Happy Birthday to Al-Hakiim von Grof! Learn more about Al-Hakiim von Grof and say happy birthday on Al-Hakiim von Grof's timeline: Al-Hakiim von Grof
Posts by Cassius
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
-
-
Thanks for letting us know, and hope to see you another time.
-
That is an excellent question Matt and I like that you posted the link that Joshua mentioned in the podcast.
It's a deep subject that I suspect others are better equipped than me to deep dive on, but in the last analysis it seems to me that the Stoics have decided that "reason" and "logic" are the hill that they are going to die on, and just as with Mr. Spock no emotion of any kind is going to be approved of as all emotion is illogical if logic itself is the highest good.
They can dance all they like around phrasing that arguably indicates that they are ok with some types of emotions, but for someone who thinks that the summit of virtue is the only part that counts, and focused on how you can down even just below the surface of the water, the implications of the bottom line are clear - there is no kind of pleasure that that are going to consider as good, and no kinds of pain that they are going to consider go be evil.
-
This week we have updated the Side-By-Side Lucretius, which contains the Latin along with translations by Bailey, Dunster, and Munro. The old topical guide page will remain available, but now that outline has been incorporated into the side by side version. Pick the columns you wish to see using the "hamburger" menu icon at the top right. Also added is the ability to resize the columns, so now you can pick the ones you want and then resize them for best reading. Let us know in this thread if you have any issues using the page.
-
We've had numerous request about what self-study materials are available here, and in this thread i will pull together what is available now in other threads, plus maintain this first post in this thread as a marker of several key points.
First, we've had numerous past questions about reading lists, and we've had several organized "book study" Zoom meeting series, such as we did on "A Few Days In Athens" and Emily Austin's "Living For Pleasure" and DeWitt's "Epicurus and His Philosophy." The threads discussing those are scattered across the forums, and while they contain some interesting material they aren't organized in a fashion I would recommend someone go to for the best way to organize their study.
Of the material we have on the forum, the best organized relates to the list of major Doctrines of Epicurus that we feature on the front page. For each of those, we have a specific Lucretius Today podcast episode devoted to the topic, as well as some written outline materials. As a result that forms the best basis from which we could begin to pull together a more organized presentation.
Those materials are summarized on the page below. Under each section is a link both to the Podcast devoted to that topic and a Discussion Guide of materials to review on each topic. If we were going to announce an "Epicurean Introductory Course" next month - and maybe we should - if would be very logical to simply devote one session to each of these topics, suggest that the podcast be reviewed beforehand, and then use the Discussion Guides to organize a Zoom discussion of each one.
- EpicureanFriends Introductory Course Outline
- Session One - Nothing Can Be Created From Nothing
- Session Two - The Universe Is Infinite In Size and Eternal In Time And Has No Gods Over It
- Session Three - The Nature of Gods Contains Nothing That Is Inconsistent With Incorruption And Blessedness.
- Session Four - Death Is Nothing To Us.
- Session Five - There Is No Necessity To Live Under the Control Of Necessity
- Session Six - He Who Says "Nothing Can Be Known" Knows Nothing
- Session Seven - All Sensations Are True
- Session Eight - Virtue Is Not Absolute Or An End In Itself. All Good And Evil Consists In Sensation.
- Session Nine - Pleasure Is The Guide Of Life
- Session Ten - By Pleasure We Mean All Experience That Is Not Painful (The Absence of Pain)
- Session Eleven - Life Is Desirable, But Unlimited Time Contains No Greater Pleasure Than Limited Time
- Session Twelve - In Summary: The Epicurean View Of The Best Life
- The best life results when we hold firmly and consistently to the major doctrines of Epicurus, and when we reject all that is inconsistent with them. This requires study and effort, and in a world full of anti-Epicurean opinions, it is not for the faint-hearted. But for those who are persuaded by Epicurus' teachings the path is clear.
- As the Torquatus summarized for us: "The truth that pleasure is the supreme good can be most easily apprehended from the following consideration. Let us imagine an individual in the enjoyment of pleasures great, numerous and constant, both mental and bodily, with no pain to thwart or threaten them; I ask what circumstances can we describe as more excellent than these or more desirable? A man whose circumstances are such must needs possess, as well as other things, a robust mind subject to no fear of death or pain, because death is apart from sensation, and pain when lasting is usually slight, when oppressive is of short duration, so that its temporariness reconciles us to its intensity, and its slightness to its continuance. When in addition we suppose that such a man is in no awe of the influence of the gods, and does not allow his past pleasures to slip away, but takes delight in constantly recalling them, what circumstance is it possible to add to these, to make his condition better?"
- For ease of reference, here is a summary list of the above doctrines:
- Nothing Can Be Created From Nothing.
- The Universe Is Infinite And Eternal And Has No Gods Over It
- Gods Have No Attributes Inconsistent With Blessedness And Incorruptibility
- Death Is Nothing To Us.
- There Is No Necessity To Live Under The Control Of Necessity.
- He Who Says That Nothing Can Be Known Knows Nothing
- All Sensations Are True
- Virtue Is Not Absolute Or An End In Itself - All Good And Evil Consists In Sensation.
- Pleasure is The Guide of Life.
- By Pleasure We Absence Of Pain (All Experience That Is Not Painful)
- Life Is Desirable, But Unlimited Time Contains No Greater Pleasure Than Limited Time.
- The best life results when we hold firmly and consistently to the major doctrines of Epicurus, and when we reject all that is inconsistent with them. This requires study and effort, and in a world full of anti-Epicurean opinions, it is not for the faint-hearted. But for those who are persuaded by Epicurus' teachings the path is clear.
- EpicureanFriends Introductory Course Outline
-
MarkJW to you or anyone else who is not in an American time zone, we'll work to set up another more suitable time to accomplish the same thing. If anyone else has a time zone issue please let us know.
-
Today we're introducing the second new home page attraction - a media presentation of Velleius' speech explaining Epicurus' view of divinity from Cicero's On The Nature of The Gods. I'll repeat what I said about the current state of both this and the other text-to-speech production:
- This audio voice is far from perfect. {Actually, I think this one is better than the Torquatus version, for some strange reason, as they were produced in the same way.) Much effort has been put into this version, but the AI voice has a long way to go, so lower your expectations. We want the best, but we also want to reach as many people with this information as possible. If we wait for perfection, some will miss having this available to him that might otherwise see it.
- The text is adapted from the same versions that we already have on the website, but it needs to be improved. i will be placing this text on "Github," a public site where text can be edited in a collaborative manner. I will appreciate submissions for corrections and will get them up as soon as possible. Again, the tradeoff here is that if we wait for perfection before we publish this, some will miss it who might otherwise profit from it.
- One merit of this audio voice is that it is entirely in the public domain. We can continue to work on improving it and distribute this with no copyright concerns whatsoever.
- It will be desirable to add graphics throughout the video to illustrate the text. That will be a huge task , and suggestions on how to do that will be appreciated.
- As this text is not copyrighted, anyone who wants to proceed on their own to produce a better version is welcome to do so. Our goal is to promote the philosophy of Epicurus with the best material available, not to promote the graphics skill of me (which are obviously poor) or of anyone else.
- Check THIS POST for more technical info.
- We will be regularly updating this to improve the text and presentation quality. One side effect of that, however, is that it is not possible to proofread a new version, without watching the whole thing. That means regression errors may creep into another part of the file as a result of editing an existing error. Please feel free to report any and all errors anytime you observe one, as we may not already be aware of it for this reason.
-
Please welcome AthenianGarden, whom I understand to be a fan of Greenblatt's Swerve and relatively new to Epicurus. Glad to have you with us!
-
Welcome AthenianGarden !
There is one last step to complete your registration:
All new registrants must post a response to this message here in this welcome thread (we do this in order to minimize spam registrations).
You must post your response within 24 hours, or your account will be subject to deletion.
Please say "Hello" by introducing yourself, tell us what prompted your interest in Epicureanism and which particular aspects of Epicureanism most interest you, and/or post a question.
This forum is the place for students of Epicurus to coordinate their studies and work together to promote the philosophy of Epicurus. Please remember that all posting here is subject to our Community Standards and associated Terms of Use. Please be sure to read that document to understand our ground rules.
Please understand that the leaders of this forum are well aware that many fans of Epicurus may have sincerely-held views of what Epicurus taught that are incompatible with the purposes and standards of this forum. This forum is dedicated exclusively to the study and support of people who are committed to classical Epicurean views. As a result, this forum is not for people who seek to mix and match Epicurean views with positions that are inherently inconsistent with the core teachings of Epicurus.
All of us who are here have arrived at our respect for Epicurus after long journeys through other philosophies, and we do not demand of others what we were not able to do ourselves. Epicurean philosophy is very different from most other philosophies, and it takes time to understand how deep those differences really are. That's why we have membership levels here at the forum which allow for new participants to discuss and develop their own learning, but it's also why we have standards that will lead in some cases to arguments being limited, and even participants being removed, when the purposes of the community require it. Epicurean philosophy is not inherently democratic, or committed to unlimited free speech, or devoted to any other form of organization other than the pursuit of truth and happy living through pleasure as explained in the principles of Epicurean philosophy.
One way you can be assured of your time here will be productive is to tell us a little about yourself and your background in reading Epicurean texts. It would also be helpful if you could tell us how you found this forum, and any particular areas of interest that you already have.
You can also check out our Getting Started page for ideas on how to use this website.
We have found over the years that there are a number of key texts and references which most all serious students of Epicurus will want to read and evaluate for themselves. Those include the following.
"Epicurus and His Philosophy" by Norman DeWitt
The Biography of Epicurus by Diogenes Laertius. This includes the surviving letters of Epicurus, including those to Herodotus, Pythocles, and Menoeceus.
"On The Nature of Things" - by Lucretius (a poetic abridgement of Epicurus' "On Nature"
"Epicurus on Pleasure" - By Boris Nikolsky
The chapters on Epicurus in Gosling and Taylor's "The Greeks On Pleasure."
Cicero's "On Ends" - Torquatus Section
Cicero's "On The Nature of the Gods" - Velleius Section
The Inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda - Martin Ferguson Smith translation
A Few Days In Athens" - Frances Wright
Lucian Core Texts on Epicurus: (1) Alexander the Oracle-Monger, (2) Hermotimus
Philodemus "On Methods of Inference" (De Lacy version, including his appendix on relationship of Epicurean canon to Aristotle and other Greeks)
"The Greeks on Pleasure" -Gosling & Taylor Sections on Epicurus, especially the section on katastematic and kinetic pleasure which explains why ultimately this distinction was not of great significance to Epicurus.
It is by no means essential or required that you have read these texts before participating in the forum, but your understanding of Epicurus will be much enhanced the more of these you have read. Feel free to join in on one or more of our conversation threads under various topics found throughout the forum, where you can to ask questions or to add in any of your insights as you study the Epicurean philosophy.
And time has also indicated to us that if you can find the time to read one book which will best explain classical Epicurean philosophy, as opposed to most modern "eclectic" interpretations of Epicurus, that book is Norman DeWitt's Epicurus And His Philosophy.
(If you have any questions regarding the usage of the forum or finding info, please post any questions in this thread).
Welcome to the forum!
-
Thanks Kalosyni, and just FYI and FWIW we usually plan our meetings to last no more than an hour. If you can only make part of the meeting that's fine too, and that goes for both any new people and our regulars.
-
i've completed another companion to the other side-by-side text versions. Today i am setting up the Velleius section from CIcero's On the Nature of the Gods. it will contain the Latin along with translations by Charles Yong, Frances Brook, and Harris Rackham. it can be found here.
-
I am still processing most of DaveT's post but I have to first comment on this part, because it may indicate a part of the reason I am still working on trying to know exactly where you are going DaveT.
Because when you say this ....
To paraphrase physicist Brian Greene’s statement: he is content to know that he is composed of particles of matter formed by natural processes from star formation. Since matter can only be converted to energy and vice versa, his atoms exist forever. Can’t be more Epicurean than that!
... I see an immediate warning flag. As far as "atoms existing forever" goes, both Democritus and Epicurus agreed on that, but you definitely CAN get "more Epicurean than that, because despite this common ground Epicurus diverged sharply from Democritus on skepticism and determinism and therefore presumably on many other ethical issues. I suspect that this observation plays into the problem we're confronting about terminology. I have no clue about any other aspects of Brian Greene's thinking or who he is, but I would not generally conclude say that anyone "can't be more Epicurean than that" simply because he thinks things are ultimately made of atoms and void. The role of pleasure and pain in the canonical test of "truth" still remains to be resolved.
And maybe the reason I point this out is that for all we know Brian Greene or any average atomist may be completely against the ethical conclusions that Epicurus reached. Epicurus factors in many additional canonical and physics-based conclusions that are not yet resolved simply by saying that everything is composed of atoms and void. So we have sort of a parallel here in terms of the need to be very clear in our definitions of pleasure, life, virtue, gods, etc.
-
That last post from Don sounds like a chapter out of a work by DeWitt himself
And yes I think this is exactly right -
I get the feeling Epicurus wanted to be provocative, to make people question their common wisdom, their acculturation, which is what using pleasure / ηδονη / voluptas obviously did.
Along the same lines as saying that the sun - or anything else - is what it "appears" to be. Because if "appearance" is taken to mean a reference to the senses, anticipations, and feelings, then yes *everything* is understandable to us only from "appearances" - and that is a point well worth being a provocateur over.
-
You're raising lots of good points for discussion DaveT. At this point I'll insert these thoughts into the record as we take it further:
1. DeWitt's point as to the true goal being "life" in my personal opinion has a lot of merit, BUT, we have a lot of disagreement here about whether that is in fact the case, and I would myself say that this formulation suffers from much the same problem as other formulations. The whole issue is that the way people think about life and pleasure is too narrow and/or erroneous, and whatever words you end up focusing on have their own problems to unwind. Clearly the word "life" itself is insufficient standing on its own, because Epicurus makes clear that we sometimes give our lives for our friends, and even more generally, we will "leave the theatre when the play ceases to please us," as I think probably Epicurus and certainly Atticus and probably others chose to do to accelerate their impending deaths. So "Life Alone" isn't logically sufficient, and you'd have to explain that what you mean is "a life in which you can expect to experience more pleasure than pain" to be more precise. This point number one i am writing here is one of many separate issues that's involved in the discussion you are raising.
2. As for this ...not for the purpose of evangelizing this philosophy to the masses, it is for an alternate approach to answering the new inquirer's question of what's it all about,
... I see your distinction and agree that it's valid, though the issues do bleed together. Both "the masses" and "the new inquirer" need clarity as quickly as possible, but I think you are right that "the inquirer" probably comes to the discussion with a more positive and open mind than does "the masses."
3. This seems to be ultimately the concern that a lot of people have:his followers leaves the modern sensitivities at the mercy of modern language.
And that seems to me almost EXACTLY what Cicero's own complaint was -- that Epicurus was doing violence to common language.
And yes I'd say that that is true - Epicurus made the decision as Don / Joshua quoted above that he would prefer to be misunderstood rather than not speak the precise truth. I'd say that there is room for lots of different approaches, and that we should encourage people to develop alternative websites, or (given to whom i am speaking) write alternative books, produce alternative arguments, etc., to explore new ways to cut across the existing mental barriers. All I can say for what I think "this" website needs to be is a place where the people who are most dedicated to exploring Epicurus can speak about it in most clear and precise terms regardless of what the rest of the world likes to hear. But as you can tell, I hope, I am all in favor of producing videos and other forms of messaging that explore new ways to get the message across.
It's my own observation that most of the "compromisers" however don't accomplish very much. Even going back to Gassendi and others who tried to mash together Epicurus and Christianity or Deism, I don't think they really got very far. All those efforts probably helped to preserve some mention of Epicurus during very hostile periods, but in the end I personally think they just added to the confusion rather than resolving it.Right now we have what may be a brief period in history where at least we in the USA, and to some degree other countries, can speak more freely than usual to a wider audience than usual, and we can choose from being extremely direct on the one hand or be "diplomatic" on the other. I don't want to see us on this forum discourage anyone from taking initiatives in new ways, but the flip side of that is that while some of us explore certain ways of arguments I don't want to let those ways squelch others who like different approaches.
My hopes for this forum is that we will always focus on accuracy, clarity, and directness, so we can provide a place for the most "hard-core" of Epicureans to collaborate together. But at the same time I want to see us encourage in every way we can other approaches. It's likely going to be appropriate that the different approaches keep some distance from each other to maximize their respective chances of success, but I don't see a problem with that, and it actually seems to me to be more consistent with the "atomistic" nature of the universe.
I'd particularly cite Eikadistes as an example of someone who's doing exactly what in my own personal view they should be doing. He (and others including some here on the forum but I won't go down a list) are putting a lot of time and effort into their own websites/blogs/etc while still collaborating here, and I think that's really the optimum approach.
I'll wrap this up by referring back to your DeWitt comment. I think what we're talking about here now is what DeWitt himself did. He broke from the pack and cut his own path. Some of it was more successful than others, but if he had not broken from the path I'd probably never have gotten as interested in Epicurus as I became, and this website wouldn't be here. I don't like that he spent so much time drawing parallels with Christianity, and some of his formulations are probably too speculative, but many of Dewitt's insights, even the "life is the goal" formulation, I think are definitely in the right direction. And to the extent that DeWitt made some mistakes, some of them ( e.g. life as the goal) were because he didn't carry his ideas far enough.
-
Latest version updated to main page and posted to Facebook with this intro:
Here is a new audio-with-text version of Torquatus' Defense of Epicurus from Cicero's "On Ends," delivered by the Roman Senator and Praetor (military commander) Lucius Manlius Torquatus. For two thousand years this has been one of the most clear, concise, and compelling explanations of Epicurean Philosophy available anywhere. As many people know, portions of Torquatus' speech were coded into the "Res Ipsum" jumble of Latin that publishers use for "dummy" text. It seems likely that the decision to choose this text, even in jumbled form, reflects an understanding of the desirability of preserving the memory of this text forever. Over time we will continue to work to improve the quality of rendering of this voice and media. In the meantime this present version can be shared and referenced whenever you need access to the strongest and most unapologetic defense of the Epicurean way of life that has been delivered since the days of the original Garden. -
Happy Birthday to Carlos! Learn more about Carlos and say happy birthday on Carlos's timeline: Carlos
-
To accompany the new Torquatus audio version I have now completed a side-by-side Latin and English version of the main Torquatus narrative. This version contains the Latin alongside the Yonge, Reid, and Rackham versions, followed by the modified Rackham which is the basis for the Text-To-Speech version. This will assist in helping us check to be sure that current and future text-to-speech versions stay compatible with the older public domain translations even as we convert it into more-widely-usable modern American English.
Here's the main link, and it can also be found in the right-hand navigation column alongside the side by side versions of Lucretius and Diogenes Laertius:
EpicureanFriends Side-By-Side Torquatus
I do my best to keep these as accurate as possible while still getting them out in a reasonable time frame, but I am sure there are some typos so always feel free to point those out when convenient.
-
Glad to have you MarkJW!
-
Here is a request for the topic for 11/2 submitted by DaveT. I think this is an excellent suggestion and it's also something we can discuss during the week before we have the live discussion. Let's use this thread to discuss it where it can be found in the future rather than continuing in the private conversation. Thanks!
QuoteDisplay MoreCassius, do you think we might continue the topic you selected for the Zoom today and revisit it on Nov. 2nd? The way Joshua contrasted the primacy of Pleasure over necessity rather than the reverse really caught my attention.
Might we take more time to consider your question on ways to respond to newcomers to Epicurus, considering our discussion today about Pleasure and its connotation with shamefulness? I think it is important not just for newcomers to Epicurus, but also for students like me who are digging into the pleasure/pain concept.
For example, Pleasure is such a loaded word! When Joshua said it should not be associated with shame, it resonated with me a lot. I think the common understanding in the English language is that pleasure is associated with shame, or sin, or antisocial behavior, at least in America. As someone said today about the Stoics, we seek pleasure, but don’t like to admit it.
So, back to the question of responding to initial inquiries about Epicureanism, might another tack be considered? I see a larger question that we might consider. Why must even a knowledgeable Epicurean always have to explain the pleasure-pain principle as limited by prudence as soon as that emotion-laden word Pleasure surfaces?
Robert wondered if “re-branding” our word choice would be useful. I think that is an important enough question for us to discuss collectively. Maybe we can discover a different way for both new and old followers to avoid the common ridicule that tends to shame not just the timid, but the courageous person who says, they follow Epicurus’ ethics about Pleasure.
Am I suggesting we consider another English word for Epicurus’ wording for Pleasure as a concept? No, but I think it might be appropriate to consider new ways of dealing with Epicurus’ concept of Pleasure.
Can I ask our eminent ancient Greek linguists in the Forum for help with the following questions?
I wonder how the most highly regarded English translations render Epicurus’s use of the word Pleasure. Are they agreed? Is any one of them considered above the others?
Does Epicurus’ ancient Greek word have a singular meaning or multiple meanings within the context of mental vs physical?
Is his use of the word always consistent without his explaining the distinction between mental and physical meanings?
I wonder if his followers in the varied parts of the eastern Mediterranean all deduced the same meaning(s) he intended with his usage of the Greek word for Pleasure?
I’m looking forward to responses from one and all.
Dave Tamanini
Harrisburg, PA, USA
-
This is to start a thread for us to discuss preparation of the discussion for this meeting. DaveT has suggested a focus which sounds good, and it will be helpful if we talk through some of the details here in this thread beforehand.
Finding Things At EpicureanFriends.com
Here is a list of suggested search strategies:
- Website Overview page - clickable links arrranged by cards.
- Forum Main Page - list of forums and subforums arranged by topic. Threads are posted according to relevant topics. The "Uncategorized subforum" contains threads which do not fall into any existing topic (also contains older "unfiled" threads which will soon be moved).
- Search Tool - icon is located on the top right of every page. Note that the search box asks you what section of the forum you'd like to search. If you don't know, select "Everywhere."
- Search By Key Tags - curated to show frequently-searched topics.
- Full Tag List - an alphabetical list of all tags.