The Notre Dame Fire

  • From that wikipedia page:


    When I read that, the first thing that comes to my mind is PD 33 -

    33. There never was such a thing as absolute justice, but only agreements made in mutual dealings among men in whatever places at various times providing against the infliction or suffering of harm.

    Just as a general observation, and not related to this situation in particular, this brings home to me: How useless it is to think that any "law" at any time or any place, has any power whatsoever on its own, unless the people promoting the law are so organized as to have the power to enforce it themselves.

  • Have a nice day, as you all sleep well that "comfortable sleep of the righteousness" as a greek idiom says...for dreaming Nietzsche that lived in the past century and who neither have any children, nor Onfray of our days who is reaching his 60 years old, without being married yet... Sorry, there is no proof yet that there are many genuine epicureans that are applying in practice the Epicurean Philosophy. And if there are some or many of them either here or there, in the basis of the analogy of the Canon I realized that they do not marry epicurean women to bear new babies to leave and their genes and creating to them such an environment for studying and applying Epicuru's philosophy... In Nature both the genes and the environment cooperate to give us many results. And that is because the first law of Nature is that : the species that is not multiplying itself is doomed to die.

    And I ask : What a value have a few books or some articles for epicurean philosophy only? Nothing at all. The platonists and stoics multiplying themselves through the centuries for this they still conquer carrying their stupid genes with their stupid ideas which made them to measure all the things through pain for producing more pain around, and just for creating and the environment/societies with such traditions that are based on superstitions etc etc. We see that with our own eyes, and we feel it with our own emotions. This is the main fact of the facts. If we want to examine properly the phenomena and the causes that caused them.

    And again with the analogy of the Canon: There are three Gardens in Greece... "what a great hope" some may say. Wrong! This is not a great hope as any hope is not a fact! Because the most of the Epicureans inside the greek gardens did not marry at all, and some other that have been married... their wives do not like the Epicurean Philosophy at all, but the worse of all is that their children do not visit the gardens at all. This goes to me too. Because as I am talking and applying with my children the Epicurean Philosophy... but this is not enough too. Since, as they say, they have no free time to visit any of the Gardens. Where and with whom could they apply the epicurean philosophy only with me? Wrong ! With their friends. But who are their friends, and in what kind of environment do they live... when their friends are still struggling to find a job or they are going to other countries in EU for finding a job?

    Please read again more carefully this excerpt from the Will by Epicurus. He did not leave only some money or estate or some papyri with his works to the rest. No, he left trusted friends as guardians to their little children, and to the rest that maybe have some children too. Because Epicurus knew that of what Protagoras has said: "man is the measure of all things".

    From Epicuru's Will : "Amynomachus and Timocrates shall be the guardians of Epicurus, the son of Metrodorus, and of the son of Polyaenus, as long as they study philosophy under, and live with Hermarchus. In the same way also, they shall be the guardians of the daughter of Metrodorus, and when she is of marriageable age, they shall give her to whomsoever Hermarchus shall select of his companions in philosophy, provided she is well behaved and obedient to Hermarchus. And Amynomachus and Timocrates shall, out of my income, give them such a sum for their support as shall appear sufficient year by year, after due consultation with Hermarchus".

    Conclusion : Epicureans are like those sweet Pandas that do not like multiplying themselves. As for my compatriots, the modern greeks, are Mules. So, here comes Dimitris Liantinis to say just a few words to Epicurus how the modern Greeks became such great Mules :

    “What kind of blindness prevents us as a nation to recognize just how low we have fallen in the eyes of the international community, how foreigners see us? Like the esurientes graeculi [Greek beggars] of Juvenal and Cicero. Describing and explaining how it came to be so is not all that hard. Throughout the country, which is to say, throughout our educational system and our traditions, we see ourselves as lions, where those outside of our country would see us as mice. We believe we are the great-grandsons of Aristotle and Alexander (or of Epicurus, as some few they will add). But the foreigners see us as mummies discovered in some nondescript Mastaba. Why? There are many reasons. But they all point to a common source. A simple equation with two sides and an equality sign. Here it is: In terms of the prevalent culture and philosophical outlook of life, modern Greeks equals Jewish-Greeks. Applying this equation to the problem, we derive two results. The first is that we are living a national polarization. The second, a corollary of the first, that we live without an ethnic identity. We modern Greeks are an illegitimate and bastardized lot. Not horses nor donkeys. We are mules. And mules do not produce offspring”.

    Beauty and virtue and such are worthy of honor, if they bring pleasure; but if not then bid them farewell!

  • Yes, and some of that is the Will by Epicurus ! ;)

    Beauty and virtue and such are worthy of honor, if they bring pleasure; but if not then bid them farewell!

  • I am sad and frustrated that I never got a chance to see Notre Dame. It was a beautiful structure with significant meaning to both secular and religious people.

    As far as religious implications go, the building was just that...a building. Made from wood and stone. The church is not a building. The religion of Christ is not dependent on stone structures.

    Obviously if a person can’t see that it was built with reverence for something “greater” then it’s clear that such a person sees only what they wish to see.

    Notre Dame like the Great Hassan II Mosque in Casablanca or the Taj Mahal in India are painstakingly beautiful artistic emanations of the human spirit. Anyone who would take pleasure in their destruction or be dismissive of them clearly have no grasp of the artistic spirit of humanity...regardless of religion and philosophy.

  • Anyone who would take pleasure in their destruction or be dismissive of them clearly have no grasp of the artistic spirit of humanity...regardless of religion and philosophy.

    I definitely agree. And I think one of the things Elli is getting at in the post above (22) is that there ARE such people who DO take pleasure in an event like that, and we need to deal with that reality in practical ways, rather than close our eyes to it and hope for the best.

    Which is not to say that such people (who take pleasure in this) are "wrong" or "evil" or in any way to be condemned as violating any laws of god or of humanity. It's simply to say that I want nothing to do with them, and that if I or people who think like I / we do want to live happily, we need to explore ways so that these conflicting views of life don't come into contact with each other any more than necessary.

  • The Islamic State recently destroyed Mesopotamian artifacts and cities that had survived not only the constant internal upheaval of political power in ancient times, but also the occupation and wars of Alexander the Great and the Rome. They survived the Islamic expansion and the Crusades. They also survived the 20th century wars to include WW1 and 2 and the Gulf War.

    Only to be destroyed by a few goons with sledgehammers and dynamite. Fortunately the British among other nations had many more objects and copies of objects in their possession in their respective countries. Thankfully many of the objects destroyed were well documented and photographed.

    Go and see the world heritage sites while they are still here. They can at any moment be destroyed by nature or by man.

  • I got a chance to see the main highlights of the UK and Ireland when I went there 2 years ago. Cathedrals, castles and museums. Not to mention the Celtic and Paleolithic sites like Stonehenge and Newgrange. Romania was the same last year. Stunning architecture and amazing sights.

  • Matthaeus wrote : <<As far as religious implications go, the building was just that...a building. Made from wood and stone. The church is not a building. The religion of Christ is not dependent on stone structures>>.

    Wrong conclusion. Who said that ? Let’s see some facts with narrations what Christ preferred and of what was/is dependent!

    And let’s start with the word “church” . In greek language is given with the word "ecclesia". In ancient greek ecclesia was not a building it was a calling between many persons usually philosophers, politicians and the majority of people that have a meeting in the Agora place that is called "ecclesia of Demos". The Agora was a place in Athens that people sold and goods. And Demos was the majority of people who wanted to participate speaking to each other, for the purpose to make contracts with such laws useful and practical to not harm each other or making decisions on how they would defend themselves from those that were willing to harm them. So, in the Agora Place everyone could hear philosophers, politicians, generals, and many others as a majority, if the laws are beneficial or not. And soon after they voted what would be the best decisions for them. For this that ancient greek "ecclesia of Demos" led to the word Democracy.

    The synagogue was a meeting in a building, so the calling for a meeting among persons was inside buildings from here comes the word "church", and later the meetings were inside catacombs. Inside buildings and catacombs, nobody hears what some would speak about. Outside the buildings i.e. the synagogues and churches was a market place for selling goods, maybe useless goods, because as they say, this made christ to be very angry. Since the christ was a jew, he liked the churches as buildings, this also is proved with the description of his presentation at the church in Jerusalem in order to officially induct him into Judaism, that is celebrated by many Christian Churches on the holiday of Candlemas. Or the other when Christ was twelve years old, he stayed behind in Jerusalem. His parents did not know it, but supposing him to be in the company, they went a day's journey, and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintances; and when they did not find him, they returned to Jerusalem, seeking him. After three days they found him inside the church, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions; and all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers. And when they saw him they were astonished; and his mother said to him "Son, why have you treated us so? Behold, your father and I have been looking for you anxiously." And he said to them, "How is it that you sought me? Did you now know that I must be in my Father's house?"

    So, there is a need for a HOUSE and for his father , and for his mother, and for himself , and as I said above chirst did like churches, but did not like the people to sell goods outside the churches. So, what would be better to sell goods inside the churches or outside them ? They preferred the former as more practical. It is better the things to be sold inside buildings like candles, little crosses, little icons, wood from the cross of the chirst (we have count that there must be up to a thousand crosses of the chirst -maybe they sell and the cross from Barnabas and the other robber that was crucified next to the christ), they also sell pieces from the slippers of saints, books with stupid stories of popes, and priests that became saints etc etc. To not say about those who are kissing the relics, and innards of them. Anyway, after the colossal fire in Notre Dame there is a huge loss in the income with euros because they have no building for selling their things inside this church now. But do not worry at all, as we heard the news, they found very wealthy men who want to be cleaned up from their sins, usually their sins are to gain a lot of money that is based on the financial banking system. Financial banking system, and the churches is one and the same thing. So, Christ is pleased to sell goods inside churches, because he did not appear yet to show that he is angry and he will not appear till the sun will lose all its energy to become a red giant. So those sinners/bankers/priests will give a lot of money to build Their Dame/Lady again.

    So, the same question arises again and again : “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?”

    Beauty and virtue and such are worthy of honor, if they bring pleasure; but if not then bid them farewell!

  • And as our friend Cassius Amicus wrote a long time ago : "It is time for you to shift your devotion and your attention away from the deceptions which have grown from what we today call the “Middle East.” Once again you must ask the question that was first asked almost two thousand years ago: “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?”

    The man who first asked that question knew that Athens and Jerusalem cannot be reconciled. He knew that it is necessary to take sides in the war between those who love their life in this world and those who love some other world. You are living in a world that has chosen sides – and chosen unwisely.

    Hundreds of years before Tertulian asked his question about Jerusalem, there arose in Athens the greatest of all teachers and the school that he founded. The philosopher Epicurus showed the people of his day how to be free by asking other questions; questions which we ourselves can ask today.

    What has confused so many of you is that you have never thought about the nature of asking questions. You presume that all questions are asked in good faith, and that answers can be established by looking to see how many people agree with them, or whether the answers “make sense” to you given the assumptions that the questioners ask you to make.

    Epicurus was the first man who pointed out that you yourself have the ability to find your way out of the dark caves of religion and “higher education.” Epicurus taught that your own abilities – your five senses and the other faculties with which you were born – are the only test of what is true and false. He also taught that all religious speculation, and all academic logic and reasoning, must be based on evidence that men have the ability to confirm or deny for themselves. Epicurus showed you the truth that the preachers and the academics do not want you to see – that all their speculations in fact rely on the evidence of our natural faculties, and that speculation not built on that evidence is worthless.

    Where is the proof, asked Epicurus, that a god created the universe? Where is that god now? Where are his continuing acts of creation today? Show me before my own eyes one grain of sand being created from nothing! Show me one grain of sand being destroyed to nothing! If there is no proof that a grain of sand can come from nothing, or go to nothing at the command of a god or any of his preachers, then there is no proof the universe can – or ever did – come from nothing!

    Where is the proof, asked Epicurus, that the human soul existed before birth, or after death? Where is the proof that in all the ages a single man has come back to life once being truly dead? Such proof does not exist, and that means that once dead we are nothing, and there is no possibility of reward or punishment after death.

    Where is the proof, asked Epicurus, that there is a single standard for what is “good” or “virtuous” in human life? Is it not true that killing another person will be looked on as a great evil if the person killed is an innocent baby? But that killing another person will be looked on as a great good if the person killed is a reprobate, stopped cold in the act of mass murder? All questions of what is right and wrong must be judged in the context from which they arise. There is no tablet of stone written by god or man which contains rules which must be obeyed by all men at all places and all times.

    But while ethical questions must be judged by their context, where is the proof, asked Epicurus, that nothing at all can be known with certainty? We can see for ourselves that killing may be good or evil depending on context, why should we accept without any proof that the state of being dead mean may mean delight in heaven or agony in hell?

    Unproven assertions about death are bad enough, but even worse are those who tell us that nothing in life can be known with certainty. These are the worst kind of liars, because they presume that we will accept their definition of “true” and “false,” even while they tell us that nothing can be true or false!

    Among the saddest of all are those whose education has led them to believe that their very lives are worthless. These people waste their lives and bury their emotions in drugs from the pharmacy, escapism from the television, or “stoicism” from the local bookstore.

    In the face of these deceptions, Epicurus taught that we should look for ourselves at the nature of the world. When we do, we will see that the world is governed neither by gods nor by chaos. The sun rises in the east every day, and yet there is nothing truly new under the sun. Using our eyes and our intelligence, we can learn that the consistency we see in front of us must have a basis, and that this basis is neither supernatural nor chaotic.

    Epicurus taught that Nature has no ruler over her, and that Nature yields neither to gods nor to chaos. Instead, the world we see around us is composed of eternal elemental particles which we cannot see, but which form the eternal fabric and glue from which the universe is made. There are no ideal “patterns” to which we must conform our lives, or to which preachers and academics have exclusive access. There is no beginning or end to the universe in space or time. Instead there is only what is – the universe of eternal elements with natural properties from which worlds are made. It is from these which the natural laws of the universe arise, and from these by which the universe as a whole teems with life.

    As for how we should live, Epicurus asked: To what do all living things look to know what is desirable and what is undesirable? Why would men be any less equipped by Nature to know what to choose and what to avoid than are any other animals? All of us can see, Epicurus pointed out, that young animals of all types – even humans – reach out for pleasure and draw back from pain from the moment of birth. And this they continue to do so long as they remain uncorrupted by false religions and false philosophies.

    It is time for you to realize that the deceptions of the last two thousand years are not irreversible. They are not permanent, and they are not your “fate.” You are a being with free will and an intelligent mind. Just as you can choose what type of ice cream you like using your natural faculties, without gods or ideals of virtue to tell you which is best, you can choose how to live your life using your natural faculties as well.

    The path to happy living was opened by Epicurus over two thousand years ago – it is time you got to know more about him".

    Beauty and virtue and such are worthy of honor, if they bring pleasure; but if not then bid them farewell!

  • elli

    I would respond to your comments in regard to New Testament studies and the eschatological implications of the destruction of the second temple and the coming of the spiritual kingdom of heaven and that your superficial reading of the subject does not form any relatable conclusions to the subject at hand. But really I see no point. Nor does it give me pleasure.

  • You welcome Matt . I have chosen to put both my feet in one boat and not in two, since this is dangerous. I do not fly on that winged ram that had golden fleece to fall again in Elliespontos, as a greek Myth says. So, now I'm sailing on the Hellenic archipelagos for staring at Homer and Odysseus who was the cleverest man of all. These are my Myths and their evolution are Democritus and then Epicurus who never had a need of any church. The only he had was a Garden and friends, many friends. Not like Christ with traitors like Judas Iscariot and those “friends” in Gethsemane, who abandoned their teacher ALL of them. These are the examples : traitors, abandonment, sacrifice and a lot of PAIN. Why ? Because Christ's teachings are for little boys that are afraid the darkness of death…

    Philosophically speaking Christ did not die on a Friday on the hill of Golgotha, but on a Wednesday, at the Mount of Olives. In solitude, abandoned by ALL, somewhere far removed. It was at the time when his sweat was like drops of blood, and when, with tears in his eyes, he whispered “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death”. It was then and there that the dice were cast, and that was his fear of death. And the fear of death of a jewish god continues with illusions and resurrections.

    Beauty and virtue and such are worthy of honor, if they bring pleasure; but if not then bid them farewell!

  • elli

    It’s very clear to me where you stand hence we will never see eye to eye. There is absolutely no benefit in me trying to rebut any of your remarks since your personal philosophy is one of ethnic nationalism and anti-theism hitched to Epicurean philosophy. Why bother? Right? I will expect a long paragraph Liantinis in response. Not your words...his.

    It’s pretty difficult to know where you end and Lianitinis begins. So I’m not going to argue with a disgraced dead man or you.


    The"disgraced" dead man with the name Dimitris Liantinis, who when was alive, was a great teacher to the teachers for their studies on "HELLENICA", he is repeating the above message in every eon.

    Beauty and virtue and such are worthy of honor, if they bring pleasure; but if not then bid them farewell!

  • <<The despisers of the body, according to Nietzsche, or as Diogenis of Oinoanda calls them "following the empty beliefs of the soul and not listening to body appeals." And how disgusting, an Epicurean feels towards the body despisers.

    Like Plato, through Socrates, in Phaedon, whereby death the soul is freed from the body as if it is free from the shackles.

    But also the Stoics, who accept the material existence of the soul, fought against Hellenism, but in their own oriental way. This strict philosophy of Stoicism, which allowed joy only when one did his duty, became the ideal of Christian monasticism through Nile Sinaiti who copied the Handbook of Epictetus and established it as a preparation for the monastic life. The absolute determinism and strict discipline of the Stoics influenced the Christianity of the Protestants and Kant was affected by it. (Christos Yapijakis Epicurus Principal Doctrines p. 60). The "Duty" of Kantian idealism has been experienced by mankind in a harsh way>>.

    (The above is an excerpt of the work entitled :<< “father” Epicurus>>, by George Kaplanis founder of the Epicurean Garden in Thessaloniki).

    Beauty and virtue and such are worthy of honor, if they bring pleasure; but if not then bid them farewell!

  • Liantinis, a sad martyr with a messianic complex. Judging from what little is available to English speakers is that he was an ugly anti-Semite academic that hated the “New Greeks” or “Jew Greeks” of modern times. Wrote volumes to the superiority of Greek culture.

    Then he unceremoniously marched off into the mountains to kill himself after writing a melodramatic suicide note:

    “My last act has the meaning of protest for the evil that we, the adults, prepare for the innocent new generations that are coming. We live our life eating their flesh. A very bad evil. My unhappiness for this crime kills me."

    I see now how you replace the Christ for the melodramatic self proclaimed martyr of Liantinis. One for one.

    Such a disgrace and dishonor to leave behind his family for his own vanity.