Posts by Cassius

Welcome Faria!

Welcome to Episode 201 of Lucretius Today. This is a podcast dedicated to the poet Lucretius, who wrote "On The Nature of Things," the only complete presentation of Epicurean philosophy left to us from the ancient world. Each week we walk you through the Epicurean texts, and we discuss how Epicurean philosophy can apply to you today. If you find the Epicurean worldview attractive, we invite you to join us in the study of Epicurus at EpicureanFriends.com, where you will find a discussion thread for each of our podcast episodes and many other topics.

This week we continue our discussion of Book Two of Cicero's On Ends, which are largely devoted Cicero's attack on Epicurean Philosophy. "On Ends" contains important criticisms of Epicurus that have set the tone for standard analysis of his philosophy for the last 2000 years. Going through this book gives us the opportunity to review those attacks, take them apart, and respond to them as an ancient Epicurean might have done, and much more fully than Cicero allowed Torquatus, his Epicurean spokesman, to do.

Follow along with us here: Cicero's On Ends - Complete Reid Edition

We are using the Reid edition, so check any typos or other questions against the original PDF which can be found here.

This week we start and move forward from Section IX, which begins:

IX. You must then set pleasure aside, not only if you want to pursue a right course, but if you want it to be seemly for you

to speak the language of honest men. Can we then assert that a thing is for the whole of life the supreme good, though we do not think we can say it is so even for a dinner? Yet how does our philosopher talk? There are three kinds of passions, one natural and necessary, another natural but not necessary, a third neither natural nor necessary. In the first place his subdivision lacks neatness; for he has made what were really two classes into three. ‘ This is not to subdivide, but to rend asunder.

Welcome Faria Dantes !

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 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!

I note that on the Audible page for the Charlton Griffin version that the official "sample" is very good and contains one of my favorite passages, the part that starts "When human life, all too conspicuous...." .

https://www.audible.com/pd/On-the-Nature-of-Things-Audiobook/B002UZX528

I see also that different video-sharing websites, such as bitchute.com, contain uploads of various editions of Lucretius.

Due to the very poor audio quality of the end of episode 200 I have re-recorded the closing started at 1:11:22, and reposted the video youtube version as well. If anyone is interesting in hearing only the changed part, here is a youtube link cued to the part that has been updated:

Glad to have you Page259!

I may re-record my ending because unfortunately I was away from base when I did it, and the mike sounds a lot different, but other than that I think this is a good episode and likely one we will point new listeners to in the future.

We left some loose ends to address in the thread, especially as to "where to start reading" but perhaps we can fill in that gap as people comment after listening.

Shortly the episode will be available here on Youtube:

Early in the episode Kalosyni mentions the Charlton Griffin reading of Rolfe Humphries' edition of Lucretius.

Here is one source for that:

https://www.amazon.com/On-Nature-of-Things-Lucretius-audiobook

Also:

https://www.audible.com/pd/On-the-Nature-of-Things-Audiobook/B002UZX528

Episode 200 of the Lucretius Today Podcast is Now Available! This week is our special 200th Episode Retrospective and Recap, and we hope you enjoy our review of where we've been and where we plan to go. Special treat - Don rejoins us for this episode!

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.