Posts by Cassius

Welcome Ranc1! Just had a second to start scanning your video and I think you are going to find that some of those quotes are not accurate, but in general I think you are definitely on the right track. Sorting out the details is what we do here and we'll be glad to help. Welcome aboard and I applaud your enthusiasm!

Welcome ranc1 !

There is one last step to complete your registration:

All new registrants must post a response to this message here in this welcome thread (we do this in order to minimize spam registrations).

You must post your response within 72 hours, or your account will be subject to deletion.

Please say "Hello" by introducing yourself, tell us what prompted your interest in Epicureanism and which particular aspects of Epicureanism most interest you, and/or post a question.

This forum 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 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.

Please check out our Getting Started page.

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.

"Epicurus and His Philosophy" by Norman DeWitt

The Biography of Epicurus by Diogenes Laertius. This includes the surviving letters of Epicurus, including those to Herodotus, Pythocles, and Menoeceus.

"On The Nature of Things" - by Lucretius (a poetic abridgement of Epicurus' "On Nature"

"Epicurus on Pleasure" - By Boris Nikolsky

The chapters on Epicurus in Gosling and Taylor's "The Greeks On Pleasure."

Cicero's "On Ends" - Torquatus Section

Cicero's "On The Nature of the Gods" - Velleius Section

The Inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda - Martin Ferguson Smith translation

A Few Days In Athens" - Frances Wright

Lucian Core Texts on Epicurus: (1) Alexander the Oracle-Monger, (2) Hermotimus

Philodemus "On Methods of Inference" (De Lacy version, including his appendix on relationship of Epicurean canon to Aristotle and other Greeks)

"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. Feel free to join in on one or more of our conversation threads under various topics found throughout the forum, where you can to ask questions or to add in any of your insights as you study the Epicurean philosophy.

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.

(If you have any questions regarding the usage of the forum or finding info, please post any questions in this thread).

Welcome to the forum!

Thank you for the kind words Eikadistes, and thank you for all you do yourself.

Of all the many things that might be said about social media and politics, I am totally convinced that no matter what one's perspective, nothing can be fixed in politics or personal life or anything else without a fundamental reexamination of the way the world works. Studying Epicurus shows that almost everything we've been taught in conventional society is totally upside down.

Most institutions of modern society are totally corrupt, shot through with the type of deception Lucian pointed out in "Alexander the Oracle-Monger." Lucian was right that what's needed in response is the mental strength of Epicurus and his school. There's no way we get to the point where such people can exist again without going back and uncovering what made them what they were.

So that's the place, and not on day to day politics, where we need to keep our focus. We haven't even scratched the surface on that job.

Good to have you Dave!

I moved your post over to this location where it will be more findable.

Yes, the Thomas Jefferson connection is significant to many of us - if you didn't see it, we discussed it recently in the welcome thread for Al Hakiim von Grof.

Be sure to let us know if there's anything we can help you with, or if you have questions. Given your background I'd recommend to you the DeWitt book as the place to start for the deepest background, and the Emily Austin book for good practical advice. And of course as a Jefferson fan the connection to Frances Wright's http://www.afewdaysinathens.com is something you will want to check out.

If you come across references to Epicurus or his ideas in Jefferson that we don't already have listed at the link below, please let us know. If you run across other founding fathers with connections to Epicurus please let us know too.

Thomas Jefferson Resources

Ok read it. No need to soften my comments. But I will add more:

Quote

But Stoicism’s history extends far beyond its recent resurgence. When Zeno founded his school, he did so at a time when other philosophical currents were trying to address similar issues. He was a disciple of the Cynics, and during this period, Epicurus founded Epicureanism, while Pyrrho developed Scepticism — philosophical schools that also offered practical responses to the societal challenges of their time.

I almost want to come to the defense of traditional Stoicism after reading that article, as I think the ancient Stoics would themselves if they could read it. The article is the kind of breezy dismissal of the deeper significance of Stoicism that they would have detested. They weren't just "offering practical responses to the societal challenges of their time." The Stoics - and the Epicureans - were taking philosophy seriously and attacking issues of eternal and enduring significance- worth living and dying for -- and not just acting as social commentators offering the latest self-help advice.

Next, on a slightly different issue:

Quote

The French philosopher Michel Onfray wrote in EL PAÍS that “without Epicurus, there would have been no Renaissance, no Montaigne, no libertine thought of the 17th century, no philosophy of the Enlightenment, no French Revolution, no atheism, no philosophies of social liberation.”

I don't know that I think that Epicurus himself would agree with that. Gosh knows I have a high opinion of Epicurus, but the arguments that had Epicurus not lived there would never have been an enlightenment or French Revolution or atheism or philosophies of social liberation" seems to me to go way too far. In the end, Epicurus didn't invent something from nothing - he simply did the best job so far of putting all the pieces together into a coherent whole. Others would eventually have done something similar, and we would know their names instead of Epicurus'. So I don't think Epicurus himself would have agreed with a view that he was an indispensable genius.

As Lucretius himself said, nature never makes only a single thing of a kind.

In fact, I sense there's something Stoic even in looking at Epicurus that way - as if everything good in life comes because a god has handed it down from heaven. I think if Epicurus heard that kind of argument he would have said not to worry about looking to Epicurus, look to NATURE and you'll eventually --even if after a much longer journey making do without his help -- get there on your own.