Episode One Hundred Eight - The Benefits of A Proper Understanding of the Senses and of Natural Science

A metaphor for the relationship between the three core components of Epicurean philosophy.

The keystone arch was a Roman invention, and a gateway to the building of the palatial domes and vaulted ceilings of Imperial architecture. For us, it may stand as a symbol for the careful balance of the Epicurean system.

The keystone, or capstone, is clearly supported by the stones on either side. But just as the apex of the span is supported by the lower elements, it supports them also in its turn; the arch, though classified into parts, is in truth a single self-reinforcing whole. The Physics may stand alone, but standing alone it is weakened; and the same with the Canonics. Together they hold up the higher order function of the Ethics, and, so doing, hold each other up as well---and so without the Ethics, the system falls.

That is a great visual metaphor, Joshua !! It also alleviates the problem of which is more important or which comes first. All three are needed for the structure. I like it, too, for the idea that the arch can be seen as a portal to the Garden. Too bad the Greeks didn't have the arch. Lintel/post construction isn't as elegant as a metaphor. Maybe that's our visual representation of the philosophy. Better to have an arch necklace than an execution device around one's neck (Yeah, looking at you, Christians.)

Roman architecture (article) | Ancient Rome | Khan Academy

www.khanacademy.org

The Romans are definitely credited with perfecting the true arch (as opposed to corbelled vaults) and running with it. Arches are all over Roman architecture: triumphal arches, aqueducts, amphitheaters, tunnels, etc etc.

For comparison

Introduction to Greek architecture (article) | Khan Academy

www.khanacademy.org

We had this conversation about a symbol for Epicureans before (e.g., ⟐ as the symbol of the philosophy of Epicurus ) but I like the arch... Unless someone else uses it.

The best thing the History Channel ever did, in my view, was a program that ran for one season called Engineering an Empire.

Go Here and at the 25 minute mark there is a good little bit on how the keystone arch transformed Roman architecture.

That's a lot of arches!

Quote from Don

We had this conversation about a symbol for Epicureans before (e.g., ⟐ as the symbol of the philosophy of Epicurus ) but I like the arch... Unless someone else uses it.

I'm curious if any of the newer members of the forum have ideas on a "symbol/logo" for Epicureanism.

Quote

I'm curious if any of the newer members of the forum have ideas on a "symbol/logo" for Epicureanism.

I have an idea for a flag, if that counts!

A piglet, in attic-black, wreathed with laurel styled the same, on a field of goldenrod.

Piglet;

Wreathed in Laurel;

In Attic Black-Figure;

On a field of goldenrod;

My only question, Joshua : Why goldenrod?

Because saffron has religious connotations in the East, and I don't know the names of very many colors!

Whatever best matches the ceramic on attic pottery would be my choice.

Edit; the range of colors that meet that criteria is of course quite broad, going from buff through yellow and into the reds.

A simpler option is this ⟐, done in the same style.

Quote

It is the color of paper that the Church of Scientology's Ethics Department prints its Suppressive Person Declares on, giving rise to the term "golden-rodding".

I see that goldenrod is also a badge of honor! 😅

Summary of Pyrrhonism

From the Wikipedia article on Pyrrho;

Quote

A summary of Pyrrho's philosophy was preserved by Eusebius, quoting Aristocles, quoting Timon, in what is known as the "Aristocles passage."[7] There are conflicting interpretations of the ideas presented in this passage, each of which leads to a different conclusion as to what Pyrrho meant.[7]

Whoever wants to live well (eudaimonia) must consider these three questions: First, how are pragmata (ethical matters, affairs, topics) by nature? Secondly, what attitude should we adopt towards them? Thirdly, what will be the outcome for those who have this attitude?" Pyrrho's answer is that "As for pragmata they are all adiaphora (undifferentiated by a logical differentia), astathmēta (unstable, unbalanced, not measurable), and anepikrita (unjudged, unfixed, undecidable). Therefore, neither our sense-perceptions nor our doxai (views, theories, beliefs) tell us the truth or lie; so we certainly should not rely on them. Rather, we should be adoxastoi (without views), aklineis (uninclined toward this side or that), and akradantoi (unwavering in our refusal to choose), saying about every single one that it no more is than it is not or it both is and is not or it neither is nor is not.

Why did I bring the flat earth into this?

Quote

The 1876 Larousse dictionary, p. 1479, wrote thus:

The name of zététiques, which means seekers, indicates a rather original nuance of skepticism: it is provisional skepticism, it is close to Descartes' idea about doubt as a means, not as an end, as a preliminary procedure, not as a definitive result. If all skeptics really were zététiques and only zététiques, they would have said with Pyrrho: "We do not arrive at doubt, but at the suspension of judgement" ... skeptics literally mean examiners, people who think, reflect, study attentively; but in the long run they take a more negative than doubtful stance, and has meant that those who are under the pretext of always examining never decide. ... the word zététiques is not made to resolve the debate between the two meanings of all these terms ... Moreover, the name zététiques has remained on the ground of the school that created it; and, despite its wide expansion, which would have helped make the term general for all seekers of truth in all fields, it is exclusively applied to skeptics, and we could even say to Greek skeptics or Pyrrhonists.

That may sound well and good; but enter Zetetic Astronomy, and see where it leads.

Zetetic Astronomy

Quote

Samuel Birley Rowbotham (/ˈroʊbɒtəm/;[1] 1816 – 23 December 1884, in London) was an English inventor, writer and socialist[2] who wrote Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not a Globe under the pseudonym Parallax. His work was originally published as a 16-page pamphlet (1849), and later expanded into a book (1865).

Rowbotham's method, which he called zetetic astronomy, models the Earth as a flat disc centered at the North Pole and bounded along its perimeter by a wall of ice, with the Sun, Moon, planets, and stars moving only several thousand miles above the surface of Earth.

Quote

In his lectures and writings, Samuel Birley Rowbotham, founder of the modern flat-earth movement, repeatedly emphasized the importance of sticking to the facts. He called his system “zetetic astronomy” (zetetic from the Greek verb zetetikos, meaning to seek or inquire) because he sought only facts, and left mere theories to the likes of Copernicus and Newton. Rowbotham devoted the entire first chapter of his magnum opus to praising facts at the expense of theories, concluding, “Let the practise of theorising be abandoned as one oppressive to the reasoning powers, fatal to the full development of truth, and, in every sense, inimical to the solid progress of sound philosophy.”