I see that is on Archive.org. I wonder who Geer was and what were his credentials?
Oops - only partly
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
I see that is on Archive.org. I wonder who Geer was and what were his credentials?
Oops - only partly
“When reasonable security from men has been attained, then the security that comes from peace of mind and withdrawal from the crowd is present, sufficient in strength and most unmixed in well-being.” Geer (1964)
Now THIS is unusual. Nate what source is that? Given the departure from the norm in that one we may see something similar in the other ones by Geer.
the power to fight them off
Ha! "The power to fight them off" --- as usual St Andre comes through with something memorable - and I like it!
Again, THANK YOU NATE for the work in these recent postings.
Approaching it as "Epicurean fan fiction" written by a teenage fan of Epicurus might allow for some leniency with her writing. With that it mind, too, it's more sophisticated than what I would initially expect from a teenager.
I suspect that you are going to have many of the same questions I did. The book is VERY maturely written, and it indicates a knowledge of details from the other ten books of Diogenes Laertius that one would expect would take years of study.
I haven't focused recently on her age when she wrote it, so I need to verify that aspect of it. Certainly at some point she was capable of writing every bit of it herself, because her later work is written in much the same style and from the same viewpoint.
But the maturity shown in AFDIA is very deep, and the younger it is postulated that she was when she wrote it, the more in my own mind its almost certain that she had at very least "good coaching." I am not trying to take anything away from FW in these comments because she was clearly a remarkable person, but I don't want you beating yourself up Don that you're a couple of years older now than she was when this was published and you still haven't written anything comparable.
For sure, neither have I! ![]()
One last note is that I think it's probably an indication of something going on that she wrote such a lengthy and detailed introduction about the "anonymous" background of the manuscript.
now that I know she wrote it when she was a teenager.
For sure, this is not a work by an average teenager!
Happy birthday! I'm looking forward to reading A Few Days in Athens after finishing the Lucretius podcast.
In many ways it is excellent; in some ways it is disappointing. We have some good commentary in it in our section on Frances Wright, including some pretty blunt (but I think accurate) criticism of it by Elayne. Problems in Frances Wright's "A Few Days in Athens"
There is much additional good material in that subforum as well.
First, to repeat, there's a lot of good material in it and it is well worth reading, which is why it's on our reading list. However:
In general, the issue is that some people are turned off by the "flowery" writing style of the early chapters. That doesn't strike me as too serious a flaw (I ignore it as an aspect of the style of that time) but there are more serious issues too. Frances Wright doesn't seem to follow Epicurus on "agency," nor does she go by the book on the existence of the "gods." Most interestingly, she hints at (and carries further in some later writing) her view that we need to be so careful of "theories" that we essentially reject all of them. If carried to an extreme (as perhaps she did in her later writing) this can itself turn into a form of skepticism that I think went well beyond what Epicurus taught.
She wrote A Few Days in Athens while she was still a teenager? Did not know that!
That relates to our brief recent podcast discussion that we should learn Epicurean philosophy when we were children.
I've never been able to find any further leads, but apparently several members of her family were philosophically and/or politically active and presumably led her in the right direction from an early age. We can't wait til we're in advanced age (where's my walking stick?) before we start studying Epicurus! ![]()
"A Few Days In Athens" shows not only a deep understanding (though not always agreement) with Book Ten
looks very nice!
Great catch Joshua!
Yep. Definite reasons to be cautious there.
In this episode I was trying to remember a Bible verse to the effect that the world was unchanged since the beginning of time. I think I was referring to 2 Peter 3-4
They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”
They will say, “What happened to the promise that Jesus is coming again? From before the times of our ancestors, everything has remained the same since the world was first created.”
They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.”
“Where is the promise of His coming?” they will ask. “Ever since our fathers fell asleep, everything continues as it has from the beginning of creation.”
Actually I do have something else to add here -- although I never got finished, I made a list of a number of significant translations that DeWit made which I found in a number of sources. I will add them here if I can format it correctly. I was going to set this up as a table and then sort it by the reference, which would have given a set of his translations not only of the PD's but also of the Vatican Sayings, but as usual I lost steam before the project was complete!
PD11. Undocumented in De Witt's works?
Gosh PD11 strikes me as too important not to be there, but it might be blended in with that point being made in Lucretius. That point (about scientific knowledge not being worthwhile in itself, which is related to the bad idea of arbitrary picking of one solution from many possible ones) would be a good one to find and further document.
Ah! That's the wrinkle when you start looking at the original text.
I agree with that comment, but I also think that Norman DeWitt had read more Greek in his lifetime up to writing that book than any ten of us, so it's probably always worth considering whether he didn't see some connotation in the Greek literature where that word occurs that isn't obvious to us just using the dictionaries.
I see here is the paragraph Nate is citing from (I don't see it on page 188 but might be in a footnote?) and it certainly looks like DeWitt thought it appropriate to hammer home the "patronage of princes" part. Gosh only knows at this point why, but I wouldn't bet my life that he didn't have a reason. Maybe just a word association in his own mind for that particular Greek.
Nate I am going to edit your original post to put "PD" in front of each entry, and that way the site can pop up the box that takes you to the main entry we have for each one. I hope that's ok - we can fix it back if not!
I always presumed he was referring to kings and kingdoms but never investigated the Greek for PD14.
Depending upon the context of each one, it seems to me that I remember that DeWitt stated on some of these that he was intentionally paraphrasing to get what he thought was the right meaning rather than strictly according to the text. Plus, on some of these the text is disputed, and again if I recall correctly Dewitt talks about his text choice in making the translation. However those caveats could be applied to any of the translators, and as long as we compare the different versions and keep in mind that no single translation has been blessed by Epicurus himself, we can hope to come to a reasonable approximation of what Epicurus intended.
And that's illustrated, now that I look back at the list, that Dewitt translated them sometimes two or three different ways himself!
Wow thank you Nate! I cannot tell you how many times I have told myself to do exactly such as list but never got the time to do it. Thank you very much!!!
On first thought Camotero I think the issue is that there are a couple(?) Of text references to Epicurus talking about "casting the mind" such as in his figurative journey through space, and so that tends to get picked up by commentators when they see something about "applying the mind.". Pretty clearly Epicurus stressed that thinking requires action of the mind applied to observations, and I don't think there is much more to it than that. The bottom line for me would be that we don't often need the full details but we do need the overall outline in order to apply our minds in an organized way to figuring out problems consistent with the overall view. You could reverse that and say you are applying the principles to the problem but I doubt that makes much difference.
Maybe you are asking something else?
Wow very interesting on amber - now I am confused myself where it comes from!