Posts by Cassius

One question I raised in the discussion last night Don, is whether the question is the coming and going of pleasure itself, or of the "greatest good." I know that the issues are related but is the issue that pleasure and pain do not co-exist at any moment, or is the issue related to the "greatest pleasure" (100% pleasure 0% pain) or some combination.

In other words, what is the proposed "take-away" from this saying? That pleasure and pain are the two alternative feelings, or that they never co-exist at the same moment, or what? Does adding in the issue of 'the greatest pleasure" add something to the issue that pleasure and pain do not co-exist?

Welcome page259 !

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 and/or by telling us what prompted your interest in Epicureanism - 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 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.

"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!

Tonight at 8pm, we will cover Vatican Saying 42 and 43.

Please join us. (Post here in this thread if you have never attended one of these sessions as we do have a vetting process for new participants.)

VS42. The same span of time embraces both the beginning and the end of the greatest good. [14]

VS43. The love of money, if unjustly gained, is impious, and, if justly gained, is shameful; for it is unseemly to be parsimonious, even with justice on one’s side.

Pacatus I confess I shot first and asked questions later before I linked that article. If after reading it you think it was inappropriate for the forum let me know.

Ok to be more specific for the record, I am much closer to your "Asian" friends on this question. I consider it to be part of a normal healthy human life. I personally have an extremely dim view of anti-natalist positions, and I consider both to be examples of an unfortunate sickness in Western civilization deriving at least in part from the rise of monotheism. None of this is to be critical of those who for whatever reason choose otherwise, but as a "general" observation about the way nature has led humanity to evolve, that's the way I would see the standard default position.

There are real questions about overpopulation and other social aspects of reproduction, but my personal preference to deal with those issues would be to get the rocket ships ready for extraterrestrial colonization so we can go look for those "gods!".

I realize sex and reproduction are not the same question but I would analyze them largely together.

Also worth commenting is that everyone (including I think Emily Austin too) struggles with finding the right word for "not natural and not necessary." I think we all -- including Emily -- agree that the real issue is whether the activity produces more pleasure than pain. That's a question that is so fact specific to circumstances that it becomes very difficult to determine what "natural" and "necessary" really means except by setting out a specific set of facts.

And for the sake of appreciating that complexity we should all take a second to revel in the appropriateness of Don's hostility to hypotheticals! How do you set out a hypothetical "natural" and "necessary" that is actually useful without referring to the facts of a particular situation?

"Necessary" to whom and for what? "Natural" for whom and for what? I think there are common sense answers that most of us would agree on, but common sense also probably is what warns us about trying to be too legalistic with what natural and necessary means.

The other issue intertwined in this is that of having children, which we talk about little, but which has traditionally been a critical part of human life. We wouldn't be here otherwise, and Epicurus showed that he himself was concerned about the welfare of children within his philosophical community (at least the children of Metrodorus). Setting out a productive and philosophical view of "family life" would appear to me to be an important part of life in general, even though we talk about it little. I can see the Stoics and those who want to detach from everything downplaying it, but I would not expect that from the ancient Epicureans. Especially if you identify all normal activities of life which are not painful to be a part of pleasure, then you would expect Epicureans probably had a lot to say about this subject too.

I don't have anything specific to contribute at the moment but I think this is an important issue. It's not "necessary" in the sense that a certain individual can live quite a while without it, but it is "necessary" for the "preservation of the species," and Lucretius cites it repeatedly as an important aspect of life. Ebbs and flows of population seems to have many causes but I doubt it's a healthy phenomena.

Yes! Thank you Don! For some reason I have a terrible time remembering Richard Dawkins' name, even though he is one of my favorite modern philosophers.

I don't think we currently have a list of articles or references on this point so I will set up this thread to make the topic more searchable.

Here's one article but I haven't even read it to know whether to suggest it or not. However I know we've talked about this in the past and there are probably already good articles people have identified:

Philosophy v science: which can answer the big questions of life?

Philosopher Julian Baggini challenges physicist Lawrence Krauss over 'mission creep' in the scientific community

www.theguardian.com

I know there is also a relevant youtube debate between Lawrence Krauss and the British philosopher ______ on the "Something from nothing" issue, and we've also discussed Victor Stenger's work on some of these issues.

Welcome JMGuimas !

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 and/or by telling us what prompted your interest in Epicureanism - 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 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. 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!

Both the book and the author are absolutely new to me, so thanks for pointing this out! Maybe someone else has some familiarity with one or the other.

About the Author

Ken Binmore is a mathematician turned economist and philosopher. He has held chairs at the London School of Economics, the University of Michigan, and University College London. He has been involved in a range of applied projects, including the design of major telecom auctions in various countries across the world. The telecom auction he organized in the UK raised $35 billion, prompting Newsweek magazine to describe him as the “ruthless, poker-playing economist who destroyed the telecom industry”. He has contributed to game theory, experimental economics, evolutionary biology and moral philosophy. His books include Natural Justice (OUP), Does Game Theory Work? (MIT Press), A Very Short Introduction to Game Theory (OUP), and Rational Decisions (PUP). He is currently a Visiting Professor of Economics at the University of Bristol and a Visiting Professor of Philosophy at LSE.

We're going to want to eventually move this to one of the "texts" forums where it will show up when people look for sources. Is there a more elaborate way to name the thread that will make it easier to find than the single word "Suda"?

For ease of reference added to the "Special Forum Resources" link on the front page of the forum. That link takes you here:

That's outstanding Joshua.

Also for future reference, you indicated this morning that you found a better "keyword" to use in searching for something like this better than "timeline." Do you recall what that was?

In case what Joshua used to generate that excellent timeline doesn't do SVG, I see that the free program I used to generate the SVG "navigation map" here at the forum -- draw.io -- does do timelines. Here are are references to how to do that:

Proper Way to Use Draw.io in Timeline Chart Making

Blog - Draw timelines and roadmaps in draw.io

More free alternatives:

Create timelines with open-source tools | School of Data - Evidence is Power

An interesting example: https://timeline.knightlab.com/examples/user-interface/index.html

Joshua did you assemble it with a program that can output in SVG format? (That's infinitely zoomable).

Yours is so good it probably shows we need a dedicated timeline generator.

A Zoomable copy of that is pretty much exactly what we need. Did you do that?

To some extent the problems inherent in the phrasing "The only sense in which the child being dead is bad is in the pain it brings to those still living" is the reason for the selection of one of the four "points of emphasis" singled out here at the forum, which comes the letter to Menoeceus:

Quote from Letter to Menoeceus

For all good and evil consists in sensation, but death is deprivation of sensation. And therefore a right understanding that death is nothing to us makes the mortality of life enjoyable, not because it adds to it an infinite span of time, but because it takes away the craving for immortality.

"Good and evil" and "good and bad" are phrases that have to mean something in order to be useful. If they don't mean "approved or prohibited by god" or "approved or prohibited by Platonic form / absolutist views of virtue" then what use do those phrases have?

Epicurus grounds ideas of good and evil in sensation, which I think most of us agree means that good and evil comes through pleasure and pain. I think there's a passage where Torquatus says exactly that too (perhaps we even covered it last week in the podcast) and I know Frances Wright brings out the same point.

So anything which causes pain to you as a living being is bad for you, and anything which causes pleasure is good for you. When you no longer exist nothing is good or bad for you.

I think this statement of Don's is tempting (especially the part I underlined) but I think he is right to pull back from it in his last paragraph:

Quote from Don

Actual memories that can be remembered with joy are good. Imagining hypothetical what might have beens, while probably a natural outgrowth of grief, does not lead to healing.

Actually, regardless of whether he's right or wrong to pull back from it, I think it's a point worth discussiing. Does (or can) imagining "hypothetical what-might-have-beens" lead to healing?

Some might draw an analogy here between the "hypothetical what might have been" to the issue of "the Epicurean gods," and say that Epicurus was constructing hypothetical god abstractions for "good" purposes. I personally wouldn't approach it that way because I don't think he saw the gods as pure hypotheticals.

But what about fictional stories of monsters or bad situations from earlier Greek mythology, such as Lucretius references repeatedly in his poem? Lucretius seems to get much productive use out of stories that he clearly does not believe ever happened. The reason I bring those fictional stories up is that they seem to me to be pretty close to "hypothetical what-might-have-beens" that are being used for healing. I am not sure we have any examples of Epicurus using "hypothetical bad things," but Lucretius sure does use them.

[I am close to deleting this whole post because I am not sure the point I am making is worth the space on the page, but maybe it will stir someone else's more productive way of expressing this.]

What I think is interesting to discuss is sort of the entire question of the use of heart-rending hypotheticals or "bad" fictional constructions and how we should consider (or IF we should consider) them as "bad." I don't think anyone would assert that Epicurus would construct an out-and-out falsehood like "hell" in the way that religion does, but what is the general status of hypothetical "what-might-have-beens" or "what-might-be's" as good or bad?

Thinking about the uses of "fiction" might lead to another perspective on: "The only sense in which the child being dead is bad is in the pain it brings to those still living."

I think in the end we'll convert the format to something more like this:

But it will be a lot easier to collaborate over time and use the lexicon entry linked above as the place where we grow the chart and develop the data for the final version.