"For example, he thought our senses were accurate and dependable. If we saw the sun or moon to be a certain size, then we could trust they were that size. But,
when he was right about something, wow was he right! It is amazing to me that someone who lived around 300 BCE could know more than many people living in the 2000s CE. "
This is true that the senses are accurate and dependable always it is just our way we determine that data that gets the errors that's why we need to make observations and use the senses to make sure it is true or false. like when a stick is in the water you can put your hand down the stick and notice it is still straight despite appearing bent in the water. But I would agree that this interpretation can make one misunderstand what he meant by that. Am I right fellow epicureans? I would like to make an accurate comment to her post.
A quote from a book review person needs clarification misunderstanding
Yes Godek the point is that the senses do not have opinions of their own. They report honestly what they receive. The conclusions that we draw from them are in the mind, not in the senses. When evidence of the senses is unclear or distorted or simply insufficient we must wait til we have enough clear evidence before we pick a single answer as true. Epicurus said that until then any theory which fits the facts and is not contradicted should be considered possible.
And what is more, the ultimate validation of any theory comes eventually through the senses, or the theory remains speculation.