We haven't heard from him in a while but happy birthday to a long-standing participant here from our American neighbor-to-the-north - EricR!
Posts by Cassius
Regularly Checking In On A Small Screen Device? Bookmark THIS page!
-
-
Happy Birthday to EricR! Learn more about EricR and say happy birthday on EricR's timeline: EricR
-
I will address this on several levels, first for Pacatus himself, who has been unfailingly friendly and positive in his participation here, who will always be welcome, and who has a good understanding of the issues involved. Secondly I want to address this for lurkers who might not be sure exactly what is being discussed or the reasons for the disagreement.
Pacatus is aware from his lengthy participation here that I welcome postings like this thread, which bring to our attention articles that may or may not be positive about Epicurus. In the spirit of frank speech which Epicurus advised, and with the knowledge that we are speaking here at the forum with others who fully understand that we are here for the study and promotion of Epicurean philosophy, we regularly share frank criticisms of outside materials and perspectives.
One of the perspectives that is inconsistent with Epicurean views in most instances is eclecticism, which blurs distinctions about or misrepresents what Epicurus really taught. Epicurus himself complained about misunderstanding and misrepresentation of his work in the letter to Menoeceus.
I have made the observation many times that it is a characteristic pattern to see some people want to Stoicize or otherwise water down Epicurean philosophy. Such people follow a repeated pattern: Most often, they praise peripheral aspects of Epicurean ethics with which they agree (prudent and self-sufficient living), but totally omit aspects with which they do not agree. Almost unfailingly, such an approach involves the omission of the keystone of the ethics, the focus on "Pleasure" as the highest good. Such watering down efforts also characteristically totally omit reference to Epicurean physics (the rejection of supernatural forces) and Epicurean canonics (the affirmation that knowledge is possible based on the senses). These latter omissions aren't quite as important as the omission of the "Pleasure," focus, but in many cases the omission of physics and canonics probably explains why such writers fail to see the error in what they are doing.
The article referenced in this thread exhibits all those characteristics, and thus I consider it unhelpful to a good understanding of Epicurus. That's the lens through which it's most important and appropriate to analyze the article here at the forum. Articles can contain good information in part, but still be articles which would not be good to recommend to people who don't already have a good understanding of Epicurus. In this case, the article is a pro-Stoic article written for Stoic sympathizers mildly acquainted with modern Stoicism. As such, it is what it is, and provides a good example for us to talk about. So to repeat -- posting it here is helpful, because it affords the opportunity for exchanges like this, which open the eyes of many people to the real issues.
Another thing to repeat is that the writer of the article didn't ask for my opinion, and I am not offering it to him by providing it here, or offering my comments to the world at large. The writer is obviously sympathetic to Stoicism and probably semi-Stoic himself, which is certainly his prerogative. Our discussion is for consumption here, by those who are interested in understanding and promoting Epicurean philosophy. From that point of view, it's helpful to observe how much he omits, both from an Epicurean and a Stoic perspective. As I said in my comments, I suspect the ancients Stoics, and modern fundamentalist Stoics, probably share my criticism of the omission of commentary about the fundamentals on which Stoicism is based. For all I know, the writer's failure to understand the role of Pleasure arises from him never being exposed to writers like Norman Dewitt or Emily Austin. Very many good people hold their opinions because all they have been exposed to is orthodox academic commentary.
So I am glad to have the opportunity to revisit my comments in the above thread. I continue to see no reason to revise them, and this gives me the opportunity to expand them. Pacatus properly understands, and his post conveys, that there is a wide gulf between eclecticism and Epicurean philosophy.
There's a big world of generalist philosophical discussion on the internet. On the other hand, there are few if any other places where people who study Epicurus and come to see him as did Lucretius or Lucian of Samosata or Diogenes of Oinoanda or even Diogenes Laertius -- as someone whose philosophy is uniquely valuable and worthy of focus on its own. Providing such a place is the goal of this forum and while disagreements about that goal might be temporarily unpleasant, I am firmly convinced that everyone profits by our firmly standing by that goal.
Quote from Lucian of Samosata, Alexander the Oracle-Monger 61"I was still more concerned (a preference which you may be far from resenting) to strike a blow for Epicurus, that great man whose holiness and divinity of nature were not shams, who alone had and imparted true insight into the good, and who brought deliverance to all that consorted with him."
-
I just noticed that we have the following two forums ("Ethics - How To Live as An Epicurean" and "Applications For Day To Day Living") which probably should be consolidated into one, so we'll do that in the very near future. When posting, the General Discussion section is always acceptable for day-to-day general developments, and we can re-file to subforums later if needed. However many of the substantive posts our regulars make will fit into one of the three categories "Physics," "Canonics," or "Ethics." These cover very wide areas, so when you are posting and your topic fits into one of those three, please consider posting in the the "general" section of one of those three topics. Most people coming to the forum should expect to understand that Physics, Ethics, and Canonics are the way things are generally divided, and posting in this way will help those who are first focused on only one of the three to find what they are looking for.
-
Good point as to the context of the statement in the letter to Herodotus. The word "simple" has a huge number of connotations and it would be good (as stated in the first post) to flesh out which ones are and are not relevant to Epicurus. I think a lot of people tend to associate the word first and foremost with something rhyming with ascetic, but that's not at all the only option. Dictionary.com
adjective
simpler, simplest.
easy to understand, deal with, use, etc.: simple tools.
a simple matter;
simple tools.
Synonyms: lucid, unmistakable, understandable, intelligible, clear
not elaborate or artificial; plain:
a simple style.
Synonyms: unembellished, neat, natural
not ornate or luxurious; unadorned:
a simple gown.
unaffected; unassuming; modest:
a simple manner.
not complicated:
a simple design.
- not complex or compound; single
occurring or considered alone; mere; bare:
the simple truth;
a simple fact.
free of deceit or guile; sincere; unconditional:
a frank, simple answer.
common or ordinary:
a simple soldier.
not grand or sophisticated; unpretentious:
a simple way of life.
humble or lowly:
simple folk.
inconsequential or rudimentary.
Synonyms: unnecessary, nonessential, trivial, trifling
lacking mental acuteness or sense:
a simple way of thinking.
- unsophisticated; naive; credulous.
- simpleminded.
- Chemistry.
composed of only one substance or element:
a simple substance.
- not mixed.
Botany. not divided into parts: a simple stem.
a simple leaf;
a simple stem.
Zoology. not compound:
a simple ascidian.
Music. uncompounded or without overtones; single:
simple tone.
Grammar. having only the head without modifying elements included: Compare complete ( def 5 ).
The simple subject of “The dappled pony gazed over the fence” is “pony.”
- (of a verb tense) consisting of a main verb with no auxiliaries, as takes (simple present) or stood (simple past) ( compound ).
- Mathematics. linear ( def 8 ).
- Optics. (of a lens) having two optical surfaces only.
-
Our main plan for 2025 will be to continue on the same track we are on as to maintenance of the Forum, Lucretius Today Podcast, Wednesday Meetings, Twentieth Commemorations, and special projects like our recent Livestream. As to the livestream in particular, I want to see those done regularly, probably in an easier-to-do format. I also want 2025 to be the year we make more progress in getting a self-paced learning program off the ground at http://www.epicuruscollege.com.
Beyond that - and other than the general desirability of more of the same, does anyone have other suggestions or ideas that they would like us to consider pursuing here at EpicureanFriends?
Consider this a general feedback / suggestion thread, almost as a "wish list" of things you would like to see us pursue in 2025. Can't promise that we can get to all of them, but we know we'll miss 100% of the targets we don't identify.
So if you have suggestions you'd like us to consider, please post in this thread.
-
In preparation for this coming weekend's recording of episode 265, I thought I would see if anyone had any suggestions for texts to include on the specific topic of the competition between virtue and pleasure for the title of "highest good."
While the letter to Menoeceus and the Principle Doctrines (for example, PD05) mention specific virtues like justice and honor and wisdom, I am looking for texts that specifically contrast the competition between "virtue" as a category vs "pleasure" as a category for the top role.
Diogenes Laertius' inscription contains the "shouting" fragment that the end of life is pleasure and not virtue, and Torquatus goes on at length about this precise competition.
I think one of the Jefferson letters makes the specific point too.
Those give us most of the material we need, but if anyone remembers anything else referencing virtue vs pleasure on the category level that we should be sure to include, please add to this thread.
There's lots of material in praise of pleasure from which we can choose as needed, and many references to particular virtues like justice. But if anyone remembers any specific comparisons of pleasure vs virtue in any of the secondary literature (other works of Cicero, works of Plutarch, or Philodemus, etc,) please post in the thread and i will add it to the discussion outline here.
Thanks!
-
We speak frequently about translating words from the Greek, but much less frequently about Greek numbering. This subject came up in tonight's Wednesday Zoom meeting and Bryan has graciously forwarded me the information below about how the Greeks recorded numbers. All of us know the Arabic system and most of us know some Roman numerals, but this is to start a thread on the Greek numbering system. I am not at first thought able to name any immediate philosophical implications of how the Greeks counted, but I bet there are some. Thanks again to Bryan for this material:
The Greek system seems simple compared to what the Romans were doing. It is closer to our decimal system, although still more rigid.
-
Wow yes great video! I didn't see the scene you're referring to where the top of the mountain was reconstructed but I gather there is at least one fresco showing the top of the mountain to be MUCH taller!
-
Episode 264 of the Lucretius Today Podcast is now available: "Bread and Water??!! Debunking The Myth Of Epicurean Asceticism." For a slideshow version of this talk, click the "Featured Videos" link on our home page.
]I hope you'll keep notes and eventually find time to prepare something on some of these physics issues Bryan. I just posted Don's "Bread and Water" as a separate podcast episode and I think a shorter focused talk format works very well - as it would for some focused physics issues.
We're about to release this special episode of Lucretius Today, with Don's talk on the myth of Epicurean asceticism. I'm pleased with this format and think you'll enjoy it. It works well to have a shorter format on a single topic, and we'll do more of these in the future. These are a good complement to our longer-format shows on key doctrines of Epicurus that we are in the process of preparing now.
And after this episode Don may be forever-after known as "The Great Debunker!"
So these "Fellows" are who?
And I see - you are saying that because the statement is interpreted as a demeaning reference to other human beings (outsiders to the religion?), there was a reluctance to attribute it to Jesus (?)
Ha!
Good reminder of these lines - hard to find better practical Epicurean advice than this:
Latin
inter spem curamque, timores inter et iras
omnem crede diem tibi diluxisse supremum:English (Loeb Classics)
Amid hopes and cares, amid fears and passions,
believe that every day that has dawned is your last.Also: just as the title of this thread was abbreviated to "pearls before swine," I realize now that I tend to completely forget that that is only 50% of the allusion.
As to the second part, people seem to be acclimated to accept unthinkingly that pigs are "unworthy" creatures. Aside from that being an extremely debatable assumption in general, in my most recent encounter with two large pigs running wild I found them to be friendly and totally unthreatening.
But as to the mostly-forgotten first part, they've largely lost the war on that one. Dogs are almost universally beloved at least here in the West, and dogs' perceptiveness as to the true value of the "sacred" seems to me to be a lot better reasoned than that of many humans.
From now on I will be remembering the "dogs" part as much or more than the "swine" part.
Prior discussion took place here:
Prior discussion of this interview took place here:
Discussion of our interviews with Dr. Austin occurred In Episodes 156 and 157 of the Lucretius Today Podcast.
You can access the original podcasts and show discussions in the following links:
Unread Threads
-
- Title
- Replies
- Last Reply
-
-
-
Philodemus' "On Anger" - General - Texts and Resources 20
- Cassius
April 1, 2022 at 5:36 PM - Philodemus On Anger
- Cassius
July 8, 2025 at 7:33 AM
-
- Replies
- 20
- Views
- 6.8k
20 -
July 8, 2025 at 7:33 AM
-
-
-
-
Mocking Epithets 3
- Bryan
July 4, 2025 at 3:01 PM - Comparing Epicurus With Other Philosophers - General Discussion
- Bryan
July 6, 2025 at 9:47 PM
-
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 358
3 -
July 6, 2025 at 9:47 PM
-
-
-
-
Best Lucretius translation? 12
- Rolf
June 19, 2025 at 8:40 AM - General Discussion of "On The Nature of Things"
- Rolf
July 1, 2025 at 1:59 PM
-
- Replies
- 12
- Views
- 989
12 -
July 1, 2025 at 1:59 PM
-
-
-
-
The Religion of Nature - as supported by Lucretius' De Rerum Natura 4
- Kalosyni
June 12, 2025 at 12:03 PM - General Discussion of "On The Nature of Things"
- Kalosyni
June 23, 2025 at 12:36 AM
-
- Replies
- 4
- Views
- 911
4 -
June 23, 2025 at 12:36 AM
-
-
-
-
New Blog Post From Elli - " Fanaticism and the Danger of Dogmatism in Political and Religious Thought: An Epicurean Reading"
- Cassius
June 20, 2025 at 4:31 PM - Epicurus vs Abraham (Judaism, Christianity, Islam)
- Cassius
June 20, 2025 at 4:31 PM
-
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 2.2k
-