Posts by Cassius

Then I think we may have to complain to Charles that in his writing about the French enlightenment he did not being this to our attention earlier!

I have regularly referred to my interest in Jackson Barwis' "Dialogues Concerning Innate Principles" as potentially relevant to Epicurus' views of anticipations and their relationships to feelings. I won't expand on that here beyond saying that Barwis suggests a perspective in which Nature implants "principles of operation" which ultimately lead to the formation of ideas in particular areas of life, but that Nature does not implant specific ideas at birth. This is directly relevant to such issues as Aristotle's position concerning the "Blank Slate" and John Locke's development of a form of empiricism. The "Dialogues Concerning Innate Principles" is directly aimed at refuting John Locke's views on that subject as expressed in "Essays Concerning Human Understanding."

Notes: Wikipedia

Quote

An Essay Concerning Human Understanding is a work by John Locke concerning the foundation of human knowledge and understanding. It first appeared in 1689 (although dated 1690) with the printed title An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. He describes the mind at birth as a blank slate (tabula rasa, although he did not use those actual words) filled later through experience. The essay was one of the principal sources of empiricism in modern philosophy, and influenced many enlightenment philosophers, such as David Hume and George Berkeley.

Book I of the Essay is Locke's attempt to refute the rationalist notion of innate ideas. Book II sets out Locke's theory of ideas, including his distinction between passively acquired simple ideas—such as "red," "sweet," "round"—and actively built complex ideas, such as numbers, causes and effects, abstract ideas, ideas of substances, identity, and diversity. Locke also distinguishes between the truly existing primary qualities of bodies, like shape, motion and the arrangement of minute particles, and the secondary qualities that are "powers to produce various sensations in us"^[1] such as "red" and "sweet." These secondary qualities, Locke claims, are dependent on the primary qualities. He also offers a theory of personal identity, offering a largely psychological criterion. Book III is concerned with language, and Book IV with knowledge, including intuition, mathematics, moral philosophy, natural philosophy ("science"), faith, and opinion.

This is just to not that today I "upgraded" the JacksonBarwis.com website, and this is to link to that site for future reference.

I can't resist posting one sentence from the first of the Dialogues Concerning Innate Principles which is probably the key to it all, and on which assertion has argument stands (as I think it does) or falls:

Quote

When we are told that benevolence is pleasing; that malevolence is painful; we are not convinced of these truths by reasoning, nor by forming them into propositions: but by an appeal to the innate internal affections of our souls: and if on such an appeal, we could not feel within the sentiment of benevolence, and the peculiar pleasure attending it; and that of malevolence and its concomitant pain, not all the reasoning in the world could ever make us sensible of them, or enable us to understand their nature.

And if true, as I think it is, what would this mean other than that all "Natural" morality is ultimately based on pleasure and pain? The remainder of the Dialogues expands upon this principle.

Announcement Posted at Facebook.

Online "A Few Days In Athens" Book Review

Planning is underway for a Zoom online "Book Club" read-through, chapter by chapter, of Frances Wright's "A Few Days In Athens." This is a fictional introduction to Epicurus through the eyes of a formerly-Stoic young philosophy student. Our plan is to do one chapter per week, for about an hour, with a short presentation of each chapter at the start of the session, followed by a round-the-table discussion afterward. We will be screen-sharing to highlight the text so participants will not be visible by video unless they request to be.

Current plans are for a late-afternoon or early evening start time by Eastern USA time, but we recognize that causes problems for participation in Europe, and if you are there and prefer an earlier start time, let us know in the thread and we will see what we can do. We will probably start Sunday January 30 depending on level of interest, so let us know if you would like to participate. In order to prevent disruptions we will ask those who wish to attend to sign up and you will be sent the appropriate zoom link close to the start time. We will probably set up a "private" Facebook group for attendees to make that process easier.

Let us know your thoughts on this.

A Few Days In Athens

Quote from Titus

I've just finished a reading, written by a guy called Cassius who deals with this subject at length

I shudder to check some of my old writing sometime. Hopefully it's still useful, but I continue to learn a lot every day.

This (like most hard-to-find French issues) is something I would love to hear from Charles on!

Wow that IS interesting! Cyrano de Bergerac seems to be a universally-admired figure - although I wasn't even sure he was a real person until I read Godfrey's links. It would be great to link him to Epicurus if we could. I had no idea he was linked to Gassendi. Maybe it's only the figure in the play that is admired, but if he was a student of Gassendi, and considered a "Libertine" then that sounds like there's potential Epicurean connection at work.

I wasn't aware of the recent movie material but of course the old black and white version available free is considered a classic. Even I who am not much of a movie buff have seen this one, and have to admit it is really amazing in quality. Once I got used to the highly intellectual dialog, that is. I bet Joshua has seen and liked this one.

Let's see if i can find a link to add here.

Quote from Scott

(I'm the one of the world's WORST small talkers. I've never been comfortable with it.)

I suspect I am in close competition with you and I bet if we thought about it that might be a trademark of the "Epicurean personality" - or at least the "Lucretian" personality!

How's this for good small talk with the next cute person you meet at a party:

Let's get right to the heart of the matter: You're wasting your life pursuing virtue! There is no god to protect you! Stop hoping for heaven or thinking that bad people go to hell! Hang some skeleton pictures on your wall and remember that death is just around the corner! And with death comes eternal nothingness - and that means FOREVER!

What do you mean that you don't care about infinite divisibility? Don't you see how crucial that is to your happiness? Or even to walking across the floor?

And are you trying to tell me that you don't think the issue of whether the universe is eternal or whether space is infinite doesn't have a direct influence on how you're going to spend your weekend?

Geesh how shortsighted can you be ? ! ?

I think this is an idea that pretty definitely needs to go forward. I doubt I am up for starting this Sunday night, but I think it makes sense to target a Sunday afternoon or night either Jan 30 or Feb 6.

Just like when we first went through Lucretius, it actually adds a level of freshness if people have just read the material recently, and have not read the full book.

Sixteen Chapters, right?

Well that is an interesting thought. Is it practical? What do others think about that?

Yes I have heard of those things but I think that there are indeed now safeguards like the waiting room, etc. But those are good cautions.

Of Course!

VS47. I have anticipated thee, Fortune, and I have closed off every one of your devious entrances. And we will not give ourselves up as captives, to thee or to any other circumstance; but when it is time for us to go, spitting contempt on life and on those who cling to it maundering, we will leave from life singing aloud a glorious triumph-song on how nicely we lived.

Sort of what you would say to the grim reaper when he comes looking for you:

But me, I'm already gone

And I'm feelin' strong

I will sing this vict'ry song

'Cause I'm already gone

Yes, I'm already gone

And I'm feelin' strong

I will sing this vict'ry song

'Cause I'm already gone

Yes, I'm already gone

Already gone

I see I am still missing new images: https://www.epicureanfriends.com/wcf/gallery/in…ead-image-list/

Kalosyni has made the proposal that we consider a chapter by chapter book review of "A Few Days In Athens" as a format for a special series of Epicurean Zoom meetings.

The proposal came up in the context of wanting to open up our online meetings to a larger audience, for example posting a link publicly on the EP Facebook group. Doing a chapter by chapter review of AFDIA would allow for a format in which we open the meeting with maybe a 15 minute recap of the events of a chapter (so as to provide continuity) and then go around the "table" letting each participant introduce themselves and say just a minute or two about that chapter. We could then use the balance of time for open discussion and then adjourn (probably after no more than an hour).

To deal with security issues we would tell people to use video only if they really want to do so, with the idea that video would generally be off (except for a shared screen of bullet points for the chapter).

If so, we would want a time that is workable for as many as possible. I have heard it suggested that maybe Sunday Night eastern time might provide a good time, but an early Sunday afternoon time might allow for European participation.

Would this be of interest? It would be fairly easy to do. Would it be worthwhile?

It would be particularly helpful if some number of our core people could take the lead in rotating the opening discussion of the events of each chapter.

Again, this would be easy, as each chapter is relatively short and direct and would require very little preparation.

I already have the chapter topic outline available here: http://afewdaysinathens2.epicureanfriends.com/ContentsAndFindingAid/

Quote from Godfrey

BTW I always enjoy an Eagles reference

The old guys strike again.

I still remember when that came out, and how much I liked it, and how disappointed I was when the Eagles changed their lineup and their music format.

You're right peaceful easy feeling does need an entry in our music list. But I hace to say back then I was probably partial to "Already Gone."

Songs the Kalosyni and most of our people here have probably not heard!

Note:. My gosh, after relistening to "Already Gone" I am immediately struck by the connection that comes to mind to a particular Vatican Saying! We could use Peaceful Easy Feeling as a background to any reference for Tranquility, but as a quiz, what Vatican Saying needs a particular type of song that fits Already Gone?

Quote from smoothiekiwi

If a friendship will produce more pain in the long run (although that seems difficult to achieve), then we should end it, or at least de-attach us.

Or conclude either that (1) it is not a friendship at all, or (2) our definition of friendship needs reworking.

Thank you Kalosyni and good catch as to "intrinsic value." I think we're on safe ground to assert that the only thing Epicurus would label as "intrisically desirable" (which I interpret as the meaning of "intrinsic value) is pleasure itself. Friendship might come close, depending on one's definition of it, but I think the way most people speak and understand the terms Friendship would generally be thought of as a tool for achieving pleasure, but not a pleasure itself.

That takes us toward definitional rabbit holes but I wonder if anything can be defined as "always" a pleasure other than pleasure itself.

Perhaps "joy" and "delight" and other words which are always associated with "pleasure," and maybe even "tranquility," but I would think that whatever we're discussing would have to be something that we "always" consider to be pleasurable. In that regard, "friendship" is probably tricky to classify.

What do others here think about that?

Credit to Joshua for this:

Post

RE: Epicurean Worldview, Personal Identity, and Creating Community

[…]

[…]

I might agree with the first part, but not as much with the second.

It's important to consider the whole proposition. Epicurus thought that the sun was;

1. Wholly material

2. In constant but not uniform motion

3. In a centerless cosmos

4. Governed by the same laws as things on Earth

5. Arose out of matter, and has a finite period of existence

5a. But its matter will recombine into other things

6. About as big as it seems.

Compare Aristotle's sun;

1. Made of aether, an element that didn't exist on…

Joshua

January 20, 2022 at 12:45 PM

Quote

His idea, that the Sun is as big as it seems (—> DeWitt), is very naive...

Quote

...even in the ancient world.

I might agree with the first part, but not as much with the second.

It's important to consider the whole proposition. Epicurus thought that the sun was;

1. Wholly material

2. In constant but not uniform motion

3. In a centerless cosmos

4. Governed by the same laws as things on Earth

5. Arose out of matter, and has a finite period of existence

5a. But its matter will recombine into other things

6. About as big as it seems.

Compare Aristotle's sun;

1. Made of aether, an element that didn't exist on earth

2. In constant and uniform motion (because aetherial)

2a. Set in motion by unmoved mover (god)

3. Orbiting a stationary earth that was the center of everything

4. Governed by different laws than Earth (the laws of the aether)

5. Exists in perpetuity (because aetherial)

6. Size uncertain (not mentioned, as far as I can tell)

______________________

In view of the above, I think Epicurus came out alright.

That's a great list and we need to refer to it every time the size of the sun issue comes up. I added it into the FAQ.

Quote from smoothiekiwi

His idea, that the Sun is as big as it seems (—> DeWitt), is very naive, even in the ancient world

He was clearly wrong, but I don't think that "naive" is warranted. He had very specific epistemological reasons for his view point based on observing objects at a distance here one earth, and he was also concerned about the use of mathematecs to allege that the sun and other stars are gods. Exploring that further belongs in another thread, but I wanted to make a note on this.

Also, as to Martin's post above, which I agree with, I think the big picture point on all of this is that Epicurus was using his physics as a foundation for his epistemology, such as is stated in the quote that's currently at the top of the website home page:

Quote

Moreover, unless the constitution of the world is thoroughly understood, we shall by no means be able to justify the verdicts of our senses. Further, our mental perceptions all arise from our sensations; and if these are all to be true, as the system of Epicurus proves to us, then only will cognition and perception become possible. ... [W]hen cognition and knowledge have been invalidated, every principle concerning the conduct of life and the performance of its business becomes invalidated. So from natural science we borrow courage to withstand the fear of death, and firmness to face superstitious dread, and tranquillity of mind, through the removal of ignorance concerning the mysteries of the world, and self-control, arising from the elucidation of the nature of the passions and their different classes....

And we can see that reflected in Diogenes Laertius:

Quote

We must begin with the first letter, but I will first speak briefly about the divisions of his philosophy. It is divided into three parts, the Canonicon (or Procedure), the Physics and the Ethics. The Canonicon gives the method of approach to the system, and is contained in the work called The Canon. The Physics contains all the investigation into nature, and is contained in the thirty-seven books On Nature and in an abridged form in the letters. The Ethics deals with choice and avoidance, and is contained in the books On Lives and the letters and the book on The End. The Epicureans usually group the Canonicon with the Physics and state that it deals with the criterion of truth and the fundamental principles and contains the elements of the system.

In the past I don't think I paid sufficient attention to that line, and I think from now on I am going to emphasize it as strongly as I can.

The purpose of the study of phyiscs is to be able to grasp the way the universe works well enough to understand how to make sense of anything. Unless you have a basic framework that establishes that knowledge is possible, you can't make any progress on anything else.

Epicurean physics isn't perfect from our point of view today, but it provided a basis for being able to have confidence in things right in front of us - things that are essential to happy living. I don't think anything in modern physics has come close to an effective challenge to that basic point of view, which is probably summarized in this statement of Diogenes of Oinoanda. He gets taken to task for attributing the wrong view to Aristotle rather than to others, but I am not going to be quick to just as wrong someone who presumably had access to much more of Aristotle's materials than we do. The point is to argue against those "who hold the same view... that nothing is scientifically knowable...."

Quote

Now Aristotle and those who hold the same Peripatetic views as Aristotle say that nothing is scientifically knowable, because things are continually in flux and, on account of the rapidity of the flux, evade our apprehension. We on the other hand acknowledge their flux, but not its being so rapid that the nature of each thing [is] at no time apprehensible by sense-perception. And indeed [in no way would the upholders of] the view under discussion have been able to say (and this is just what they do [maintain] that [at one time] this is [white] and this black, while [at another time] neither this is [white nor] that black, [if] they had not had [previous] knowledge of the nature of both white and black.