Here's a new thread for Celsus. General Bio of Celsus and the Possibility that the Celsus Who Wrote "The True Word" was not the Celsus who was friend of Lucian

As Joshua points out in this episode, DeWitt comes down on the side that the two people are the same, and says that the questioning arises from the view that the writer is too smart to be an Epicurean. This is an instance where I am not so sure DeWitt is right, because it seems in my (long ago) reading I too thought that the writer seemed to be talking about gods being actively involved in human affairs, and if so I would think that would mark him clearly as non-Epicurean.

But it was years ago when I read that and I may not at the time have appreciated some of the subtleties of the Epicurean position that people do benefit from having proper opinions about the gods, so perhaps I was reading Celsus too narrowly. Whichever is the case, Celsus seems to be regarded as among the first anti-Christian writers, so he deserves our attention for many reasons, even if he was not fully orthodox Epicurean. No doubt there is a lot of stuff in Celsus that it would profit us to talk about, just like there is in Lucian's anti-Christian "Death of Peregrine"

The Death of Peregrine | De Morte Peregrini [The Lucian of Samosata Project]

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celsus

Celsus (/ˈsɛlsəs/; Hellenistic Greek: Κέλσος, Kélsos; fl. AD 175–177) was a 2nd-century Greek philosopher and opponent of early Christianity.^[1][2][3] His literary work, The True Word (also Account, Doctrine or Discourse; Greek: Hellenistic Greek: Λόγος Ἀληθής),^[4][5] survives exclusively in quotations from it in Contra Celsum, a refutation written in 248 by Origen of Alexandria.^[3] The True Word is the earliest known comprehensive criticism of Christianity.^[3] Hanegraaff^[6] has argued that it was written shortly after the death of Justin Martyr (who was possibly the first Christian apologist), and was probably a response to his work.^[6] Origen stated that Celsus was from the first half of the 2nd century AD, although the majority of modern scholars have come to a general consensus that Celsus probably wrote around AD 170 to 180.^[7][8]

^{THIS points out that there may be more than one Celsus, and there is confusion as to whether the anti-Christian Celsus was in fact an Epicurean:}

Philosophy[edit]

All that is known about Celsus personally is what comes from the surviving text of his book and from what Origen says about him.^[9] Although Origen initially refers to Celsus as an Epicurean,^[10][11][12] his arguments reflect ideas of the Platonic tradition, rather than Epicureanism.^[10][13][12] Origen attributes this to Celsus's inconsistency,^[10] but modern historians see it instead as evidence that Celsus was not an Epicurean at all.^[10][11] Joseph Wilson Trigg states that Origen probably confused Celsus, the author of The True Word, with a different Celsus, who was an Epicurean philosopher and a friend of the Syrian satirist Lucian.^[11] Celsus the Epicurean must have lived around the same time as the author of The True Word and he is mentioned by Lucian in his treatise On Magic.^[11] Both Celsus the friend of Lucian and Celsus the author of The True Word evidently shared a passionate zeal against superstitio, making it even easier to see how Origen could have concluded that they were the same person.^[11]

As editing proceeds on this week's episode, we have some typical pronunciation questions which I probably butchered, so I will beg forgiveness and see if there is a consensus on correct pronunciation.

In the great debate between the Christian Origen and the possibly Epicurean Celsus, how do we pronounce those names?

Does Origen rhyme which "origin," or where is the emphasis, and is there a hard or soft "g"?

As to Celsus, it seems I hear both hard "C" and soft "C" pronunciations. In the recording I went with the hard C, but we don't use a hard "C" with "Cicero," so I probably got it wrong.

Thoughts?

Edit -- we need a thread or subforum on Celsus so I will add him

NOTE: If you are a new member who has not previously attended a meeting, click here for background information on how to attend and obtain the Zoom link.

Here are our topics for this week:

1 - The Vatican Sayings:

VS22. Unlimited time and limited time afford an equal amount of pleasure, if we measure the limits of that pleasure by reason. ^[9]

Prior Discussions: VS 22 - Same as PD 19.

VS23. Every friendship is worth choosing for its own sake, though it takes its origin from the benefits. ^[10]

Prior Discussions: VS 23 - All friendship is desirable in itself, though it starts from the need of help.

2 - Our Special Topic - If We Have Time

Open Night.

Attendees should also plan to be sure they are on Kalosyni's conversation list. If you are not already on that and want the Zoom link so you can attend, please message Kalosyni or any other moderator.

Based on recent discussions I think we are probably moving to the idea that the best option is a mix of approaches, with one of them being having an opt-in email list so they of the forum does happen to go down for an extended period that we have a way to reach out to regulars with an explanation and ETA for fixing any problems that do arise. Thankfully there has not proved to be a pressing need for this, but over time it makes sense to harden the backup systems.

For the moment the most likely event would be a technical mishap with our host that keeps the forum offline for a period, and for that we now have in place backup.epicureanfriends.com as a first line place people can check for updates.

Great comments Burninglight and thanks for that suggestion as to materialism.

And I had never heard of that Horace quote but the litany of examples reminds me immediately of the list of misbegotten love interests in Lucretius Book IV. I wonder if there's any pattern or parallel there worth considering as to form of presentation, or if it is totally coincidental?

Quote from Lucretius Book 4 - Munro

For this men usually do, blinded by passion, and attribute to the beloved those advantages which are not really theirs. We therefore see women in ways manifold deformed and ugly to be objects of endearment and held in the highest admiration. And one lover jeers at others and advises them to propitiate Venus, since they are troubled by a disgraceful passion, and often, poor wretch, gives no thought to his own ills greatest of all. The black is a brune, the filthy and rank has not the love of order; the cat-eyed is a miniature Pallas, the stringy and wizened a gazelle; the dumpy and dwarfish is one of the graces, from top to toe all grace; the big and overgrown is awe-inspiring and full of dignity. She is tongue-tied, cannot speak, then she has a lisp; the dumb is bashful; then the fire-spit, the teasing, the gossiping turns to a shining lamp. One becomes a slim darling then when she cannot live from want of flesh; and she is only spare, who is half-dead with cough. Then the fat and big-breasted is a Ceres’ self big-breasted from Iacchus; the pug-nosed is a she Silenus and a satyress; the thick-lipped a very kiss. It were tedious to attempt to report other things of the kind.

Right. Other than for Lucretius' poetic version, we don't know when or if Epicurus' "On Nature" or even his letters or the sayings were translated into Latin in the ancient world, if at all. Greek may have been the language of the intellectuals but the common people would have eventually needed Latin, so "getting the texts into easily accessible form" has to always be a priority. Were they successful in doing so in the ancient world other than in the negative form of being included in Cicero's attacks?

So I'll add to the list: "Possibility that the texts were not translated into Latin or local languages in sufficient numbers to penetrate deeply enough into common culture."

As a shorter way of saying what I stated in that last post, below is a table I am setting up in the thread for the next podcast episode. For the table I am tweaking the title of Kalosyni's first post (which is already a little unwieldy) to try to bring a little more focus to what we want to talk about on the podcast. Even this tweaking still leaves a lot of ambiguity, but hopefully it helps.

For example, I really want to make the title "as a movement where people PUBLICLY identify their primary worldview as Epicurean," and that should be implicit in the discussion. However that brings in questions of "affiliation with a group," which is beyond the scope of this discussion, so let's try to separate the issue of an "official" identification from that of what a person in their own minds is doing.

So for example, let's consider the main issue not as counting numbers of avowed "public" Epicureans, but evaluating what it took from 50 BC to say 1700 AD for people in their own personal lives to consider their own worldviews to be primarily aligned with what Epicurus taught. No doubt many of those same factors extend to the present, but talking about the present implies more than we want to take on at the moment. What we'll address in the podcast is "factors" - not proposed solutions. "Solutions" is too big a topic to tackle in an hour long final podcast.

So the titles of the lists for the podcast will be:

A) Major Causes of the Decline of Epicurean Philosophy "As A Movement Where People Identify Their Primary Worldview as Epicurean" after Lucretius

B) Major Obstacles to the Revival of Epicurean Philosophy "As A Movement Where People Identify Their Primary Worldview as Epicurean" through Today

1. For many if not most modern American Christians, their beliefs about the Christian god are in fact one of their greatest sources of comfort and not distress (burninglights)

Let's keep the majority of the conversation here, but for purposes of the podcast as we near the date of recording we'll update the final list here: RE: Episode 189 - "Epicurus And His Philosophy" Part 41 - Chapter 15 - Extension, Submergence, & Revival 04 (Not Yet Recorded)

Kalosyni has started a new thread to help us with ideas for the final episode of this series of the podcast, to be recorded on 8/27/23.

Post

Let's Make a List of 1) Major Causes of the Decline of Epicurean Philosophy after Lucretius and 2) The Obstacles to its Revival Through Today

Next week for our final episode of our podcast series on Norman DeWitt's book we what to close with a discussion on the reasons the Epicurean movement crested around the time of Lucretius and began a long decline. We also want to cover the obstacles to the resurgence of an organized Epicurean movement in the intervening years up through today.

There are probably many causes of each, and we would like to know your thoughts so we can consider including them in the final episode.

Kalosyni

August 20, 2023 at 1:02 PM

That's where we should conduct the main part of the discussion, because the topic is a great one and separate from this episode. I will have to work to keep up but I will keep a running list of items here. I will fine tune the title of that post just a little - but note that the suggestions included are potential, and for discussion only as to whether we think the were factors:

A) Major Causes of the Decline of Epicurean Philosophy "As A Movement Where People Identify Their Primary Worldview as Epicurean" after Lucretius

1. Potential loss of livelihood, reputation, or life due to ostracism by those who advocate Christianity, Islam, Judaism, or other competing worldview.
2. Closing of organized schools reduced opportunities for collaboration or education of children(?)
3. Accepting the proposition that wagering on the possibility of life after death was worth the risk of acting on faith.
4. Accepting the proposition that one's beliefs about the Christian god are in fact one of one's greatest sources of comfort and not distress (burninglights)
5. Possibility that the texts were not translated into Latin or local languages in sufficient numbers to penetrate deeply enough into common culture.
6. Loss of confidence in Epicurean doctrine (?)
7. Possibility that if the focus of Epicurean philosophy becomes "having a good time" or even "helping people" then the proponents of the school lose the intensity of Epicurus or Lucretius in wanting to live according to the "truth" - the "way things are" -- as they believed the Physics and Canonics establish to be true. When you lose the zeal to pursue this "truth" for yourself and then to communicate this "truth" to others, then it becomes very tempting to compromise and go along with the submergence of the key doctrines for the sake of "getting along" and living for the pleasure of the moment, and slighting the mental pleasure involved in wishing to know and follow "the truth."

B) Major Obstacles to the Revival of Epicurean Philosophy "As A Movement Where People Identify Their Primary Worldview as Epicurean" through Today

(To the extent not included in A above)

Welcome to Episode 189 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. We are now in the process of a series of podcasts intended to provide a general overview of Epicurean philosophy based on the organizational structure employed by Norman DeWitt in his book "Epicurus and His Philosophy."

This week we complete our discussion of Chapter 15, entitled "Extension, Submergence, and Revival," and we reflect on the book as a whole as we close this series of episodes of the podcast.

Chapter XV - Extension, Submergence, And Revival

• The Epicurean Revival

Burning lights you are of course also raising the background question of what it is we are talking about in terms of decline and revival - whether the focus is on ethics primarily or the full picture.

It's definitely legitimate to talk about eclecticism especially as an entry point. However for purposes of the discussion let's presume that what we are talking about both in the past and in the intervening years would be the status of claiming "I am an Epicurean" and meaning by that that the person is making the point that he or she endorses the full philosophy of Epicurus - -- not necessarily every precise point of "science" at the atomic level, but including every major point of canonics, ethics, and the nature of the universe professed by Epicurus. Which is what you would expect an organized "school" would likely do.

Now of course that kind of standard applies more clearly to the intervening centuries than to 2023, but I think the basic point remains valid, and revolves around seeing Epicurus as the core organizing figure of a philosophy that he would clearly recognize as his own if he were alive at any point in the last 2000 years or even today.

For purposes of this exercise we aren't saying necessarily that we ourselves would take that path tomorrow. The main point here is analyzing the big picture in the abstract, sort of along the lines of Gibbon diagnosing the fall of Rome, for us to discuss in the podcast.

Any further ambitions beyond that should be reserved for another day. . Putting a period to this series of episodes of the podcast is the immediate objective. All comments so far have been great so we will hope for many more over the next week.

Good suggestions so far. In addition, before we go too far down the "current obstacles" road, it would probably help to be sure to include comments on factors in the ancient world that led to decline. Many of the "obstacles" we see today were present during the rise of Epicurean philosophy, and yet rise it did. What caused the rise to slow and reverse? Was Christianity really so persuasive intellectually? What other factors played a part? Especially since a decline seems to have set in even before Christianity rose?

Or did it? When did the decline really begin? Was Lucretius really the last powerful *explicit* Epicurean writer? We can say Diogenes of Oinoanda came later, but to some extent he seems to be a special case.

So please everyone keep going, and consider both time periods.

Thanks Burning lights. We will compile a table and include in one or both lists:

Quote from burninglights

I'd imagine that for many if not most modern American Christians, their beliefs about the Christian god are in fact one of their greatest sources of comfort and not distress

That is no doubt thought to be true in many cases. What to do in response to it is a separate question, and no doubt varies by personal context and goals. It's definitely something that many people believe in their own lives to be the case, and so something to consider in the mix.

Wow thanks Don! Pretty disgusting but thanks for finding!

On page 354 is a reference to a painting entitled "Triumph of St Augustine," about which DeWitt says:

A similar motive inspired a painting now in the Palazzo Diamanti in Ferrara, Italy. which is entitled "The Triumph of St. Augustine." To the right of the saint in the upper register appear Aristotle, Plato, Socrates. and Seneca. In the middle register the Virtues are represented as punishing the sinners, among whom appear Epicurus."

Either this one at wikisource is different, or it is only part of what DeWitt describes, so we need to track this down.

File:Claudio Coello - The Triumph of St Augustine - WGA5127.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

commons.wikimedia.org

Again thank you for all the work spent in doing that Don!

Joshua is amazing, and his breadth of information is a large part of the reason I take the time to edit each episode so closely. The stuff we are talking about has been talked about for more than 2000 years already, and is truly "evergreen," so I would like to think that these episodes can be listened to for many years to come. If we store them right they will be useful long after this website and HTML are obsolete.

We about to close out forty some episodes going through the book, and I don't feel like we've nearly exhausted the subject.

In fact I am more enthusiastic than ever to tackle Cicero's arguments against Epicurus in "On Ends." Those have been out there tearing down Epicurus for 2000 years, and it's time to make an organized effort to make a dent in them. And given the lengthy time we've spent on Lucretius, Epicurus' letters, and now on a book devoted to the whole philosophy, I feel like we have a good group of people positioned to tackle them. And note that I say "group of people" because it really helps to have the input of Martin, Kalosyni, Don (who I hope will occasionally appear) and many others. As we go through books one and two of On Ends we ought to be able to map out and outline the arguments that Cicero was summarizing as the key attacks on Epicurus, and we need all hands on deck to go through them and refute them.

When we finish book two of On Ends we get (if I recall) to the end of the section specifically devoted to Epicurus, so we will then make an executive decision and decide whether to go over Cicero's attacks on Stoicism (worthwhile but possibly tedious) or switch over to the Epicurean section of "On the Nature of the Gods," which the podcast Don recently linked in another post was talking about.

For a full size version in landscape orientation, click here or on the graphic below.

Today we are launching a new feature for the front page of the forum - a "Navigation Map" with clickable boxes to take you to the relevant sections of the forum. This is only a first version and will no doubt go through lots of iterations, but this is intended to be a help for everyone (old and new here at the forum) in finding some of the most important subforums and seeing their relevance to each other.

The version below is not clickable or well zoomable, but the version on the front page is an SVG graphic that is fully zoomable to any size and remains sharp. Click over to that one and you can zoom in and out to your heart's content.

It is formatted in "portrait" since most people are using phones and devices of similar format to access the forum. We can probably do a "landscape" version as well if we can figure a way to display the correct one for the correct screen size.

Thanks for responding and very glad to have you!