Welcome Kungi!

Regularly Checking In On A Small Screen Device? Bookmark THIS page!

    Welcome Kungi !


    Note:     In order to minimize spam registrations, all new registrants must respond in this thread to this welcome message within 72 hours of its posting, or their account is subject to deletion. All that is required is a "Hello!" but of course we hope you will introduce yourself further and join one or more of our conversations.

    This is the place for students of Epicurus to coordinate their studies and work together to promote the philosophy of Epicurus. Please remember that all posting here is subject to our Community Standards / Rules of the Forum our Not Neo-Epicurean, But Epicurean and our Posting Policy statements and associated posts.

    Please understand that the leaders of this forum are well aware that many fans of Epicurus may have sincerely-held views of what Epicurus taught that are incompatible with the purposes and standards of this forum. This forum is dedicated exclusively to the study and support of people who are committed to classical Epicurean views. As a result, this forum is not for people who seek to mix and match some Epicurean views with positions that are inherently inconsistent with the core teachings of Epicurus.

    All of us who are here have arrived at our respect for Epicurus after long journeys through other philosophies, and we do not demand of others what we were not able to do ourselves. Epicurean philosophy is very different from other viewpoints, and it takes time to understand how deep those differences really are. That's why we have membership levels here at the forum which allow for new participants to discuss and develop their own learning, but it's also why we have standards that will lead in some cases to arguments being limited, and even participants being removed, when the purposes of the community require it. Epicurean philosophy is not inherently democratic, or committed to unlimited free speech, or devoted to any other form of organization other than the pursuit by our community of happy living through the principles of Epicurean philosophy.

    One way you can be most assured of your time here being productive is to tell us a little about yourself and personal your background in reading Epicurean texts. It would also be helpful if you could tell us how you found this forum, and any particular areas of interest that you have which would help us make sure that your questions and thoughts are addressed.

    In that regard we have found over the years that there are a number of key texts and references which most all serious students of Epicurus will want to read and evaluate for themselves. Those include the following.

    1. "Epicurus and His Philosophy" by Norman DeWitt
    2. The Biography of Epicurus by Diogenes Laertius. This includes the surviving letters of Epicurus, including those to Herodotus, Pythocles, and Menoeceus.
    3. "On The Nature of Things" - by Lucretius (a poetic abridgement of Epicurus' "On Nature"
    4. "Epicurus on Pleasure" - By Boris Nikolsky
    5. The chapters on Epicurus in Gosling and Taylor's "The Greeks On Pleasure."
    6. Cicero's "On Ends" - Torquatus Section
    7. Cicero's "On The Nature of the Gods" - Velleius Section
    8. The Inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda - Martin Ferguson Smith translation
    9. A Few Days In Athens" - Frances Wright
    10. Lucian Core Texts on Epicurus: (1) Alexander the Oracle-Monger, (2) Hermotimus
    11. Philodemus "On Methods of Inference" (De Lacy version, including his appendix on relationship of Epicurean canon to Aristotle and other Greeks)
    12. "The Greeks on Pleasure" -Gosling & Taylor Sections on Epicurus, especially the section on katastematic and kinetic pleasure which explains why ultimately this distinction was not of great significance to Epicurus.

    It is by no means essential or required that you have read these texts before participating in the forum, but your understanding of Epicurus will be much enhanced the more of these you have read.

    And time has also indicated to us that if you can find the time to read one book which will best explain classical Epicurean philosophy, as opposed to most modern "eclectic" interpretations of Epicurus, that book is Norman DeWitt's Epicurus And His Philosophy.

    Welcome to the forum!


    &thumbnail=medium


    &thumbnail=medium


    2693-pasted-from-clipboard-png

    Hello!

    I have been reading the forum without an account for some time now and I am very impressed by what you have built here. It is a treasure trove of wisdom in the all knowing landfill we call the internet.

    About me

    - currently in the later part of my thirties.

    - German living in Germany

    - Studied Computer Science

    - Own a small consulting firm with ~10 Employees where we develop software for our corporate clients.

    My way to Epicurus

    For the last ten years I had an interest stoic philosophy, even once considering myself a capital S Stoic for some time. I read the stoic authors (mostly Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus) and first came into contact with Epicurus in Senecas Letters to Lucilius. I was prone to bursts of anger and practical Stoicism helped me to become much calmer and happier person. But there are some teachings in Stoicism that don’t fit well with the way I see the world. Especially that virtue is the end and that peace of mind only might follow from virtue never convinced me. I always thought that it should be the other way around, that peace of mind should be the goal.

    After reading Hiram Crespo’s essay about Epicureanism in the book “How to live a good life” I had a look at Epicureanism. I read his book “Tending the epicurean garden” and am currently re-reading it and organising my notes.

    Interests

    My Interests are for the most part in applied philosophy. If philosophy does not change the way I live my day to day life, what is it good for. I keep a list of open questions at hand. Maybe you can guide me to interesting articles / forum posts addressing these:

    - What is virtue for an epicurean?

    - How does it differ from stoic virtue?

    - How do you apply these virtues?

    - What practical epicurean exercises are there?

    - What are the practical differences between Epicureanism and Stoicism. Where would an Epicurean act differently from a Stoic?

    This is the beginning of my epicurean journey. It is very pleasurable so far :-D.

    Welcome Kungi!

    Here are quick answers to your first three questions:

    For an Epicurean, virtue is one of the tools to experience pleasure.

    In Epicurean philosophy, what is virtuous depends on the particular context, whereas in Stoic philosophy, they seem to be rather absolute.

    Wisdom is a particularly important virtue because it is used in the hedonic calculus to decide which actions should be taken / are virtuous.

    Thank you Kungi! I only have time for a few comments now but you have raised many deep issues and I am sure others will chime in too.

    First it is interesting to observe where our new participants are located. As you probably observe we have several Germans here - probably a higher percentage than pure population statistics would predict - and it is interesting to consider why.

    Second, Hiram's work reaches a lot of people and that's good to know about your background. I would say this regardless, but especially knowing that, that I highly recommend your going through the DeWitt book as soon as you can for the width of background that he provides for someone at an early stage of reading. I find that people who skip that will often take longer than they would otherwise to see "the forest" rather than just "the trees" which may have attracted then initially.

    As to the basic issue of Stoicism, you of course hit the nail on the head by focusing on "virtue." If you have not read the Torquatus presentation of this issue in On Ends (see our text section) you will want to read that.

    The "modern" stoics tend to discount the issue of virtue, but there are fundamentalist stoics even today who recognize that the philosophy makes no sense if you do do. But they de-emphasize it because once you do examine the Stoic foundations they melt away if you walk away from the virtue/religious aspects of it.

    Epicurus is rigorously logical, and once identifying pleasure in a general and sweeping sense as the goal, all else (even virtue) is instrumental toward that goal, as Torquatus explains well.

    There is much more to say and add but this is a start. If you will go through the DeWitt book and focus on understanding the "big picture" as soon as you can, I think that will help a lot in your seeing that each of the answers to your questions derives from that "big picture," rather than being a set of arbitrary rules as if out of a doctor"s medicine bag. There are indeed many bits of practical advice, but until you see the big picture it's hard to understand how profoundly different the Epicurean view of the happy life is from that of Stoicism or the other larger Greek schools.

    Welcome Kungi!

    The most important practical exercise for a person beginning to explore Epicurus is to set aside and follow through with a daily time to study. Epicurean philosophy is much more of a unified worldview than a specific set of practices. Paradoxically, it's a very straightforward philosophy, but, due to the dearth of original texts and the Academic backgrounds of many of the secondary writers, it takes quite a while to understand properly.

    I agree with Cassius on the reading he recommends. There's also much here on the forums to review: an overwhelming amount!

    Another practical exercise, which is equal in importance with the first that I mentioned, is to post questions and discuss issues of interest to you. Key to the philosophy is friendship and frank speech and this is one manifestation of those ideas.

    Speaking only from my personal experience, I advise (with much respect) putting aside Hiram's book for a while. That was one of the first books that I read after discovering Epicurus, and I found that it wasn't a very direct path, for me personally, to understanding the philosophy. It may well be worthwhile for you to return to, but I don't advise it as a starting point.

    One final recommendation would be to read Cicero’s On the Nature of the Gods. That's what started me on my Epicurean journey: I was attempting to reconcile some of the inconsistencies in Stoicism and realized, perhaps like you, that Epicurus had already done that.

    Welcome Kungi!

    Quote from Kungi

    What is virtue for an epicurean?

    This is a good question, and I agree with what the others have said so far.

    It also brings up the idea of actually listing (on one's own, for oneself) what virtues lead to pleasure and a pleasant life. This should be a kind of simple common sense list, and it may be worth some contemplation. This list would be based on what leads to the best outcome for the overall most pleasant life. I would say thinking about this will bring one to think rationally, justly, and wisely when moving through life.

    As for my own studies, I have been focusing on the Principle Doctrines, the Vatican Sayings, and the Letter to Menoeceus. (And wanting to eventually study more closely the Diogenes Wall of Oinoanda, the "wise man" list within Diogenes Laertius Book X, as well as "unpack" the Torquatus section of Cicero's "On Ends".)

    Also an important interpretation regarding pleasure -- to remember "it is not the pleasures of the profligate" (letter to Menoeceus) AND "no pleasure is bad, but some lead to much worse pains" (PD8). And here one might want to contemplate what would be considered to be excessive and also what would bring longterm pains -- some things are obvious and others may just be a matter of trial and error. I would say that there is no one-size-fits-all "absolute rule" list, because wisdom comes from thinking these things through for oneself -- though a friend might speak privately to another good friend about these things if a particular situation comes up requiring it (not in judgment, but out of caring and compassion).

    Good luck in your continued Epicurean studies! :)

    @ Kungi

    For me, a virtue is something that leads to a value. For Aristotle, the ultimate value (that which is not just instrumental, leading to another, higher value) was eudaimonia – a life of happy well-being. A virtue is anything that leads to that goal (telos).

    But if the goal (value) is to, say, split wood well, a proper and well-honed axe is a virtuous axe. The Greek term, arete ("excellence"), included but was not limited to moral virtue.

    The Stoics seem to have generally equated a set of specific moral virtues with eudaimonia itself: If you were sufficiently wise, courageous, just and temperate – then you must have had a eudaimonic life. (This is not to suggest that the Stoics were a monolithic group, without variations – nor that they did not recognize eupathe: good feelings, as opposed to the more general pathe, for which they recommend apatheia). As one modern Stoic, Massimo Pigliucci, suggested in a blog I read, eudaimonia thus becomes a value judgment: “Have I done well enough?” (Again, there are variations among Stoics, old and new.)

    For Epicureans, eudaimonia is a life pleasantly lived. A life pleasantly lived means one in which natural pleasures (mental and physical) outweigh pain and suffering (mental and physical).

    And that goal (telos) requires certain social, as well as strictly personal virtues. To live justly, for example (which Epicurus thought was necessary to live such a life), means actively making due allowance for others to also have what they need to live such a life. None of the virtues are abstract (or Platonic) ideals worthy in themselves per se (or eudaimonic in themselves per se) – but are instrumental. An Epicurean view of socially virtuous behavior – for me – is grounded more in natural sympathy/empathy (which can be cultivated, but not demanded) than in any simple, dictated “should.”

    That is my simplified interpretive summary. (But there are others here who are better versed than I – including those who have posted here before me.)

    "We must try to make the end of the journey better than the beginning, as long as we are journeying; but when we come to the end, we must be happy and content." (Vatican Saying 48)

    Quote from Pacatus

    For Epicureans, eudaimonia is a life pleasantly lived. A life pleasantly lived means one in which natural pleasures (mental and physical) outweigh pain and suffering (mental and physical).

    I found Pacatus' post in full very good, but I would caution against the formulation "natural pleasures ... outweigh...) That is not the way Epicurus formulated it - he referenced "Pleasure" as the goal without qualification - so this formulation might well lead off in an unproductive direction.

    I would say the natural and necessary classifications help us predict the amount of pain that will be required to attain them, but to imply that there is a flat rule that everyone should seek only "natural" pleasures would be going too far.

    That's the real reason we debate this issue so much - because people tend to infer "natural and necessary ONLY" from the discussion and I would say that is a major mistake.

    We need to continue to talk about how to avoid an overbroad formulation here and what issues arise with this. What exactly are "unnatural" pleasures? Should we seek none of them at all to any degree? If there is such a list then does that list constitute a Platonicly universal list of "Thou shalt nots" like the Ten Commandments?

    Please do not take this Pacatus as critical of you personally -- and if you would like to in fact defend that position, please do, as that would help the discussion move forward too.

    But any time we leave open the implication that the ideal Epicurean life would be in a cave with bread and water then we create major theoretical problems.

    Pacatus

    Quote from Cassius

    Please do not take this Pacatus as critical of you personally -- and if you would like to in fact defend that position, please do, as that would help the discussion move forward too.

    No, I think your correction is spot on. :) Thank you for making it. (And no cave with bread and water, please!)

    LATE EDIT: I think I've walked into this error before; I am reading the thread "Differences Between Epicureanism and Cyrenaicsm" -- because I think my mistake might stem, at least in part, from an erroneous (or at lest a sloppy) understanding of the distinctions there; and I think I should probably re-read Nikolsky.

    "We must try to make the end of the journey better than the beginning, as long as we are journeying; but when we come to the end, we must be happy and content." (Vatican Saying 48)

    Edited 2 times, last by Pacatus (July 24, 2022 at 1:00 PM).

    Quote from Martin

    For an Epicurean, virtue is one of the tools to experience pleasure.

    In Epicurean philosophy, what is virtuous depends on the particular context, whereas in Stoic philosophy, they seem to be rather absolute.

    The 4 Stoic virtues are:

    • (practical) Wisdom
    • Justice
    • Temperance
    • Courage

    For the Stoics these are the only good things, with all others being (preferred or dispreferred) indifferents. The stoics are absolute when it comes to their cardinal (in a non christian sense) values. I think all of these virtues are important for a pleasurable life. I can't be unwise, unjust, without self discipline and a coward and have a happy life.

    Are there more or different virtues in Epicureanism than these? If yes, how are they defined?

    Quote from Cassius

    If you will go through the DeWitt book and focus on understanding the "big picture" as soon as you can

    After your comment I started reading Epicurus and his Philosophy by DeWitt. When I've finished it there will be many questions. Even for a non native english speaker it is easy to understand :-). Not many philosophy books fall in this category.

    Thank you for the encouragement.

    Quote from Kalosyni

    It also brings up the idea of actually listing (on one's own, for oneself) what virtues lead to pleasure and a pleasant life.

    This is an excellent idea.

    Quote from Kalosyni

    I would say that there is no one-size-fits-all "absolute rule" list, because wisdom comes from thinking these things through for oneself

    I concur that there can be no "absolute rule" list but I think many of us will come to quite similar answers when trying to define what virtue is. The details of these virtues will be individualistic. For example Justice looks different to everyone in the details.

    Kungi

    Sorry to have hijacked your welcome with natural and necessary discussion. I will move that to a new thread.

    As to this:. "Are there more or different virtues in Epicureanism than these? If yes, how are they defined?"

    The ultimate answer is that a course of action is counterproductive if it does not lead to pleasure, so actions are judged virtuous or not in that context. You would find the explanation of this issue given by Torquatus in on Ends to be very helpful, because the thrust of his presentation is dedicated to this issue. I will get the link and add it here in a moment.

    Quote from Cassius

    Sorry to have hijacked your welcome with natural and necessary discussion. I will move that to a new thread.

    As to this:. "Are there more or different virtues in Epicureanism than these? If yes, how are they defined?"

    The ultimate answer is that a course of action is counterproductive if it does not lead to pleasure, so actions are judged virtuous or not in that context. You would find the explanation of this issue given by Torquatus in on Ends to be very helpful, because the thrust of his presentation is dedicated to this issue. I will get the link and add it here in a moment.

    No need to be sorry. These are the discussions I am here for. When my initial comment lead to this even better :-D.

    I will read Torquatus when you send the link.

    Quote from Kungi
    Quote from Martin

    For an Epicurean, virtue is one of the tools to experience pleasure.

    In Epicurean philosophy, what is virtuous depends on the particular context, whereas in Stoic philosophy, they seem to be rather absolute.

    The 4 Stoic virtues are:

    • (practical) Wisdom
    • Justice
    • Temperance
    • Courage

    For the Stoics these are the only good things, with all others being (preferred or dispreferred) indifferents. The stoics are absolute when it comes to their cardinal (in a non christian sense) values. I think all of these virtues are important for a pleasurable life. I can't be unwise, unjust, without self discipline and a coward and have a happy life.

    Are there more or different virtues in Epicureanism than these? If yes, how are they defined?

    Thanks for bringing your thread back around to the Stoic/Epicurean question. My first thought when reading the list of virtues was Principal Doctrine 5:

    Epicurus clearly thinks the "virtues" are important, but they are important because they are instrumental to achieving a pleasurable life and not as ends or goals for their own sake.

    Quote from Don

    Thanks for bringing your thread back around to the Stoic/Epicurean question. My first thought when reading the list of virtues was Principal Doctrine 5

    Quote from Epicurean Principal Doctrines

    My translation: PD5 It is not possible to live a pleasurable life without the traits of (practical) wisdom, morality, and justice; and it is impossible to live with wisdom, morality, and justice without living pleasurably. When one of these is lacking, it is impossible to live a pleasurable life.

    Consider in light of Fragment 519: The greatest fruit of justice is serenity. δικαιοσύνης καρπὸς μέγιστος ἀταραξία.

    Epicurus clearly thinks the "virtues" are important, but they are important because they are instrumental to achieving a pleasurable life and not as ends or goals for their own sake.

    If I read this correctly the virtues are not only important they are essential. They are necessary and sufficient for the pleasant life as in the mathematical equivalent sense "virtue <=> pleasurable life". As far as I interpret PD5 there is no difference between Stoicism and Epicureanism in regard to the connection between virtue and the pleasurable life. The difference lies only in the goal.

    How would you define "morality" as a virtue? What would Epicurus have meant by this term?

    See, this is my issue with relying on translations. In Greek, the three traits/virtues are:

    φρονίμως wisely, sensibly, prudently

    καλῶς II. regul. adv. καλῶς, mostly in moral sense, well, rightly

    δικαίως —adv. -ως, rightly, justly

    And Kalōs καλώς can be defined as:

    Woodhouse, S. C. (1910) English–Greek Dictionary: A Vocabulary of the Attic Language‎[1], London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Limited.

    admirable idem, page 12.

    artistic idem, page 42.

    auspicious idem, page 53.

    beautiful idem, page 68.

    buxom idem, page 107.

    capital idem, page 111.

    comely idem, page 145.

    creditable idem, page 183.

    elegant idem, page 265.

    estimable idem, page 283.

    excellent idem, page 288.

    exquisite idem, page 296.

    fair idem, page 302.

    favourable idem, page 311.

    fine idem, page 321.

    fortunate idem, page 340.

    good idem, page 366.

    goodly idem, page 367.

    handsome idem, page 383.

    happy idem, page 384.

    high-principled idem, page 400.

    honourable idem, page 405.

    hopeful idem, page 405.

    lovely idem, page 502.

    lucky idem, page 504.

    noble idem, page 559.

    ornamental idem, page 580.

    picturesque idem, page 611.

    plausible idem, page 618.

    pomantic idem, page 625.

    principled idem, page 641.

    promising idem, page 653.

    propitious idem, page 653.

    reputable idem, page 699.

    righteous idem, page 715.

    skilful idem, page 780.

    specious idem, page 799.

    spruce idem, page 806.

    virtuous idem, page 954.

    well-favoured idem, page 974.

    So, "morality" is only one Interpretation of that 2nd word.

    Here is another translation of PD5 (St. Andre):

    It is not possible to live joyously without also living wisely and beautifully and rightly, nor to live wisely and beautifully and rightly without living joyously; and whoever lacks this cannot live joyously. [note] οὐκ ἔστιν ἡδέως ζῆν ἄνευ τοῦ φρονίμως καὶ καλῶς καὶ δικαίως <οὐδὲ φρονίμως καὶ καλῶς καὶ δικαίως> ἄνευ τοῦ ἡδέως· ὅτῳ δὲ τοῦτο μὴ ὑπάρχει, οὐχ ἔστι τοῦτον ἡδέως ζῆν.

Unread Threads

    1. Title
    2. Replies
    3. Last Reply

    2. Analysing movies through an Epicurean lens 6

      • Rolf
      • May 13, 2025 at 3:44 PM
    3. Replies
      6
      Views
      238
      6

    4. Rolf

      May 13, 2025 at 3:44 PM

    2. ⟐ as the symbol of the philosophy of Epicurus 49

      • michelepinto
      • May 13, 2025 at 1:36 PM
    3. Replies
      49
      Views
      8k
      49

    4. Don

      May 13, 2025 at 1:36 PM

    2. Is All Desire Painful? How Would Epicurus Answer? 24

      • Cassius
      • May 10, 2025 at 3:42 PM
    3. Replies
      24
      Views
      1k
      24

    4. sanantoniogarden

      May 10, 2025 at 3:42 PM

    2. Pompeii Then and Now 7

      • kochiekoch
      • May 8, 2025 at 3:50 PM
    3. Replies
      7
      Views
      1.1k
      7

    4. kochiekoch

      May 8, 2025 at 3:50 PM

    2. Names of Bits of Reality 4

      • Eikadistes
      • May 8, 2025 at 1:31 PM
    3. Replies
      4
      Views
      280
      4

    4. Eikadistes

      May 8, 2025 at 1:31 PM