At first glance those definitions would seem to be "positive" in the sense of "reveal" rather than hinting at illusions or error.

Great examples Nate! And chapter 4 is full of examples of "illusions" but I don't know the Greek or Latin word for that.

Presumably the issue is that we need to find ways to distinguish our modern concept of "illusions" from what Epicurus was talking about as "perceptions."

I think we suffer a lot because our wordings tend to imply that Epicurus put stock in mirages or other illusions when that inference is not warranted at all. He goes to great lengths to point out how single perceptions can be "false to the facts" and saying that he accepted all "appearances" without explaining what he meant gives a totally false impression.

That kind of thing may not bother the "experts" because it gives them insider "power" over the subject, but it is a big turnoff to ordinary people to whom Epicurus appealed (and we should too).

Recent discussions have highlighted the importance of texts in which a variation of the term "appear" or "appearances" (as translated in English) are to Epicurean Canonics. For example, in the size of the sun issue, the Epicurean position seems to distill down into something like: "The size of the sun is as it appears to be."

Quote

For we must not conduct scientific investigation by means of empty assumptions and arbitrary principles, but follow the lead of phenomena: for our life has not now any place for irrational belief and groundless imaginings, but we must live free from trouble. Now all goes on without disturbance as far as regards each of those things which may be explained in several ways so as to harmonize with what we perceive, when one admits, as we are bound to do, probable theories about them. But when one accepts one theory and rejects another which harmonizes as well with the phenomenon, it is obvious that he altogether leaves the path of scientific inquiry and has recourse to myth. Now we can obtain indications of what happens above from some of the phenomena on earth: for we can observe how they come to pass, though we cannot observe the phenomena in the sky: for they may be produced in several ways. Yet we must never desert the appearance of each of these phenomena, and further, as regards what is associated with it, we must distinguish those things whose production in several ways is not contradicted by phenomena on earth." - Letter to Pythocles [87]

As to the Sun itself in the letter to Pythocles:

Quote

[91] The size of sun (and moon) and the other stars is for us what it appears to be; and in reality it is either (slightly) greater than what we see or slightly less or the same size: for so too fires on earth when looked at from a distance seem to the senses. And every objection at this point will easily be dissipated, if we pay attention to the clear vision, as I show in my books about nature.

The issue is discussed by Lucretius this way in his Book Five (Bailey):

Quote

[564] Nor can the sun’s blazing wheel be much greater or less, than it is seen to be by our senses. For from whatsoever distances fires can throw us their light and breathe their warm heat upon our limbs, they lose nothing of the body of their flames because of the interspaces, their fire is no whit shrunken to the sight. Even so, since the heat of the sun and the light he sheds, arrive at our senses and cheer the spots on which they fall, the form and bulk of the sun as well must needs be seen truly from earth, so that you could alter it almost nothing to greater or less. [575] The moon, too, whether she illumines places with a borrowed light as she moves along, or throws out her own rays from her own body, however that may be, moves on with a shape no whit greater than seems that shape, with which we perceive her with our eyes. For all things which we behold far sundered from us through much air, are seen to grow confused in shape, ere their outline is lessened. Wherefore it must needs be that the moon, inasmuch as she shows a clear-marked shape and an outline well defined, is seen by us from earth in the heights, just as she is, clear-cut all along her outer edges, and just the size she is. [585] Lastly, all the fires of heaven that you see from earth; inasmuch as all fires that we see on earth, so long as their twinkling light is clear, so long as their blaze is perceived, are seen to change their size only in some very small degree from time to time to greater or less, the further they are away: so we may know that the heavenly fires can only be a very minute degree smaller or larger by a little tiny piece.

It would probably be helpful to look into the number of locations where that kind of formulation occurs in the text, and see what Greek (and Latin) words were used in the originals.

Since I am more familiar with the Latin, here is a section from Lucretius:

Quote

Nec nimio solis maior rota nec minor ardor

esse potest, nostris quam sensibus esse videtur.

nam quibus e spatiis cumque ignes lumina possunt

adiicere et calidum membris adflare vaporem,

nil magnis intervallis de corpore libant

flammarum, nihil ad speciem est contractior ignis.

proinde, calor quoniam solis lumenque profusum

perveniunt nostros ad sensus et loca fulgent,

forma quoque hinc solis debet filumque videri,

nil adeo ut possis plus aut minus addere vere.

Display More

The Loeb / Rouse / Smith edition translates that as:

Quote

The wheel of the sun and its heat cannot be much greater or less than is perceived by our senses.

The word "Appearance" can have many shades of meaning in English. Several of the major meanings carry negative connotations in English, as if we should presume that anyone who uses the word "appears" is actually "mistaken" or even "deceived." Merriam-Webster:

Quote

Definition of appearance

1a : external show : semblance Although hostile, he preserved an appearance of neutrality. b : outward aspect : look had a fierce appearance c appearances plural : outward indication trying to keep up appearances 2a : a sense impression or aspect of a thing The blue of distant hills is only an appearance. b : the world of sensible phenomena 3a : the act, action, or process of appearing the first appearance of that word in English b law : the presentation of oneself in court as a party to an action often through the representation of an attorney 4a : something that appears : phenomenon b : an instance of appearing : occurrence her first public appearance since winning the award

I doubt strongly that Epicurus intended to attach a "negative" implication to these constructions about the size of the sun. In other words, I don't think he meant to imply that his own formulations were mistaken or deceptive. That would be a subset of the entire question of how to regard the senses and their reliability. I think we need to find the best ways to state this issue in both far and firm terms, so that people can understand what Epicurean philosophy expects from the senses, and what is beyond the limit of their capability.

So I am starting this thread as a placeholder for this conversation, because I think if we look at the instances in the texts where references like this occur, we can get a better understanding of the degree of firmness which Epicurus is attaching to these statements.

When we see in English that the word "Appearance" is being used, should we substitute (at least in our minds) a form of the word "Perception"?

Such as "The size of the sun is that which we perceive it to be." (?)

The Poetic versions that seem to be best liked today are Humphries and Stallings,

Stallings renders it "crafty" -

The winds flee from you, Goddess, your arrival puts to flight

The clouds of heaven. For you, the crafty earth contrives sweet flowers,

For you, the oceans laugh, the skies grow peaceful after showers,

This is interesting - never heard of this either but seems easy to think that there's some relation to the latin. Sounds like maybe Munro got his "cunning artificer" this way?

Daedala - Wikipedia

Daedala

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to searchFor the ancient city, see Daedala (city).

In Ancient Greece, the Daedala (Greek: δαίδαλα) was a festival of reconciliation that was held every few years in honor of Hera, consort of the supreme god Zeus at Plataea, in Boeotia, being one of the major cults of the city.

According to Pausanias, there was a "lesser Daedala" (Δαίδαλα μικρά), celebrated every four years or so exclusively by the Plataeans, and a "greater Daedala" (Δαίδαλα μεγάλα), celebrated by all of Boeotians every fourteen cycles (approx. 60 years).

In the lesser Daedala, the people of Plataea went to an ancient oak grove and exposed pieces of cooked meat to ravens, attentively watching upon which tree any of the birds, after taking a piece of meat, would settle. Out of this tree they carved an image, and having it dressed as a bride, they set it on a bullock cart with a bridesmaid beside it. The image seems then to have been drawn to the bank of the river Asopus and back to the town, attended by a cheering crowd.^[1]

These adorned xoana were also called "daidala" (δάιδαλα or δαιδάλεια),^[2] with the connotation that they were "crafted" or "fashioned" (compare Daedalus, "daidalos" (δαίδαλος) meaning "cunning worker").

Ah that word IS in the Latin! So I suppose maybe I can ratchet down some of my criticism ---

However ultimately if the point of a translation is to be understandble in the common language I am afraid I still have to rate this choice a failure. I just don't recognize any form of "daedala" as coming down to us in modern English well enough to make this a workable choice. Anyone using that word or a form of it in daily life other than Don?

The only thing it conveys to me the nonsense word "diddle" which is pretty far from the intended meaning, I gather.

I expect to be forever identified with "Daedal" from now on --- but that reminds me I wanted to check the Latin to see if there is possibly an excuse for that word there....

I AM GLAD YOU ASKED THAT Don !

I did mention Perseus at this page at the very top: https://epicuruscollege.com/coursematerial/Map-Lucretius-DRN/

But i have to say I am prejudiced against the Leonard edition because it's the first one I tried to read, for years, and always found it too "flowery" (maybe "poetic" is the word).

And I confess further you have hit a raw nerve. For some reason I cannot get out of my mind an unforgiveable choice of words that I always choke over, right at the beginning of Book One:

"For thee the daedal Earth bears scented flowers...."

That just does it for me for the whole translation. With ALL the intricacy of the Roman allusions, with ALL the difficulty of the text, with ALL the difficulty of the subject matter, do we have to dredge up an obscure word like DAEDAL which no one translator uses?

BROWN: Thee, Goddess, Thee the winds avoid; the clouds fly Thee and Thy approach. With various art the Earth, for Thee, affords her sweetest flowers;

MUNRO: Before thee, goddess, flee the winds, the clouds of heaven, before thee and thy advent; for thee earth, manifold in works, puts forth sweet-smelling flowers...

BAILEY: Thou, goddess, thou dost turn to flight the winds and the clouds of heaven, thou at thy coming; for thee earth, the quaint artificer, puts forth her sweet-scented flowers; for thee the levels of ocean smile, and the sky,

MARTIN FERGUSON SMITH: You, goddess, at your coming hush the winds and scatter the clouds; for you the creative earth thrusts up fragrant flowers; for you the smooth stretches of the ocean smile, and the sky, tranquil now, is flooded with effulgent light.

HUMPHRIES: All things conceived, all things that face the light

In their bright visit, the grain-bearing fields,

The marinered oceans, where the wind and cloud

Are quiet in your presence - all proclaim

Your gift, without which they are nothingness.

For you that sweet artificer, the earth,

Submits her flowers, and for you the deep

Of ocean smiles, and the calm heaven shines

With shoreless light.

I can handle "quaint artificer," I can handle "sweet artificer," I can handle "manifold in works" and all the rest.

But darn it do NOT ask me to go looking up the meaning of some obscure ENGLISH word just because you want to make your version of Lucretius sound poetic!

And if already in the first paragraph I can't trust Leonard to play fair with me, then I'm sorry, I can't ask anyone else to wade through that nonsense.

I will admit only that in recent years since I've found that he's at Perseus I sometimes am willing to use him now, but I can't do it with confidence because I never know when another of those darn DAEDALS is going to turn up!

I am trying to upgrade the website's connections to good copies of Lucretius, and also to provide a "table of contents" to the important topics.

I am working on that at the following link, which as of now has better material than the corresponding pages on the wiki site: Lucretius At the "Epicurus College" Course Materials page.

This site now contains the Brown, Munro, and Bailey public domain versions, with paragraph numbers set to correspond to the Loeb edition.

The "Table of Topics" needs refinement, and each point needs to begin with a paragraph section where the reference can be found.

Don were you making a comment or just updating the thread with the current graphic?

Eikadistes I forgot until now to post that this "Oasis" graphic came up in discussion last night on Zoom and the person who brought it up mentioned that they got a lot of use out of it and appreciated it!

We haven't talked about this graphic much lately but we continue to feature it on the front page and I feel sure it continues to be helpful especially to newer people.

So thanks again for creating it!

Threadstarter post

This link comes from Wikipedia on Thomas Young:

https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1159&context=english_theses

(However this sounds like the writer's overlay rather than a cite to Epicurus.)

Another: Reason and Revolution:  The Radicalism of Thomas Young

For me, the real litmus test of whether someone was an "Epicurean Influencer" often comes down to: Did they embrace eternal universe rather than a Deistic clockmaker model? Unless they embrace eternal universe they are hedging on key doctrine. (I don't apply that test quite the same way to people today, because I know that advanced physics has people turned in so many directions its hard to know what to believe anymore. But until that phenomena happened, seems to me the only legitimate position was Epicurus' own position - and of course I myself continue to think it's the best one even now. )

It would be really interesting to know how far Thomas Young went in endorsing Epicurus rather than just a generic deist/clockmaker/materialism model.

Because of course materialism doesn't confirm whether they embraced "Pleasure" as the ultimate goal rather than virtue or some other form of idealism. Thomas Cooper wrote an essay, for instance, giving a way to reconcile materialism with Christianity.

Also interesting that several of these type people were "doctors," including Joseph Priestley and Thomas Cooper.

A long time ago I put together using the website XMINDS this chart of the major figures referenced in "A Few Days In Athens."

A Map Through A Few Days In Athens and the World of Epicurus

www.xmind.net

Over time it would be a great project to put together something similar (better!) illustrating the web of relationships among those who were "significant contributors to the transmission of Epicurean Philosophy" in the English-speaking world.

Not everyone has need for this kind of thing, especially outside the USA, but I think that there are many people in the initial stages of considering their viewpoints about Epicurus, and discussing him with other people, who would profit a lot from having a ready reference to a diagram of past "luminaries" who have embraced Epicurean philosophy.

Labelling Thomas Young as more radical increases the odds he was affirmatively Epicurean. We need to investigate and find out what texts are available!

This is the section I need to reorganize and expand that has this kind of material already:

1700's - 1800's

Nate thanks for that reference:

Quote from Nate

Thomas Young, organizer of the Boston Tea Party,

Back when I was researching that period years of go I started with Paine's Age of Reason and from Paine and found Ethan Allen's book (Reason the Only Oracle of Man) which is a little rough compared to Paine). I also found Elihu Palmer's "Principles of Nature" and the writings of Thomas Cooper.

But I never found a reference to "Thomas Young." Do you know if he wrote anything worth reading? Probably this list of books here deserves a thread of its own for people who would like to research and cite "Founding Fathers" of the USA for reference in advocating Epicurean viewpoints. Even if they were "deists" or didn't mention Epicurus specifically I can imagine this kind of material being useful to lots of people. I didn't orginally consider it but of course now in retrospect I should include Frances Wrights AFDIA in that list too.

Absolutely right to link to Nate's text whenever possible. What you're seeing in some posts going on now is an attempt to reorganize and make it easier to find the forum threads on the individual doctrines such as this one. I added a new link under the "special resources" section on the first place, as currently it's probably not highlighted well enough that these are available. We have the lists of texts under the "Texts" menu, but it's not easy to find the individual forum threads, and we want to avoid too much detail being put in the "comments" section of each doctrine in the "Lexicon." I am trying to add a notice to that effect under each doctrine such as you see now in PD09, but I am afraid that leaves 39 to go and I don't have the time to add those immediately to every Doctrine, Saying, and Fundamental. Will get that done when I can.

Quote from Don

But to wind back to Cassius, I could see a "Sunday School" curriculum being helpful. Some kind of supplemental home study.

Right! Supplemental home study is the main thing I was thinking about, at least for most of us. As usual, depends on the context and what options are available.

Quote from Don

But it shouldn't necessarily be imposed on one's children.

I agree with that and the rest of the paragraph as well. But to some extent we do make lots of choices for our children, so choosing to address the subject shouldn't be ignored. An interesting example to include in a discussion of that would be the example of "Hedea" in "A Few Days In Athens" who seems to stand for the position that formal instruction might not be necessary, but perhaps that is a very unusual case.

Yes we discussed the murkiness of PD09 last night. Anyone else who has a current take on the meaning of PD09 is welcome to join in here. I think Kalosyni is right that there is an "ultimate point" which the doctrine is making beyond the words that are on the paper.

I am not even sure that i have seen many articles on this topic but we need good review of it:

PD09 - Epicureanfriends.com

www.epicureanfriends.com

Thread

PD09 - General Discussion of PD09

Thread starter for general discussion of PD09 . Please post detailed discussion here rather than in the "comments" section of the PD09 alternate translations.

Cassius

June 16, 2022 at 10:19 AM

Thread starter for general discussion of PD09. Please post detailed discussion here rather than in the "comments" section of the PD09 alternate translations.