REMINDER: SUNDAY WEEKLY ZOOM - April 26, 2026 -12:30 PM EDT - Ancient text study and discussion: De Rerum Natura - - Level 03 members and above (and Level 02 by Admin. approval) - read more info on it here.
New Graphics: Are You On Team Epicurus? | Comparison Chart: Epicurus vs. Other Philosophies | Chart Of Key Epicurean Quotations | Accelerating Study Of Canonics Through Philodemus' "On Methods Of Inference" | Note to all users: If you have a problem posting in any forum, please message Cassius
I just discovered that I'm not as late in talking about this as I thought. It appears that Haris has just recently updated the book on Amazon, and I am finding that when I try to read it they still have the old version rather than the second edition.
I have messaged Haris about this and he tells me he is working on it -- -I will update here when fixed.
Shamelessly cutting and pasting a post that Joshua just made, here is his quote from the fallen Horace:
"Once I wandered, an expert in crazy wisdom, a scant and infrequent adorer of gods, now I’m forced to set sail and return, to go back to the paths I abandoned. For Jupiter, Father of all of the gods, who generally splits the clouds with his lightning, flashing away, drove thundering horses, and his swift chariot, through the clear sky, till the dull earth, and the wandering rivers, and Styx, and dread Taenarus’ hateful headland, and Atlas’s mountain-summits shook. The god has the power to replace the highest with the lowest, bring down the famous, and raise the obscure to the heights. And greedy Fortune with her shrill whirring, carries away the crown and delights in setting it, there."
--Horace, Ode 1.34, Translated by A. S. Kline
________________
This, this it is, O Memmius, to see through
The very nature of fire-fraught thunderbolt;
O this it is to mark by what blind force
It maketh each effect, and not, O not
To unwind Etrurian scrolls oracular,
Inquiring tokens of occult will of gods,
Even as to whence the flying flame hath come,
Or to which half of heaven it turns, or how
Through walled places it hath wound its way,
Or, after proving its dominion there,
How it hath speeded forth from thence amain,
Or what the thunderstroke portends of ill
From out high heaven. But if Jupiter
And other gods shake those refulgent vaults
With dread reverberations and hurl fire
Whither it pleases each, why smite they not
Mortals of reckless and revolting crimes,
That such may pant from a transpierced breast
Forth flames of the red levin- unto men
A drastic lesson?- why is rather he-
O he self-conscious of no foul offence-
Involved in flames, though innocent, and clasped
Up-caught in skiey whirlwind and in fire?
Nay, why, then, aim they at eternal wastes,
And spend themselves in vain?- perchance, even so
To exercise their arms and strengthen shoulders?
Why suffer they the Father's javelin
To be so blunted on the earth? And why
Doth he himself allow it, nor spare the same
Even for his enemies? O why most oft
Aims he at lofty places? Why behold we
Marks of his lightnings most on mountain tops?
Then for what reason shoots he at the sea?-
What sacrilege have waves and bulk of brine
And floating fields of foam been guilty of?
Besides, if 'tis his will that we beware
Against the lightning-stroke, why feareth he
To grant us power for to behold the shot?
And, contrariwise, if wills he to o'erwhelm us,
Quite off our guard, with fire, why thunders he
Off in yon quarter, so that we may shun?
Why rouseth he beforehand darkling air
And the far din and rumblings? And O how
Canst thou believe he shoots at one same time
Into diverse directions? Or darest thou
Contend that never hath it come to pass
That divers strokes have happened at one time?
But oft and often hath it come to pass,
And often still it must, that, even as showers
And rains o'er many regions fall, so too
Dart many thunderbolts at one same time.
Again, why never hurtles Jupiter
A bolt upon the lands nor pours abroad
Clap upon clap, when skies are cloudless all?
Or, say, doth he, so soon as ever the clouds
Have come thereunder, then into the same
Descend in person, and that from thence he may
Near-by decide upon the stroke of shaft?
And, lastly, why, with devastating bolt
Shakes he asunder holy shrines of gods
And his own thrones of splendour, and to-breaks
The well-wrought idols of divinities,
And robs of glory his own images
By wound of violence?
-Lucretius Book VI, transl. William Ellery Leonard
Welcome martyo26
Note: In order to minimize spam registrations, all new registrants must respond in this thread to this welcome message within 72 hours of its posting, or their account is subject to deletion. All that is required is a "Hello!" but of course we hope you will introduce yourself -- tell us a little about yourself and 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.
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.
Welcome to the forum!
Would you define happiness differently now?
Ha probably I would define it differently every time I think about it 
But surely the consciousness of the predominance of pleasure over pain, and not just in length of time, must be a major part of it.
Last night in our Zoom we discussed the apparent backsliding of Horace later in life from his earlier Epicurean views. Joshua talked about this in our most recent podcast and if I can find the quote he read then I will post it in this thread too.
As part of that discussed we mentioned but did not pursue that the environment after the defeat of Cassius and Brutus at Philippi was not favorable to the Epicureans.
I see in Haris Dimitriadis' preface to the second edition of his book he writes:
The development of Epicurean ethics: As far as Epicurus’s philosophy is concerned, we know that following the introduction of Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire, it was abolished by law, along with the other philosophical schools.
The "abolished by law" is what I have heard but have not researched. I thought I had read that Augustus closed all the schools, not just the Epicurean, and that would predate the Christian issue. Presumably this would have hurt all the schools, but if the Epicureans were "taking Italy by storm" as Cicero complained, then this would have been especially damaging to the Epicureans.
I don't have more to add at the moment other than to start this thread in hopes of future discussion about this point.
Another section of the updated preface worth highlighting:
A Comparison of Epicurean and Aristotelian Ethics
The root differences between the Epicurean views and those expressed by Aristotle concern the roles that reason and emotion play in decision-making and well-being. Epicurus, on the one hand, claims that the truth about happiness is revealed by nature because nature possesses the accumulated knowledge of existence.
Further, Epicurus asserts, human nature plainly shows that pleasure is the ultimate good in life, and the maximization of it is the purpose of one’s life. Aristotle, on the other hand, declares that the truth about happiness is revealed by one’s character and capacity for rational thinking.
Therefore, to be happy, one has to shape a virtuous character and excel in one’s capacity for reasoning. The virtuous character reveals the purpose and actions that would make one happy, and reason finds the most effective ways to serve the purpose and accomplish the associated actions. Pleasure and happiness, says Aristotle, are simply the natural consequence of succeeding in those actions.
Epicurus rejected this theory on the grounds that virtues are mental concepts that derive meaning through the definitions, interpretations, and practices society attaches to them. Taking into account that the beliefs and habits of society are mostly corrupt, it is evident that people’s desires and thoughts are likewise spoiled, with detrimental consequences to their well-being.
Haris' release of a second edition shows that he is interested in working to always improve. I am pretty sure that overall you'll agree with his approach.
Very interesting Martin, and continues to be an interesting topic. D.L thought it was an interesting enough detail to include in his biography, it's just a shame that he didn't make more clear what was thought of the significance of it.
This is so embarrassing -- to have Haris work available for years and not to have taken more advantage of it. To anyone so inclined - please help me fix that.
In case you haven't checked out his website in a while, Haris has two music videos and two presentation videos there:
Facbook version of the above post:
It has just come to my attention that Haris has released a second edition of his "Epicurus and the Pleasant Life." His detailed preface is available on his website here. The following is an excerpt:
My deep confidence in the truthfulness of the Epicurean philosophy and, in particular, in its capacity to help modern people live a happy life, is the driving force that motivates me to do whatever is possible within my powers to make this largely unfamiliar philosophy accessible and meaningful to the general public. I have tried to objectively present the alternative views, both ancient and contemporary, so that the truth reveals itself transparently by the sheer comparison of the evidence.
Five years since the first publication of the book and fifteen years since my first encounter with the Epicurean philosophy, I feel that the circumstances are ripe now to go through the second edition. There are several reasons that nourish my desire to improve the quality of the first edition: my accumulated personal experience from the application of the philosophy in everyday life; my continuous research on the Epicurean philosophy over the years; and the feedback I received from an ample number of reviewers of the first edition.
All these reasons are powerful motives to present a comprehensive version of the Epicurean philosophy, shed light on the remaining dark areas, and lastly, address the reported weaknesses of the first edition.
I have been an appreciative fan of Haris for the many years that I have been in (unfortunately sporadic) communication with him over at Facebook. In fact we have at least one article from him featured here on Epicureanfriends:
I think we have missed too long being more engaged with Haris and his work, and I'm going to try to work to remedy that in the coming months. With the recent release of Emily Austin's "Living for Pleasure," 2022 has turned into a landmark year for publication of accessible introductions to Epicurus.
For any of you who are so inclined I hope you will join me in looking over Haris' book and even more, let's try to engage with him more closely over the coming months and years. I am embarrassed to say that I am not sure whether Haris has an account here or not, but if he doesn't I will try to talk him into dropping in every so often.
Not sure who did this engraving, and it's not a good likeness, but I find the inscription interesting. What's it say? "Praised by some, Blamed by others"? And a reference to Horace? Sort of reminds me of Dewitt's opening paragraph - "At the very outset the reader should be prepared to think of him at one and the same time as the most revered and the most reviled of all founders of thought in the Graeco-Roman world."
This screen clip comes from Allposters.com - "Perfetti" (is that a reference to an artist or art type?)
I always saw this as more palliative for the pain than any hint of suicide.
Yes I have always presumed that too, but I am no expert on the effects of wine or even warm baths. I am not sure what kind of pain that disease causes, or whether it would even make sense to think that warmth of a bath might be of any relief. I suppose today we use narcotics and other such drugs when we are really in pain, and I presume things like "a shot of whiskey' are used to dull pain, but it would be interesting to hear more from a medical side, or from someone more familiar with ancient Greek medicine. For example, why wine as opposed to something else? As Nate has been mentioning lately, didn't the ancient Greeks have access to perhaps even hallucinogenic drugs that might also have been used for pain? To what extent was the undiluted wine "enjoyable" (as was maybe the warm bath) rather than something to hasten death? The way DL writes it, it is almost as if getting in the bath and drinking the wine would naturally be expected to lead to death, but if so that's totally unintuitive to me.
I don't think the system has this date entered so this is a manual entry. Happy Birthday Elli ! Thanks for all you have done to assist Epicurean philosophy, and me personally, over the years!
Thanks again, Martin. Couple of things:
(1) The exercise reminds me that we have a link database that people are welcome to add to here: https://www.epicureanfriends.com/wcf/index.php?link-overview/ I used that to find the Athens Greece Epicurean website: https://www.epicuros.gr/pages/en.htm
(2) I found the article, so I did not have to email Christos. Here is the presentation in full: https://www.epicuros.gr/arthra/Euthana…poulos_2017.pdf
Unfortunately the only real detail is:
Moreover, the evidence that his friends put Epicurus in a tub of hot water and gave him undiluted wine as he wished is an insightful piece of information i.e. he was preparing for his end, with the help of his friends. He acted upon this when he knew his end was approaching and he did this in a most relieving manner. Hot water alleviated his severe pains and relaxed his body. The undiluted wine created mental relaxation. The undiluted wine hastened his end as it reacted on an already weakened body. In other words, Epicurus perhaps did what we call today "euthanasia in the final stages of incurable disease." He acted this way just before approaching his natural end and not a moment sooner, despite his unbearable pains. He managed this due to his philosophy.'
But you have a very good memory, Martin.
Very interesting. I will email Christos and ask him if he remembers and what he thinks about that. Would undiluted wine be a depressant to breathing or otherwise help lead to death?
Episode 152 of the Lucretius Today Podcast is now available. This week we turn to Chapter 6 and begin discussion of "The New Education."
I can't remember anything specific from my own memory at this point, but perhaps similar to the direction you are going is the issue of dreams:
Oh gosh - four years ago - no telling what I said back then but if you think it's helpful then maybe so.
I'm much more fond of this presentation, which may also come through a "Cassius" filter, but which is more insulated from error by sticking more strictly with the texts:
