Posts by Cassius

Episode Sixty of the Lucretius Today Podcast is now available. In this episode, we discuss dreams and the mind's use of images. There is some challenging material in this episode, especially as it relates to Epicurus' view of the use of images and how that may or may not relate to memory. We encourage you to listen and post any comments or questions in the thread below.

We just finished recording this one and I will try to get it posted as soon as possible. When you hear the episode, you'll see that one of our topics is to what extent this section describes a theory that may go so far as to be Epicurus' entire explanation of what we might think of as "memory." In the episode you will hear me resist that conclusion, but Elayne in particular makes good arguments that that might be the case, so please consider and if possible make comments in particular about that when you hear the episode.

Even if so, thanks for posting that. There's a lot to be learned from observing people who accept certain parts of Epicurus while rejecting other important parts. Seems to me that you can definitely see patterns in people picking and choosing only certain parts, and thinking about how they make those choices helps expose key questions that are very helpful to trace down and be clear on ourselves.

Thanks for the detailed post Titus. Here are my thoughts:

Quote from Titus

Many thinkers only refer to the ethics as presented in letter to Menoeceus (additionally Principal Doctrines, Vatican Sayings) but do not apply Canonics and Physics, which they consider as a different point of interest. For a person who studies all three main branches of Epicurean philosophy and even tries to combine and interconnect, it's something different.

I very much agree with that. It seems to me that most of the people whose interpretations I find reason to criticize focus almost exclusively on one aspect (most frequently, the letter to Meoneceus) and act as if the epistemology and physics are irrelevant. In a nearby (in time) thread I think we see an example of that in an American philosopher (Pierce) who embraces one aspect of Epicurus to support his own views, but rejects the rest of Epicurus. I think it's necessary to incorporate them all to get a balanced picture.

Quote from Titus

In my personal opinion, Epicurus is neither looking for painlessness nor for pleasure as pleasure on its own. He tries to find out what a human is in itself. This is why he focuses on senses, feelings and anticipations.

I agree that Epicurus is very concerned about looking to Nature to determine what a human is in itself, and that he does not just start with pleasure as the goal without any reason. But I would have to differ and say that the reliable texts when read as a whole (including the material cited in this thread) are clear that Epicurus held "pleasure" to be the goal and not painlessness. When you say he focuses on senses / feelings / anticipations I think that is where the answer is found, in that it seems to me that he is using "feelings" (or whatever word one prefers in translation) in general as the basis for choice, with pleasure being the positive thing to choose and pain being the negative to avoid, which is both a theoretical statement of the goal (pleasure) and a practical way of evaluating each decision (does it lead to greater pleasure or greater pain). I think the multiple perspective (incorporating both theory and practice) is how it is kept in mind that even when you are sometimes choosing pain in the short term, you are really always choosing pleasure (because you view the long term / total result),

Quote from Titus

Consequently, satisfying all natural and necessery desires is the highest level of being.

This is a phrasing that I find very troublesome whenever I run into it, but it is definitely a conclusion a lot of people reach. For me, there is no way to carry such a formulation to its logical conclusion without accepting that living in a cave on bread and water is the course most to be desired for everyone. Epicurus himself certainly did not do that, and that observation alone is sufficient (to me) to show that such an interpretation would not be valid. I am sure that an elaborate and detailed rendering of such a phrase, by going through each word and applying very specific definitions, could be employed to save the formula from that result, but I just don't think Epicurus intended for his students to take that path.

Quote from Titus

This is why Epicurus advices only to fullfill natural but not necessery desires if they do not harm.

I would repeat the same observation as I just made. There are literally (to my knowlege) zero exampled of actual Epicureans who pursued lives of asceticism and minimalism. Again, I realize that the formulation can probably be explained in a way that allowed the activism of a Cassius Longinus or the movement in the highest circles of Roman life of Atticus and other leading Romans who embraced Epicurus, but they had access to far more authoritative texts and teachers than we do, and they apparently found no contradiction in their lifestyles and fundamental Epicurean teaching. Maybe in fact there was a large body of ancient Epicureans who competed with the Stoics and the various ascetics in pursuing only that which was necessary to sustain their lives, but if there were such applications that seem to have escaped mention in the texts I have seen.

Much more likely to me is the deduction from such references as are made in the Ciceronian comments set out here that Epicurus would have been fully aware of the option of setting up painlessness as the real goal, as set forth by Hieronymous, and that Epicurus rejected that option in favor of identifying the goal as "pleasure" - which he then proceeded to broadly define as including all types of physical and mental pleasures.

As in the concluding sections of Diogenes of Laertius:

Quote

Epicurus differs from the Cyrenaics about pleasure. For they do not admit static pleasure, but only that which consists in motion. But Epicurus admits both kinds both in the soul and in the body, as he says in the work on Choice and Avoidance and in the book on The Ends of Life and in the first book On Lives and in the letter to his friends in Mytilene. Similarly, Diogenes in the 17th book of Miscellanies and Metrodorus in the Timocrates speak thus: ‘Pleasure can be thought of both as consisting in motion and as static.’ And Epicurus in the work on Choice speaks as follows: ‘Freedom from trouble in the mind and from pain in the body are static pleasures, but Joy and exultation are considered as active pleasures involving motion. '

A further difference from the Cyrenaics: they thought that bodily pains were worse than those of the soul, and pointed out that offenses are visited by bodily punishment. But Epicurus held that the pains of the soul are worse, for the flesh is only troubled for the moment, but the soul for past, present, and future. In the same way the pleasures of the soul are greater. As proof that pleasure is the end, he points out that all living creatures as soon as they are born take delight in pleasure, but resist pain by a natural impulse apart from reason. Therefore we avoid pain by instinct, just as Heracles, when he is being devoured by the shirt of Nessus, cries aloud,

Or maybe I could summarize my views on all of this subject as "Like Epicurus, I refuse to give up joy and exultation!"

Thank you Godfrey I had never heard of any of that. Two parts I note in the article of special interest to me are:

This is a point made in AA Long's "Chance and Natural Law in Determinism" and I have always thought it to be hugely important to keep in mind: Yes the swerve exists, but it generally does not break through to the macroscopic level so as to result in chaos. In my view people tend to talk about the significance of the swerve too broadly without noting this very important limitation.

Also:

So in the end Pierce seems to be very far from Epicurus, as the article's conclusion admits. Sounds like he is pretty much someone who agrees with Epicurus in opposition to hard determinism, but really doesn't agree with Epicurus on much else.

Welcome to Episode Sixty of Lucretius Today.

I am your host Cassius, and together with my panelists from the EpicureanFriends.com forum, we'll walk you through the six books of Lucretius' poem, and 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.

For anyone who is not familiar with our podcast, please check back to Episode One for a discussion of our goals and our ground rules. If you have any question about that, please be sure to contact us at Epicureanfriends.com for more information.

In this episode 60 - we will discuss dreams, and the mind's use of images.

Our text comes from Latin Lines 907-1036 of Book Four.

Now let's join the discussion with Charles reading today's text.

Munro Notes

907-928: sleep takes place, when the soul is scattered in the body, and part of it has gone out, part withdrawn into the depths of the body: only part however can go forth; else death would ensue; enough must stay behind to let sense be rekindled, as fire is rekindled when buried under the ashes.

929-961: sleep is thus produced: the body is constantly beaten upon by the outer air as well as by that which is inhaled by breathing; thus assailed within and without the body gives way, and the soul is disordered, part of it as has been said leaving the body, part withdraw- ing into its recesses, while the rest cannot perform its functions: thus the body too becomes languid and powerless: again sleep follows eating, because the food in passing into the system acts on it as the air does; and the disorder of the soul is then greater than ever.

962-1036: the dreams of men generally turn on what has chiefly occupied their waking thoughts, whether business or pleasure: it is the same with brutes too: again the passions which are strongest in men often display themselves in dreams, as well as other mental states.

Browne 1743

Next, how soft sleep dissolves the limbs in rest, and frees the mind from anxious care, I choose in few but sweetest numbers to explain; as the swan's short song is more melodious than the harsh noise of cranes scattered by winds through all the air. Hear me, my Memmius, with attentive ears and a discerning mind, lest what I shall prove, you think impossible to be; and so your mind refusing to admit the truth I shall relate, you make no progress in philosophy, when the fault is in yourself, that you will not see. And first, sleep comes on when the power of the soul, diffused through the limbs, part of it is thrown out and fled abroad, and part being squeezed more close retires further within; then are the limbs dissolved and grow weak. For without doubt the business of the soul is to stir up sense in us, which since sleep removes, we must conclude that the soul then is disturbed and driven abroad: Not the whole soul, for then the body would lie in the cold arms of eternal death; then no part of the soul would lie retired within the limbs, as a fire remains covered under a heap of ashes; from whence the senses might be kindled again through the body, as a flame is soon raised from hidden fire. But by what means this wonderful change is brought about, how the soul is thus disordered and the body languishes, I shall now explain. Do you see that I do not scatter my words unto the wind.

And first, the outward surface of bodies which are always touched by the adjacent air, must of necessity be struck by it and beaten with frequent blows; and for this reason all things almost are covered either with skin, or bristles, or shells, or buff, or bark. This air then, as it is drawn in and breathed out by respiration, strikes upon the inward parts of the body. Since therefore the body is beat upon from within and without, and since the strokes pierce through the little pores into the seeds and first principles of it, this cause a kind of ruin and destruction through all the limbs; the situation of the seeds, both of the body and mind, are disordered, so that part of the soul is forced out, and part retires and lurks close within, and the part that is diffused through the limbs is so broken and divided, that the seeds cannot unite to perform their mutual operations, for nature stops up all the passages of communication between them, and therefore the regular motions being exceedingly changed, the sense is entirely gone. Since therefore there is not power sufficient to support the limbs, the body becomes weak; all the members languish; the arms, the eyelids fall, and the knees sink under the weight of the body. Thus sleep follows when the belly is full, because food, when it is distributed through all the veins, has the same effect upon the soul as the air had; and that sleep is by much the soundest which you take when you are weary or full, because then more of the seeds being agitated and put into motion by the hard labour, mutually disturb and disorder one another. And for this reason the soul retires further within, and a greater part of it is thrown out, and the parts that remain within are the more separated and the further disjoined.

And then the business we more particularly follow, the affairs we are chiefly employed in, and what our mind is principally delighted with when we are awake, the same we are commonly conversant about when we are asleep. The lawyer is pleading of causes and making of statutes, the soldier is fighting and engaging in battles, the sailor is warring against the winds; for myself, I am always searching into the nature of things, and writing my discoveries in Latin verse; and so, many other arts and employments are commonly the empty entertainments of the minds of men when they are asleep. And they who spend their time in seeing plays for many days together, when those representations are no longer present to the waking senses, there still remain some open traces left in the mind, through which the images of those things find a passage, so that for many days after the whole performance is acting over again before their eyes; and even while they are awake they fancy they see the dancers leaping, and moving their active limbs, and hear the speaking strings; they see the same audience, the same variety of the scenes and decorations of the stage. So strong impressions do use and custom make upon us; such effects do the common business of life produce in the minds of men, and beasts likewise.

For you shall see the gallant Courser, when his limbs are at rest, to sweat in his sleep, to breath short, and, the barriers down, to lay himself out as it were on the full stretch for the prize. And hounds frequently in their soft sleep throw out their legs, and of a sudden yelp and snuff the air quick with their nose, as if they were full cry upon the foot of the deer; and when awake they still pursue the empty image of the game, as if they saw it run swiftly before them, till undeceived they quit the chase, and the fancied image vanishes away. And the fawning breed of house-dogs, that live at home, often rouse and shake the drowsy fit from their eyes, and start up of a sudden with their bodies, as if they saw a stranger or a face they had not been used to. The sharper the seeds are of which the images are formed, they strike in the sleep with the greater violence; so, many birds will fly about, and hide themselves in the inmost recesses of sacred groves by night, if in their soft sleep they see the hawk pursuing them upon the wing, or pouncing or engaging with his prey.

Munro 1886

Now by what means yon sleep lets a stream of repose over the limbs and dispels from the breast the cares of the mind, I will tell in sweetly worded rather than in many verses; as the short song of the swan is better than the loud noise of cranes scattered abroad amid the ethereal clouds of the south. Do you lend me a nice ear and a keen mind, that you may not deny what I say to be possible and secede with breast disdainfully rejecting the words of truth, you yourself being in fault the while and unable to discern. Sleep mainly takes place when the force of the soul has been scattered about through the frame, and in part has been forced abroad and taken its departure, and in part has been thrust back and has withdrawn into the depths of the body: after that the limbs are relaxed and droop. For there is no doubt that this sense exists in us by the agency of the soul; and when sleep obstructs the action of this sense, then we must assume that our soul has been disordered and forced abroad; not indeed all; for then the body would lie steeped in the everlasting chill of death. Where no part of the soul remained behind concealed in the limbs, as fire remains concealed when buried under much ash, whence could sense be suddenly rekindled through the limbs, as flame can spring up from hidden fire? But by what means this change of condition is accomplished and from what the soul can be disordered and the body grow faint, I will explain: do you mind that I waste not my words on the wind.

In the first place the body in its outer side, since it is next to and is touched by the air, must be thumped and beaten by its repeated blows; and for this reason all things as a rule are covered either by a hide or else by shells or by a callous skin or by bark. When creatures breathe, this air at the same time buffets the inner side also, as it is inhaled and exhaled. Therefore since the body is beaten on both sides alike and blows arrive by means of the small apertures at the primal parts and primal elements of our body, there gradually ensues a sort of breaking up throughout our limbs, the arrangements of the first-beginnings of body and mind getting disordered. Then next a part of the soul is forced out and apart withdraws into the inner recesses; a part too scattered about through the frame cannot get united together and so act and be acted upon by motion; for nature intercepts all communication and blocks up all the passages; and therefore sense retires deep into the frame as the motions are all altered. And since there is nothing as it were to lend support to the frame, the body becomes weak and all the limbs are faint, the arms and eyelids droop and the hams even in bed often give way under you and relax their powers. Then sleep follows on food, because food produces just the same effects as air, while it is distributed into all the veins; and that sleep is much the heaviest which you take when full or tired, because then the greatest number of bodies fall into disorder, bruised by much exertion. On the same principle the soul comes in part to be forced more deeply into the frame, and there is also a more copious emission of it abroad, and at the same time it is more divided and scattered in itself within you.

And generally to whatever pursuit a man is closely tied down and strongly attached, on whatever subject we have previously much dwelt, the mind having been put to a more than usual strain in it, during sleep we for the most part fancy that we are engaged in the same; lawyers think they plead causes and draw up covenants of sale, generals that they fight and engage in battle, sailors that they wage and carry on war with the winds, we think we pursue our task and investigate the nature of things constantly and consign it when discovered to writings in our native tongue. So all other pursuits and arts are seen for the most part during sleep to occupy and mock the minds of men. And whenever men have given during many days in succession undivided attention to games, we generally see that after they have ceased to perceive these with their senses, there yet remain passages open in the mind through which the same idols of things may enter. Thus for many days those same objects present themselves to the eyes, so that even when awake they see dancers as they think moving their pliant limbs, and receive into the ears the clear music of the harp and speaking strings, and behold the same spectators and at the same time the varied decorations of the stage in all their brilliancy. So great is the influence of zeal and inclination, so great is the influence of the things in which men have been habitually engaged, and not men only but all living creatures.

Thus you will see stout horses, even when their bodies are lying down, yet in their sleep sweat and pant without ceasing and strain their powers to the utmost as if for the prize, or as if the barriers were thrown open. And often during soft repose the dogs of hunters do yet all at once throw about their legs and suddenly utter cries and repeatedly snuff the air with their nostrils, as though they had found and were on the tracks of wild beasts; and after they are awake often chase the shadowy idols of stags, as though they saw them in full flight, until they have shaken off their delusions and come to themselves again. And the fawning brood of dogs brought up tame in the house haste to shake their body and raise it up from the ground, as if they beheld unknown faces and features. And the fiercer the different breeds are, the greater rage they must display in sleep. But the various kinds of birds flee and suddenly in the night time trouble with their wings the groves of the gods, when in gentle sleep hawks and pursuing birds have appeared to show fight and offer battle.

Bailey 1921

Now in what ways this sleep floods repose over the limbs, and lets loose the cares of the mind from the breast, I will proclaim in verses of sweet discourse, rather than in many; even as the brief song of the swan is better than the clamour of cranes, which spreads abroad among the clouds of the south high in heaven. Do you lend me a fine ear and an eager mind, lest you should deny that what I say can be, and with a breast that utterly rejects the words of truth part company with me, when you are yourself in error and cannot discern. First of all sleep comes to pass when the strength of the soul is scattered about among the limbs, and in part has been cast out abroad and gone its way, and in part has been pushed back and passed inward deeper within the body. For then indeed the limbs are loosened and droop. For there is no doubt that this sense exists in us, thanks to the soul; and when sleep hinders it from being, then we must suppose that the soul is disturbed and cast out abroad: yet not all of it; for then the body would lie bathed in the eternal chill of death. For indeed, when no part of the soul stayed behind hidden in the limbs, as fire is hidden when choked beneath much ashes, whence could sense on a sudden be kindled again throughout the limbs, as flame can rise again from a secret fire?

But by what means this new state of things is brought about, and whence the soul can be disturbed and the body grow slack, I will unfold: be it your care that I do not scatter my words to the winds. First of all it must needs be that the body on the outer side, since it is touched close at hand by the breezes of air, is thumped and buffeted by its oft-repeated blows, and for this cause it is that well-nigh all things are covered either by a hide, or else by shells, or by a hard skin, or by bark. Further, as creatures breathe, the air at the same time smites on the inner side, when it is drawn in and breathed out again. Wherefore, since the body is buffeted on both sides alike, and since the blows pass on through the tiny pores to the first parts and first particles of our body, little by little there comes to be, as it were, a falling asunder throughout our limbs. For the positions of the first-beginnings of body and mind are disordered. Then it comes to pass that a portion of the soul is cast out abroad, and part retreats and hides within; part too, torn asunder through the limbs, cannot be united in itself, nor by motion act and react; for nature bars its meetings and chokes the ways; and so, when the motions are changed, sense withdraws deep within. And since there is nothing which can, as it were, support the limbs, the body grows feeble, and all the limbs are slackened; arms and eyelids droop, and the hams, even as you lie down, often give way, and relax their strength. Again, sleep follows after food, because food brings about just what air does, while it is being spread into all the veins, and the slumber which you take when full or weary, is much heavier because then more bodies than ever are disordered, bruised with the great effort. In the same manner the soul comes to be in part thrust deeper within; it is also more abundantly driven out abroad, and is more divided and torn asunder in itself within.

And for the most part to whatever pursuit each man clings and cleaves, or on whatever things we have before spent much time, so that the mind was more strained in the task than is its wont, in our sleep we seem mostly to traffic in the same things; lawyers think that they plead their cases and confront law with law, generals that they fight and engage in battles, sailors that they pass a life of conflict waged with winds, and we that we pursue our task and seek for the nature of things for ever, and set it forth, when it is found, in writings in our country’s tongue. Thus for the most part all other pursuits and arts seem to hold the minds of men in delusion during their sleep. And if ever men have for many days in succession given interest unflagging to the games, we see for the most part, that even when they have ceased to apprehend them with their senses, yet there remain open passages in their minds, whereby the same images of things may enter in. And so for many days the same sights pass before their eyes, so that even wide awake they think they see men dancing and moving their supple limbs, and drink in with their ears the clear-toned chant of the lyre, and its speaking strings, and behold the same assembly and at the same time the diverse glories of the stage all bright before them. So exceeding great is the import of zeal and pleasure, and the tasks wherein not only men are wont to spend their efforts, but even every living animal.

In truth you will see strong horses, when their limbs are lain to rest, yet sweat in their sleep, and pant for ever, and strain every nerve as though for victory, or else as though the barriers were opened [struggle to start]. And hunters’ dogs often in their soft sleep yet suddenly toss their legs, and all at once give tongue, and again and again snuff the air with their nostrils, as if they had found and were following the tracks of wild beasts; yea, roused from slumber they often pursue empty images of stags, as though they saw them in eager flight, until they shake off the delusion and return to themselves. But the fawning brood of pups brought up in the house, in a moment shake their body and lift it from the ground, just as if they beheld unknown forms and faces. And the wilder any breed may be, the more must it needs rage in its sleep. But the diverse tribes of birds fly off, and on a sudden in the night time trouble the peace of the groves of the gods, if in their gentle sleep they have seen hawks, flying in pursuit, offer fight and battle.

Episode Fifty-Nine of the Lucretius Today Podcast is now available. In today's podcast we will discuss the mind's direct receipt of images. There is some challenging material here on imagination and memory and whether / how the mind stores images, so be sure to let us know your questions and comments in the thread below.

At this moment on first scanning of this material I can't tell whether Aurelian's personal view is of the "ascetic" version of Epicurus, which I think most of us here will agree is incorrect history, but I can definitely tell that his level of research into the transmission of Epicurean philosophy will be of interest to many of us, regardless of whether he is personally more Stoic or more Epicurean,

This comes from Facebook - I hope we can encourage him to post here as well:

I am very pleased to announce the publication of my book: Epicurus in the Underworld. Heresy, atheism and hedonism in the Middle Ages, published by Fayard, Paris (in French). Here is the link to the publisher's website, where you can read a few pages and buy the book (with links to many bookshops online). With a lot of pleasure!

https://www.fayard.fr/histoire/epicu…s-9782213711744

Cassius: This looks like an interesting book, but unfortunately for most of us here, it is in French. Here is the opening blurb through google translate:

Aurélien Robert
Cassius Amicus
thanks a lot! I’ll try to post a more detailed overview in English very soon!

Please do, Aurelien! I wasn't sure whether it was a good idea for the group for us to post this, but if you are actively following along the thread and you can comment here, then that will be great.

I am coming to the conclusion that if I had to randomly pick the people from a particular country to rate them as "most in tune with Epicurus" I would probably pick France. I have some ideas for "least in tune" too, but I will keep those to myself.

I am going to tag Charles Edwins
here to be sure he sees this, as he is particularly interested in French literature on Epicurus

Aurélien Robert
Epicurus in the Underworld. Heresy, Atheism and Hedonism in the Middle Ages

Aurélien Robert

Could the figure of the epicurean jouster be a medieval invention? Was it not until the rediscovery of Lucretius in the 15th century that Epicurean philosophy regained its letters of nobility? Did the notion of pleasure play a role in the philosophical debates of the Middle Ages? By answering these questions, this book proposes a new history of the reception of Epicurus and his philosophy, which breaks with certain received ideas. Far from being unknown until the 15th century, Epicurean thought was the subject of intense debates in the Middle Ages, ranging from religious anathema to philosophical praise. To understand this history, it is necessary to distinguish, on the one hand, the origin and function of the figure of the heretical, atheist and hedonistic Epicurean, and, on the other hand, the philosophical reception of Epicurus' wisdom, which took a decisive turn in the 12th century. While the caricature of the depraved Epicurean who does not believe in God originated in Antiquity, the Middle Ages made it popular by identifying it with a number of well-known biblical figures. Furthermore, although no medieval thinker accepted his materialistic physique or his criticism of religion, from the 12th century onwards, some did not hesitate to take up for them part of Epicurus’ ethics. This same ambiguity was found up to the 17th century, even among the Renaissance humanists: the vulgar Epicurean was publicly criticised, but Epicurus' wisdom was praised in more restricted cenacles. Epicurus' slow return to philosophy can therefore only be analysed over a long period of time. This is what this book tries to show.

The heretical Epicurean

In his Lives and Doctrines of Illustrious Philosophers, Diogenes Laertius reports a number of malicious remarks against Epicurus. In addition to the frequent philosophical attacks aimed at his materialism, his refusal of all providence or the role he accorded to pleasure, they were aimed at the man, his morals and his beliefs. However, as the book shows, an important change took place from the second century AD, when the Epicurean became a figure of heresy. Such an association was born in the eastern confines of the Roman Empire, from Asia Minor to Egypt, where the first Christian sects were in competition with pagan philosophical schools, particularly those of the Epicureans. The extent of this competition can truly be gauged by reading the apologies of Christianity sent to Roman dignitaries, sometimes even to the emperor. The Epicurean appears to be the most immoral pagan thinker and the furthest removed from Roman moral and religious practices, as opposed to Christianity, which is presented as fully compatible with these values. These attacks on philosophers quickly turned into speeches against heretics. For if the Greek term hairesis initially designated a group or sect, without any religious connotation, it took on a new meaning at that time and allowed an unprecedented rapprochement between religious heresies and philosophical schools, establishing a consubstantial link between the two types of sect. The leaders of heretical movements were in reality disguised philosophers. Gradually, by aberrant shortcuts, so far removed from Epicurean philosophy, the Epicurean was made the heretic by antonomasia. A strategy that can be found, in slightly different forms, in Judaism and Islam, to which the book offers a significant place.

A pastoral use of the figure of the Epicurean

The image of the heretic Epicurean, a symbol of atheism and vulgar hedonism, is therefore by no means a medieval creation, although it is found even in Dante's Divine Comedy, which places Epicurus and his disciples in the sixth circle of Hell among heretics. From this ancient heritage, the Middle Ages forged a "biblical portrait" of the Epicurean, matching several figures from the Old and New Testaments to the ancient philosopher. The Epicurean was none other than the madman of the Psalms who said in his heart that God does not exist; he was also the character of the Ecclesiastes who drew from the observation of the vanity of the world that all pleasures must be enjoyed; and finally, he was the one who cried out "let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we will die" in Isaiah. In addition to this new portrait of the Epicurean, it is above all the use of this figure that evolved during the medieval period to occupy a very important place in what Jean Delumeau called "the pastoral care of fear". The people must have recognised themselves in this portrait of the heretic Epicurean and feared that they would suffer the punishments of hell that were reserved for them. This is why it occupies a singular place in the sermons. To be epicurean, that is, not to believe or to believe badly, or to be guided by earthly pleasures alone, was to become a heretic Christian. Due to the multiplication of this public discourse of the theologians, this representation of the Epicurean became extremely popular and it was soon found in literature and poetry, including popular ones. It can therefore be said that Dante's Inferno expresses a vision of Epicurus that is the culmination of this logic at work in medieval preaching.

A first rehabilitation of Epicurus in the Middle Ages?

In the shadow of this theological and pastoral literature, we find texts praising the wisdom of Epicurus as early as the 12th century. We can thus see the existence of a double discourse: one is addressed to the people, the other is limited to scholarly debates. The second half of Epicurus in the Underworld analyses this positive discourse on Epicurean asceticism, which was supposed to serve as a model for Christian ethics. In addition to the very favourable judgements of Peter Abelard, William of Malmesbury and John of Salisbury, Epicurus found its place in numerous collections of "Lives of Philosophers", as early as the 13th century, two centuries before the Latin translation of Diogenes Laertius. These texts are most often compilations of quotations from classical authors - particularly Seneca - and from the Fathers of the Church. Epicurus almost appears as a monk before his time: he despises external goods, honours, wealth and abuses of all kinds. If he makes use of pleasures, it is a measured use, always governed by virtue. He is therefore considered to be a great sage, whose features no longer have anything in common with those of the heretic Epicurean. Paradoxically, when humanists took over this literary genre in Petrarch's time, they were much more critical of Epicurus than were the so-called "scholastic" authors, often in a pejorative manner. Despite the scarcity of sources, interest in Epicurean wisdom was therefore ancient and the early humanists were hardly in favour of it, contrary to a widespread idea.

Pleasure regained

The first praises of Epicurus in the 12th century, then the Lives of Epicurus of the 13th and 14th centuries, insisted on the intellectual dimension of epicurean pleasure. But this ascetic vision of Epicurean philosophy was also accompanied by more precise philosophical debates on the relationship between virtue and pleasure, or on the necessity of bodily pleasures. Among these debates, the one inaugurated by physicians as early as the 12th century proved to be particularly rich in teachings. Against Epicurus, some of whose ideas they knew through Galen, they defended the necessity of sexual pleasure, not only for the body, but also for the balance of the mind. They therefore went further than the philosophy of the Garden in the rehabilitation of pleasure, finding, without knowing it, the analyses of Lucretius. In De natura rerum, Lucretius situated the evils of love in passion, not in sexuality. Most of the themes that would become important during the Renaissance were therefore already dealt with in the Middle Ages. They certainly lacked the humanistic erudition to describe Epicurus' theses accurately, but they still gave a glimpse of them that no longer had anything to do with the popular image of the heretical, atheistic and hedonistic Epicurean. The final chapter thus shows how humanists, including those most inclined to praise Epicureanism, ultimately contributed little to the positive discourse of the Middle Ages in terms of philosophical content. The tone certainly gained in freedom, the historical accuracy was greater, the language more beautiful and the rhetoric more effective, but we cannot attribute all the credit to the Italian humanists in the rediscovery of epicureanism.

Epicurus' reception over time

The issues addressed in this book therefore fill a void in the studies on the reception of epicureanism. Above all, they challenge the widespread (and recently brilliantly staged by Stephen Greenblatt in The Swerve) idea that epicureanism was rediscovered only in the 15th century, thanks to the humanist Poggio Bracciolini, who brought back to Italy a (medieval) manuscript of Lucretius. At the end of the itinerary proposed in the book, it seems more accurate to say that this return of Epicurean ideas to the Renaissance would probably not have been possible without the first historical and philosophical work of the scholars of the Middle Ages. For it was indeed during Antiquity that Epicurus was placed in the underworld and it was in the Middle Ages that he began to get out from it.

This is a rather nerdy but informative discussion of the state of the "fediverse" applications that I was reading last night: https://linuxreviews.org/Fediverse

I gather that the technology is pretty much in place to set up independent services, even to a significant extent mimicing facebook: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendica

But the issue seems to be getting critical mass to make anything successful. On the other hand, if you're working with a limited group of people in the first place and you're not going to mass conversions, several of these sites already can be used pretty nicely to duplicate twitter, facebook, etc.

Well we definitely want to get this wording as accurate as possible to avoid having to backtrack immediately in an explanation.

However, at the same time, I doubt that the subtle difference between feelings or sensation or a similar word is the most important factor. The real "kick in the gut" to the opposing team is no so much specifying how all good and evil do arise from sensation or feeling as much the point that good and evil DO NOT arise from the gods, or from reason, or from anything absolute that the world of conventional philosophy asserts is the source of their right to give commands to tell everyone else how to live.

And no matter whether we pick feeling or sensation or some other similar word, the real "explanation" of this assertion is really focused on Epicurus' rejection of what everyone else in the world thinks is the source of moral authority, with Epicurus pointing instead, as Elayne points out, to the individuals own "feelings" or whatever word is chosen.

A_Gardner do you also use Mastodon or Pleroma or any "fediverse" app? Along the lines of the original post I would like to establish beachheads in the "open source" world to be sure we are as insulated as possible from censorship. Any thoughts on any of the open source / peer to peer options?

Absolutely I would be happy for you to do so!

A_Gardner I have a twitter account under the name NewEpicurean, but all that ever gets posted there is a mirror of what is posted at NewEpcurean.com, which for the last year has meant nothing but the weekly dates to the Lucretius podcast.

https://twitter.com/NewEpicurean

Yes Don and while I have the highest respect and gratitude for your translations, when the "classical experts" seem to agree that some kind of "feeling" or "sensation" is the better translation, we'll need to take a position on whether THEY are the ones who are picking from among the alternatives the word their notion of what is 'correct' or whether we are the ones doing that. I don't begin to have the ability to weigh in on whether they could be wrong, and in the confines of my own analysis I am pretty much unable to take a position on what is correct, other than by "intuiting" the right word, as I think Elayne is doing.

Maybe what we have going on here is what DeWitt talks about the three legs of the canon not operating independently but in some way being integrated together into a single unit.

Wow the time does fly! Thank you for all your contributions Don - seems like you and several others all got active at nearly the same time, and the last year or so has been one of our most productive periods. If you could just find a way to replicate yourself about a hundred times we'd be well on our way to domination of the philosophic world!

That is a very good point Elayne and something that needs to be considered, especially when writing an explanation of the point. In stating the four in most succinct form, however, I think it is important to stay a closely as possible to the wording of Epicurus or the most reliable texts, and the translations of that seem to all say "sensation." Now it might be relevant here to go back to what Don has been pointing out that perhaps "internal sensations" is better than feelings.

This is the kind of thing that needs to be thought through and perhaps should vary with the location where it is being used.

Actually as I type this I am now thinking that this is an issue which is not entirely clear, and we need to be careful. We need to consider whether what we today define as "feeling" what Epicurus was saying in the words translated as "pathe" or "passions" or "internal sensations" or feelings?" And I am not entirely sure whether Epicurus was equating sensations with feelings or not (probably not) nevertheless the way he is relating them may not be something we really have a final finger on.

I guess the place to start would be to examine that segment of the passage in PD2 to see exactly what word was used. Don or anyone, can you help with that?

"For our nature [wants what] is better for our soul. Moreover, the soul is manifestly more [powerful] than the body; for it [has] control of the extreme and supremacy over the other [feelings], as indeed we revealed it [above.] [So if], through paying attention to the arguments of Aristippus, we take care of the body, [choosing] all the pleasure derived from drink, food and [sexual acts] and indeed absolutely all the things which no longer [give enjoyment after the happening], but neglect the soul, we shall deprive ourselves of the greatest pleasures."

Diogenes of Oinoanda Fragment 29 http://www.english.enoanda.cat/the_inscription.html

The purpose of this thread will be to accumulate text citations in support of four key assertions of Epicurean philosophy. This first post will contain a table of the assertions with passages from the texts supporting each assertion. We should include here citations primarily from Epicurus (Diogenes Laertius) and Lucretius, but other credible sources such as DIogenes of Oinoanda and the Epicurean material from Cicero are also prime targets for finding good material. Please add suggestions in this thread and we can update the table as they come in.

A table format would be preferable, but that isn't easily viewable on a telephone, so this post starts with an "outline" format, followed by the table at the bottom of the post:

1. There Are No Supernatural Gods
   1. Epicurus Letter to Menoeceus: "First of all believe that god is a being immortal and blessed, even as the common idea of a god is engraved on men’s minds, and do not assign to him anything alien to his immortality or ill-suited to his blessedness: but believe about him everything that can uphold his blessedness and immortality. For gods there are, since the knowledge of them is by clear vision. But they are not such as the many believe them to be: for indeed they do not consistently represent them as they believe them to be. And the impious man is not he who popularly denies the gods of the many, but he who attaches to the gods the beliefs of the many. For the statements of the many about the gods are not conceptions derived from sensation, but false suppositions, according to which the greatest misfortunes befall the wicked and the greatest blessings (the good) by the gift of the gods. For men being accustomed always to their own virtues welcome those like themselves, but regard all that is not of their nature as alien.
   2. PD1. The blessed and immortal nature knows no trouble itself, nor causes trouble to any other, so that it is never constrained by anger or favor. For all such things exist only in the weak.
2. There Is No Life After Death
   1. Epicurus Letter to Menoeceus:Become accustomed to the belief that death is nothing to us. For all good and evil consists in sensation, but death is deprivation of sensation. And therefore a right understanding that death is nothing to us makes the mortality of life enjoyable, not because it adds to it an infinite span of time, but because it takes away the craving for immortality. For there is nothing terrible in life for the man who has truly comprehended that there is nothing terrible in not living. So that the man speaks but idly who says that he fears death not because it will be painful when it comes, but because it is painful in anticipation. For that which gives no trouble when it comes is but an empty pain in anticipation. So death, the most terrifying of ills, is nothing to us, since so long as we exist, death is not with us; but when death comes, then we do not exist. It does not then concern either the living or the dead, since for the former it is not, and the latter are no more.
   2. PD2. Death is nothing to us, for that which is dissolved is without sensation; and that which lacks sensation is nothing to us.
3. All Good and Evil Consists in Sensation (No Absolute Good / Evil / Virtue)
   1. Epicurus Letter to Menoeceus: Become accustomed to the belief that death is nothing to us. For all good and evil consists in sensation...
   2. Epicurus Letter to Menoeceus: For the virtues are by nature bound up with the pleasant life, and the pleasant life is inseparable from them.
   3. Diogenes of Oinoanda Fr. 32: If, gentlemen, the point at issue between these people and us involved inquiry into «what is the means of happiness?» and they wanted to say «the virtues» (which would actually be true), it would be unnecessary to take any other step than to agree with them about this, without more ado. But since, as I say, the issue is not «what is the means of happiness?» but «what is happiness and what is the ultimate goal of our nature?», I say both now and always, shouting out loudly to all Greeks and non-Greeks, that pleasure is the end of the best mode of life, while the virtues, which are inopportunely messed about by these people (being transferred from the place of the means to that of the end), are in no way an end, but the means to the end. Let us therefore now state that this is true, making it our starting-point. Suppose, then, someone were to ask someone, though it is a naive question, «who is it whom these virtues benefit?», obviously the answer will be «man.» The virtues certainly do not make provision for these birds flying past, enabling them to fly well, or for each of the other animals: they do not desert the nature with which they live and by which they have been engendered; rather it is for the sake of this nature that the virtues do everything and exist.
   4. PD5. It is not possible to live pleasantly without living prudently, honorably, and justly, [nor again to live a life of prudence, honor, and justice] without living pleasantly. And the man who does not possess the pleasant life is not living prudently, honorably, and justly, [and the man who does not possess the virtuous life] cannot possibly live pleasantly.
   5. PD10. If the things that produce the pleasures of profligates could dispel the fears of the mind about the phenomena of the sky, and death, and its pains, and also teach the limits of desires (and of pains), we should never have cause to blame them: for they would be filling themselves full, with pleasures from every source, and never have pain of body or mind, which is the evil of life.
   6. PD 33. Justice never is anything in itself, but in the dealings of men with one another, in any place whatever, and at any time, it is a kind of compact not to harm or be harmed. 34. Injustice is not an evil in itself, but only in consequence of the fear which attaches to the apprehension of being unable to escape those appointed to punish such actions. 36. In its general aspect, justice is the same for all, for it is a kind of mutual advantage in the dealings of men with one another; but with reference to the individual peculiarities of a country, or any other circumstances, the same thing does not turn out to be just for all. 37. Among actions which are sanctioned as just by law, that which is proved, on examination, to be of advantage, in the requirements of men's dealings with one another, has the guarantee of justice, whether it is the same for all or not. But if a man makes a law, and it does not turn out to lead to advantage in men's dealings with each other, then it no longer has the essential nature of justice. And even if the advantage in the matter of justice shifts from one side to the other, but for a while accords with the general concept, it is nonetheless just for that period, in the eyes of those who do not confound themselves with empty sounds, but look to the actual facts. 38. Where, provided the circumstances have not been altered, actions which were considered just have been shown not to accord with the general concept, in actual practice, then they are not just. But where, when circumstances have changed, the same actions which were sanctioned as just no longer lead to advantage, they were just at the time, when they were of advantage for the dealings of fellow-citizens with one another, but subsequently they are no longer just, when no longer of advantage
4. Pleasure Is the Beginning And End of the Blessed Life
   
   1. Epicurus Letter to Menoeceus: And for this cause we call pleasure the beginning and end of the blessed life. For we recognize pleasure as the first good innate in us, and from pleasure we begin every act of choice and avoidance, and to pleasure we return again, using the feeling as the standard by which we judge every good. And since pleasure is the first good and natural to us, for this very reason we do not choose every pleasure, but sometimes we pass over many pleasures, when greater discomfort accrues to us as the result of them: and similarly we think many pains better than pleasures, since a greater pleasure comes to us when we have endured pains for a long time. Every pleasure then because of its natural kinship to us is good, yet not every pleasure is to be chosen: even as every pain also is an evil, yet not all are always of a nature to be avoided. Yet by a scale of comparison and by the consideration of advantages and disadvantages we must form our judgment on all these matters. For the good on certain occasions we treat as bad, and conversely the bad as good.
   2. PD3. The limit of quantity in pleasures is the removal of all that is painful. Wherever pleasure is present, as long as it is there, there is neither pain of body, nor of mind, nor of both at once. (A refutation of Plato's argument in Philebus that pleasure is not the greatest good because pleasure allegedly has no limit.)
      
      

To avoid sidetracking this thread, I am going to start a new thread to document text citations that support each of these four assertions:

1 - No supernatural gods

2 - No life after death

3 - Pleasure as the goal or beginning and end of blessed life

4. - All good and evil consists in sensation (or something else conveying that there is no absolute virtue / the goal of virtue is pleasure)

That thread will be here: Four Hyper-Relevant Assertions of Epicurus (Citations From The Epicurean Texts)