REMINDER: SUNDAY WEEKLY ZOOM - July 12, 2026 -12:30 PM EDT - AGENDA: 1) Discussion of Epicurean philosophy, and 2) Ancient text study of De Rerum Natura. Level 03 members and above (and Level 02 by Admin. approval). Read more about 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
Had Don been present for this last AFDIA session, I bet he would have immediately remembered the session from "Dirty Harry."
I don't have any other good suggestions at the moment, but it might be fun to think about other famous movie "near-Epicurean lines" like "Man's got to know his limitations" for a collection.
Here's the recording of this session:
Also in this session, there is a discussion prompted by Scott about whether Epicurus' ultimate goal was really pleasure, or finding the truth about reality, and how those play together. I think that's an important topic but the discussion may not bring out this point well enough: that I think Epicurus decided that the two go hand in hand, because what is truly the most effective way of living pleasurably is to understand and engage with reality, rather than to indulge in fantasies (which is perhaps the main issue with the pleasure machine hypotheticals - they are not consistent with reality).
Wow we have quite an artist here!
From the zoom discussion of book one to be posted shortly, here is the reference to my comment "A man's got to know his limitations." I am very sad that no one else could remember the attribution, and all I could remember was "Clint Eastwood." After tracking it down it's Dirty Harry from "Magnum Force" -
Episode 111 of the Lucretius Today Podcast is now available. Today we complete our section on Torquatus with an examination of the ultimate significance of Epicurus.
Welcome to Episode One Hundred Twelve of Lucretius and Epicurus 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, and to Epicurus, the founder of the Epicurean School.
I am your host Cassius, and together with our panelists from the EpicureanFriends.com forum, we'll walk you through the Epicurean texts, and we'll discuss how Epicurean philosophy can apply to you today. We encourage you to study Epicurus for yourself, and we suggest the best place to start is the book "Epicurus and His Philosophy" by Canadian professor Norman DeWitt.
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.
At this point in our podcast we have completed our review of Lucretius' Poem, and we have covered the detailed presentation of Epicurean Ethics given by "Torquatus" in Book One of Cicero's On Ends. Today we turn to the higher-level presentation of these issues as found in Epicurus' own letter to Herodotus, which like Lucretius' poem covers a combination of the full system.
Now let's join Joshua reading today's text:
Bailey:
[35] For those who are unable, Herodotus, to work in detail through all that I have written about nature, or to peruse the larger books which I have composed, I have already prepared at sufficient length an epitome of the whole system, that they may keep adequately in mind at least the most general principles in each department, in order that as occasion arises they may be able to assist themselves on the most important points, in so far as they undertake the study of nature. But those also who have made considerable progress in the survey of the main principles ought to bear in mind the scheme of the whole system set forth in its essentials. For we have frequent need of the general view, but not so often of the detailed exposition.
[36] Indeed it is necessary to go back on the main principles, and constantly to fix in one’s memory enough to give one the most essential comprehension of the truth. And in fact the accurate knowledge of details will be fully discovered, if the general principles in the various departments are thoroughly grasped and borne in mind; for even in the case of one fully initiated the most essential feature in all accurate knowledge is the capacity to make a rapid use of observation and mental apprehension, and this can be done if everything is summed up in elementary principles and formulae. For it is not possible for anyone to abbreviate the complete course through the whole system, if he cannot embrace in his own mind by means of short formulae all that might be set out with accuracy in detail.
[37] Wherefore since the method I have described is valuable to all those who are accustomed to the investigation of nature, I who urge upon others the constant occupation in the investigation of nature, and find my own peace chiefly in a life so occupied, have composed for you another epitome on these lines, summing up the first principles of the whole doctrine.
Hicks:
[35] For those who are unable to study carefully all my physical writings or to go into the longer treatises at all, I have myself prepared an epitome of the whole system, Herodotus, to preserve in the memory enough of the principal doctrines, to the end that on every occasion they may be able to aid themselves on the most important points, so far as they take up the study of Physics. Those who have made some advance in the survey of the entire system ought to fix in their minds under the principal headings an elementary outline of the whole treatment of the subject. For a comprehensive view is often required, the details but seldom.
[36] To the former, then – the main heads – we must continually return, and must memorize them so far as to get a valid conception of the facts, as well as the means of discovering all the details exactly when once the general outlines are rightly understood and remembered; since it is the privilege of the mature student to make a ready use of his conceptions by referring every one of them to elementary facts and simple terms. For it is impossible to gather up the results of continuous diligent study of the entirety of things, unless we can embrace in short formulas and hold in mind all that might have been accurately expressed even to the minutest detail.
[37] Hence, since such a course is of service to all who take up natural science, I, who devote to the subject my continuous energy and reap the calm enjoyment of a life like this, have prepared for you just such an epitome and manual of the doctrines as a whole.
In the first place, Herodotus, you must understand what it is that words denote, in order that by reference to this we may be in a position to test opinions, inquiries, or problems, so that our proofs may not run on untested ad infinitum, nor the terms we use be empty of meaning.
Yonge:
[35] For those who are unable to study carefully all my physical writings or to go into the longer treatises at all, I have myself prepared an epitome of the whole system, Herodotus, to preserve in the memory enough of the principal doctrines, to the end that on every occasion they may be able to aid themselves on the most important points, so far as they take up the study of Physics. Those who have made some advance in the survey of the entire system ought to fix in their minds under the principal headings an elementary outline of the whole treatment of the subject. For a comprehensive view is often required, the details but seldom.
[36] To the former, then - the main heads - we must continually return, and must memorize them so far as to get a valid conception of the facts, as well as the means of discovering all the details exactly when once the general outlines are rightly understood and remembered; since it is the privilege of the mature student to make a ready use of his conceptions by referring every one of them to elementary facts and simple terms. For it is impossible to gather up the results of continuous diligent study of the entirety of things, unless we can embrace in short formulas and hold in mind all that might have been accurately expressed even to the minutest detail.
[37] Hence, since such a course is of service to all who take up natural science, I, who devote to the subject my continuous energy and reap the calm enjoyment of a life like this, have prepared for you just such an epitome and manual of the doctrines as a whole. "In the first place, Herodotus, you must understand what it is that words denote, in order that by reference to this we may be in a position to test opinions, inquiries, or problems, so that our proofs may not run on untested ad infinitum, nor the terms we use be empty of meaning.
Links to the full Letter:
1) pleasure (and pain) as guiding choice and avoidance, and living a full social lifestyle, from an extroverted disposition and a physically visceral experience.
2) pleasure (and pain) as guiding choice and avoidance, and living a quiet and reserved lifestyle, from an introverted disposition and a mentally rich experience.
So how you choose to live most pleasantly is coming from your in-born nature (or nurtured) disposition.
Yes - that's always a major point. Diffferent people have different circumstances, and different immediate needs and wants.
Sometimes you're in a "defensive" position and need to focus on getting rid of pain; sometimes you're in a more "offensive" position when your life is pretty much in order, and you can afford to be more aggressive in pursuing specific pleasures you'd like to pursue.
There's no one-size-fits-all approach that applies to everyone, everywhere, all the time. If you're "sick" by all means get treatment; if you're healthy, by all means go skydiving if that's what you'd like to do.
How's this for a "chess" analogy?
When you're "sick" and you are under attack from specific pains, you pretty much have your chessboard laid out for you. You are close to being in checkmate and you have to focus immediately on the response to the attack.
When you're "healthy" you still have a chessboard, because life doesn't have unlimited options even for the most rich and most powerful, but you're more like at the opening of the game, with both sides equally equipped, and you have the first move -- you can choose many different options, and it's up to you to decide among them.
Yes! Along with my standard caution that if what he says doesn't track with the main body of the work, be cautious! But I do think that most of the time what can reliably be reconstructed DOES track with the rest.
To end on a high note, this is a good quote from Philodemus which he includes near the end of the discussion. I would say Philodemus has a much better grasp of the teachings than does this writer:
Ok, this is his conclusion, and I pretty much wholeheartedly reject it. The word "pleasure" is mentioned but once and then in the context of "The pleasures of Tranqility." This is Tranquilism, not - in my view - what Epicurus taught.
Not surprising he cites Warren, and not surprising that he tends toward the conclusion that the Epicurean, once he has become a tranquil sage, has no motive to regard death as a "comparative evil." This is ambiguous, but I can't agree with it because it seems clear that Epicurus saw no contradiction in holding that state of being dead is not painful, but, at the same time, it is undesirable to suffer an early death.
By all means, sir Tranqulist! Let's shut down this online forum, forget looking for Epicurean friends, forget taking action to secure our lives and our friends lives, and let's just go "eat a piece of cheese," " have a conversation with a friend," and "look at a beautiful sky." And if we do bother ourselves with philosophical (or related religious) issues, let's just "think them through" without caring whether we help our friends or anyone else who might be caught up in anxiety and distress because of those issues.
And if you accept the view that "freedom from pain and anxiety" was Epicurus' view of how to live life, then indeed you'll spend your time limiting your desires and withdrawing from society.
On the other hand what Epicurus did was pursue his desire for pleasure and happiness through the study of nature and the spreadings of his philosophy through constant controversy against other schools, and to live out his life pleasurably among many friends (with courtesans and slaves and multiple houses and apparent material well-being) close to the very center of an Athens that was filled with people who despised his philosophy.
So I think Epicurus would reject this author's characterizations of what Epicurus taught, and I think "we" should too. Which doesn't mean there's not a lot to learn from this article, because by talking about it we get a better focus on the issues.
Yep, he's a Tranquilist, and suggests that the best way to live a pleasurable life is to give up conventional ideas of pleasure (that way you won't worry if you aren't achieving pleasure!). Not surprising to see him starting to quote Nussbaum.
Hard to state Tranquilism more clearly than this (page 9 of the article)
So he (the writer) and Nussbaum, even though both are into tranquility and the natural and necessary divison, cannot even agree among themselves as to what "empty" means. More evidence (to me) that the word "empty" is clear mainly in describing the usefulness of the empty analysis itself (for which I do not blame Epicurus, but these writers who think this word makes sense without more clear explanation of what is being discussed).
I have never heard of this clip from Clement of Alexandria but I now want to find it because I think it helps illustrate the issue very well:
Julia Annas isn't someone recognizable to quote to others, but she's right too.
Cicero's quote isn't quite as clear, but it's usable too.
All are good quotes to use against someone (maybe even the author of this article?) who wants to posit "Absence of pain" as Epicurus' complete statement of the best life.
I particularly do agree with the part I underline here:
I don't buy this, and ONCE AGAIN I think the problem is we're getting tripped up by logical games about "good" and "bad" and the "greatest good" and so forth.
Why is it a problem to hold both, at the same time, that:
(1) the state of being dead is nothing to fear in itself, because it causes us no pain, because "we" are not there to experience it,
AND
(2) the state of being alive is desirable, as it is our only our chance to experience pleasure, so therefore we want to live as long as we can experience enough pleasure to make the pains of growing older worthwhile.
I see nothing contradictory between those two, and in the letter to Menoeceus Epicurus said:
And he who counsels the young man to live well, but the old man to make a good end, is foolish, not merely because of the desirability of life, but also because it is the same training which teaches to live well and to die well. Yet much worse still is the man who says it is good not to be born but ‘once born make haste to pass the gates of Death’. For if he says this from conviction why does he not pass away out of life? For it is open to him to do so, if he had firmly made up his mind to this. But if he speaks in jest, his words are idle among men who cannot receive them.
So my view is that Epicurus held BOTH, at the same time, without contradiction, that:
(1) the state of being dead is nothing to fear in itself, because it causes us no pain, because "we" are not there to experience it, AND
(2) the state of being alive is desirable, as it is our only our chance to experience pleasure, so therefore we want to live as long as we can experience enough pleasure to make the pains of growing older worthwhile.
This looks to be a promising article from the title. I haven't had time to read but might be worth discussing. Without reading further I am not sure what to think about the "exercising our rational capabilities" comment (especially since this was presented in an Aristotle group) but I do like even at first glance the "establishing control over our lives."
If this is worthwhile we'll add it to the "files" section.
NOTE: I have now read it all, and I have presented lots of criticisms of it below, but it is a very good article for focusing on the issues involved in viewing Epicurus' goal as "Tranquility."
I was asked about this article today. I see that Susan posted it almost two years ago, and it doesn't look like I have had time to read it closely yet. But it's probably significant to several of our ongoing conversations so by making this post I am "bumping" it for further comment.
