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
Marco I am going to take the liberty to adjust the title of the thread from
"Friends"
to
"Dealing With Friends Who Are Struggling"
to make the topic easier to find in the future. If you prefer something else, please of course feel free to adjust it again.
i want to add this:
not have to work for something after their death,
This is the one that always seem to me personally to be one of the most effective. Most of the people in my circle of contact are infected by the belief that there is life after death, so they build in an attitude that this is all just a warm-up for live in heaven (or some kind of existence) after death.
To me it is one of the most motivating things in life to realize that I have a time limit to get done the things i want to get done, and to realize that once I am dead, I will experience nothing ever again.
If people really took that point to heart I think most of us would act much differently, and that's why it appears several times in the remaining Epicurean texts.
That's a great question and I have a couple of comments.
First, a similar thought has come up in several discussions, and one comment that I associate with Elayne making it is that some people in some situations are not looking for a solution, but for empathy and confirmation of their feelings, and no matter how insightful the information you give might be, they aren't going to hear it and it actually does no good (or even causes more friction between the two of you) to talk about solutions. That way of thinking is very foreign to me but I do agree that it exists in some situations, so first I think it is necessary to determine whether the person you are talking to is looking for solutions or just a shoulder to cry on.
That their lives are a result of wrong choices and avoidance.
That the ideal they chase is just a dream, there are only atoms and void.
Of the Epicurean suggestions you were listing, I would suggest a finer point on these two.
Remember as to agency that Epicurus said in the letter to Menoeceus:
(He thinks that with us lies the chief power in determining events, some of which happen by necessity) and some by chance, and some are within our control; for while necessity cannot be called to account, he sees that chance is inconstant, but that which is in our control is subject to no master, and to it are naturally attached praise and blame.
So while I very much agree that in general terms it is likely that the problems are the result of their choices and avoidances, it is also possible that the problem was in fact beyond their control. Depending on the situation it is probably a good idea to be sure to include that possibility so that at least in the beginning, until they come to terms with the view that they are "chiefly" in control of their lives, that we acknowledge that some things (death for instance) are beyond our control.
As to this second item:
That the ideal they chase is just a dream, there are only atoms and void.
I think (again depending on context) that this needs clarification. Yes Epicurus taught that "ideal forms" do not exist, but the way that sentence comes across in English (again, I realize your first language is Dutch) the formulation has a nihilist ring to it that I do not thing Epicurus would embrace.
If what is meant by "ideal" is the person's "goal" or "view of life" or many other types of 'conceptions' then I think we have to be careful about condemning those as "ideals." This is one of the reasons that I think it is so important to think about what Epicurus was talking about in discussing "conceptions" and "PRE-conceptions." Our thoughts are extremely important to us, and they are the sources of great pains and pleasures, and so we should not disparage them just because they do not have eternal unchanging properties as do atoms and void. They may not be eternal, but they are all we have at our human level of experience.
In discussing the differences between properties of elemental properties vs. the qualities of "bodies" in the Letter to Herodotus and also in Lucretius, I do not think that the Epicureans were suggesting that we should look at the qualities of things as less significant to us than the properties of the atoms. I think Epicurus was suggesting that it is essential that we understand that one is permanent and the other is not, and that the qualities arise from the movement and combinations of atoms and void and not from supernatural beings. I think that Epicurus would have seen (and did see) nihilism as an enemy just as much as supernatural religion, and that he would stress that even things we consider to be "dreams" can have very potent impact on us. In fact come to think of it there are explicit statements about how the things we experience in "dreams" can impact us.
So as to the "there are only atoms and void" I think what I have said above illustrates the issue. The more precise point is that "the only things that have permanent independent unchanging properties are atoms and void." While that is true, we live on a different level - the level where the qualities of bodies (as discussed in Epicurus) are the only things that rise to our level of sensation and experience. I therefore think at the outset of explaining Epicurus to people that we need to stress this point very strongly so as to avoid any nihilistic implications. We don't "worship" atoms and void (which is the "weak and beggarly elements" slander from the New Testament). We simply understand that the qualities of things we experience arise from and are limited by the elemental particles of which they are composed (and not by supernatural gods).
Now I realize not everyone agrees with me on this last point, but this is also why I much prefer the translation "events" as the best way to translate the Latin "eventum" in Lucretius rather than "accidents." The 1743 edition uses "events," but many others use "accidents" - in my view influenced by the idea of the swerve and by the deduction they draw from Epicurean philosophy that everything is "accidental."
I think that is a very harmful point of view that is not Epicurean and leads to nihilism too. If this issue interests you I strongly recommend AA Long's article "Chance and Natural Law in Epicureanism." In that article Long emphasizes how in fact the effect of the swerve is not nearly so extensive as many people seem to infer. He emphasizes that in fact the swerve does not appear in the letter to Herodotus at all, and appears in Lucretius primarily as the explanation of "free will" (for which reason David Sedley concludes that the swerve did not originally occur to Epicurus as a principle of physics at all). The point is that most things in the universe do occur in a manner that may not be predictable to us, but which is in essence "mechanical" in the sense of being determined directly by the properties of the atoms and the void and their movements. There is also a reference in Herodotus that supports this conclusion, to the effect that all things continue along the way that they were set in motion "from the formation of our world."
Sorry to be so long-winded on this but your post hits some excellent and very important points. Thank you for posting that!
I do not think I have heard of that. Please keep us posted on what you make of it.
Other than DeWitt's work, the only similar thing I am aware of - and it's not explicitly Epicurean but rather "materialism" - is the article from the early 1800's by Thomas Cooper "The Scripture Doctrine of Materialism" which gives his argument that a close reading of the bible supports the view that the human soul was viewed as a material thing in some of the biblical texts.
https://thomascoopermd.wordpress.com/the-scripture-…of-materialism/
Hello and welcome to the forum @Enrique_J
This 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 / Rules of the Forum our Not Neo-Epicurean, But Epicurean and our Posting Policy statements and associated posts.
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 some 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 other viewpoints, 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 by our community of happy living through the principles of Epicurean philosophy.
One way you can be most assured of your time here being productive is to tell us a little about yourself and personal 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 have which would help us make sure that your questions and thoughts are addressed.
In that regard 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.
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.
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.
Welcome to the forum!
it's probably not a coincidence that it seems to me that the best "default" color for the forum here is blue too, although at times I do like green and other colors too.
These two with blue backgrounds have always been some of my favorite pictures of Epicurus
(at least I think the second one here is blue - I might be colorblind!)
I completely agree - I would not mess with the colors your mother chose.
If you don't mind please see if you can't reduce the file size so we can all see it and circulate it. I am thinking that we have the maximum upload size set to 1MB so that should be plenty big enough, but if you have a problem let me know!
Great find, thank you!
I am totally unfamiliar with that work, so thank you!
So this is originally French or something else translated into English?
And the text is prose, although from the looks of the page it's formatted to match the original -- it's not a poem or free verse?
The page source kind of looks like there should be a link to an image of the original, in part because there are errors in the transcription, but I don't see such a link.
I skipped back to the section on Justice which ends the book, and it seems exclusively Christian rather than mentioning Epicurus. The opening, however, does seem like a fairly standard christian-influenced view of Epicurus.
I would like at the very least to get an idea who this writer was and where they might fit in a chain of popularizing Epicurus in that period.
Welcome to Episode Seventy-Six 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 questions about those, please be sure to contact us at EpicureanFriends.com for more information.
In this Episode 76 we will read approximately Latin line 925-1027 of Book Five. We will talk about the initial forms of human life, and the early stages of human society. Now let's join Martin reading today's text:
Podcast 75
Latin Lines 925 - 1027
Munro Notes-
925-987: but men were then much hardier than they are now: they lived like the beasts of the field; ignorant of tillage, they fed on what the earth supplied of itself, acorns and berries ; and drank of the running waters: they were without fire or clothes or houses, without law government or marriage : they slept on the ground, not fearing the dark, to which they had been used from childhood; they rather dreaded real danger from the fiercest beasts.
988-1010: men then died much about the same as now : here and there they were mangled by wild beasts and perished from want of help; but then many thousands did not fall in battle in a single day; ships too and therefore shipwrecks were unknown; want and ignorance then caused some deaths ; as now do luxury and malice.
1011-1027: next the use of huts and skins and fire softened their bodies, marriage and the ties of family their tempers; then neighbors made treaties of friendship and alliance, which mostly they observed, though not always.
Browne 1743
[907] And therefore those who pretend that this new Earth and vigorous Aether could produce such creatures as these, and support their fictions only upon the empty argument of their being new, may with the same reason put upon us other fables. They may as well tell us that golden rivers flow through the earth, that trees blossom with diamonds, that men were made with such mighty strength and bulk of limbs that they could stride with their feet over wide seas, and whirl about the body of the heavens with their hands. For though there were many seeds of things in the womb of the earth when she first began the production of living creatures, this is no rule that animals could be formed of a mixed nature, and compounded of different bodies. The various products of the earth, which are in great abundance – the herbs, the fruits, and pleasant trees – never blended in such confusion together; every thing proceeds in its own proper order, and preserves its distinct kind by the established laws of Nature.
[925] And the first race of men were much hardier upon the earth, as 'twas fit they should, for the hard earth bore them. They were built within upon larger and more solid bones, and their limbs were strained with stronger nerves, nor did they easily feel the inclemency of heat and cold, or were affected with the strangeness of their food or any weakness of body. They led a long life of many rolling years, and wandered about like wild beasts. There was no husbandman to guide the plow, or that knew how to cultivate the fields; none to plant young stocks in the ground, or with pruning-hooks to lop the old branches from the high trees. What the sun, the rain, and the earth voluntarily produced, that bounty satisfied their grateful hearts. They commonly refreshed their bodies with acorns among the oaks, and with those wild apples which you see ripen in winter, of a red color, which the earth then bore in abundance, and of a larger size. Many other excellent fruits the new earth, fresh and in her prime, produced in great plenty for her wretched offspring.
[945] But the rivers and springs invited them to cool their thirst, as the fall of waters from the high hills call now upon the thirsty race of beasts; and wandering in the night, they rested in hollow caves, the Sylvan temples of the nymphs, when flowed a running stream that washed the slippery stones with its large current; among the slippery stones, covered with mossy green, it found its way, and some of its little tide broke out and spread into the plain below.
[953] As yet they knew nothing of fire to dress their foods, nor the use of skins, or how to cover their bodies with the spoils of beasts; but inhabited the groves, the hollow mountains and the woods, and hid their naked bodies among the shrubs; this they did to avoid the rains and the blasts of wind.
[958] They had no regard for the common good; they had no order among them; or the use of laws; every man seized for his own what fortune gave into his power; every one consulted his own safety, and took care of himself.
[962]Their amours were consummated in the woods; either the ladies were urged on by their mutual heat, or they were overcome by the superior force and raging fire of their gallants, or were softened by presents, a dish of acorns, of apples, or of choice pears.
[966] These unpolished mortals, relying on the mighty strength of their arms and the swiftness of their feet, pursued the wild beasts through the woods, with missive stones and heavy clubs.
[970] Many they hunted down, some secured themselves in the thick brakes; when night overtook them, like bristly hogs, they through their rough bodies naked upon the ground, and rolled themselves up in leaves and grass; nor did they run howling about the fields, frightened that the day was gone and the sun was set, or wandered about in the darkness of the night, but they waited without complaint, and lay buried in soft sleep, till the sun with his rosy beams should again spread light over the heavens. For, from their very infancy, they had been used to observe that there was a regular succession of light and darkness, and therefore they did not think it possible, they never feared or distrusted, that an eternal night could cover the earth, or that the light of the sun would never more return. But what disturbed them most was that the wild beasts often surprised and destroyed them when they were asleep. They were forced to quit their haunts, and fly out of the caverns of the rocks at the approach of the rough boar or the strong lion; and trembling, in the dead of night, to give up their beds of leaves to their cruel guests.
[988] And yet in those times fewer died than do now, for then the one unhappy wretch that was seized was sure to be devoured alive between their cruel teeth, and therefore he filled the groves, the mountains, and the woods with his cries, as he saw his reeking bowels buried in a living grave. But those who saved themselves by flight, with their bodies torn and covering their smarting wounds with trembling hands, called upon death in dreadful accents, till gnawing worms put an end to their life, for they were unskilled in medicine, and ignorant what to apply to their gaping sores. But then many thousands did not fall in battle in one day; no boisterous waves dashed ships and men against the rocks. The sea then, and its swelling tides, raged in vain, and to no purpose, and laid aside its empty threats, and grew calm again; nor could the deceitful flattery of its smooth waters cheat any one into the deceit, or tempt him to venture upon the smiling surface. The dangerous art of sailing was then unknown. Many then languished and died wretchedly for want of food, but now plenty is the destruction of mankind. Some then, through ignorance, would mix poison for themselves; now they study the art, and give it to others.
[1011] But when they began to build huts, and provide themselves with skins and fire; when one to one was joined for life together, and the chaste sweet delights of constant love were now first felt, and they saw a lovely train of children of their own; then this hardy race first began to soften, for being used to fire, their tender bodies could not bear so well the cold of the open air; and love impaired their strength, and children, by their little acts of fondness, easily softened the haughty temper of their parents. Then those who lived together began to cultivate a friendship, and agreed not to hurt or injure one another. They undertook the protection of children and women, and declared, by signs and broken words, that the weaker should be understood as proper objects of compassion. This mutual amity, though it did not prevail among them all, yet the greater and better part kept their faith, and lived peaceably together; otherwise the whole race of men had been soon destroyed, and the species could never have been preserved to this time.
Munro 1886
[907] Wherefore also he who fables that in the new time of the earth and the fresh youth of heaven such living creatures could have been begotten, resting upon this one futile term new, may babble out many things in like fashion, may say that rivers then ran with gold over all parts of the earth and that trees were wont to blossom with precious stones, or that man was born with such giant force of frame that he could wade on foot across deep seas and whirl the whole heaven about him with his hands. For the fact that there were many seeds of things in the earth what time it first shed forth living creatures, is yet no proof that there could have been produced beasts of different kinds mixed together, and limbs of different living things formed into a single frame, because the kinds of herbage and corn and joyous trees which even now spring in plenty out of the earth yet cannot be produced with the several sorts plaited into one, but each thing goes on after its own fashion, and all preserve their distinctive differences according to a fixed law of nature.
[925] But the race of man then in the fields was much hardier, as beseemed it to be, since the hard earth had produced it; and built on a groundwork of larger and more solid bones within, knit with powerful sinews throughout the frame of flesh; not lightly to be disabled by heat or cold or strange kinds of food or any malady of body. And during the revolution of many lusters of the sun through heaven they led a life after the roving fashion of wild beasts. No one then was a sturdy guider of the bent plow or knew how to labor the fields with iron or plant in the ground young saplings or lop with pruning-hooks old boughs from the high trees. What the sun and rains had given, what the earth had produced spontaneously, was guerdon sufficient to content their hearts. Among acorn-bearing oaks they would refresh their bodies for the most part; and the arbute-berries which you now see in the winter-time ripen with a bright scarlet hue, the earth would then bear in greatest plenty and of a larger size; and many coarse kinds of food besides the teeming freshness of the world then bare, more than enough for poor wretched men.
[945] But rivers and springs invited to slake thirst, even as now a rush of water down from the great hills summons with clear plash far and wide the thirsty races of wild beasts. Then too as they ranged about they would occupy the well-known woodland haunts of the nymphs, out of which they knew that smooth-gliding streams of water with a copious gush bathed the dripping rocks, the dripping rocks, trickling down over the green moss; and in parts welled and bubbled out over the level plain.
[953]And as yet they knew not how to apply fire to their purposes or to make use of skins and clothe their body in the spoils of wild beasts, but they would dwell in woods and mountain-caves and forests and shelter in the brushwood their squalid limbs when driven to shun the buffeting of the winds and the rains.
[958] And they were unable to look to the general weal and knew not how to make a common use of any customs or laws. Whatever prize fortune threw in his way, each man would bear off, trained at his own discretion to think of himself and live for himself alone.
[962] And Venus would join the bodies of lovers in the woods; for each woman was gained over either by mutual desire or the headstrong violence and vehement lust of the man or a bribe of some acorns and arbute-berries or choice pears.
[966] And trusting to the marvelous powers of their hands and feet they would pursue the forest-haunting races of wild beasts with showers of stones and club of ponderous weight; and many they would conquer, a few they would avoid in hiding-places;
[970] and like to bristly swine just as they were they would throw their savage limbs all naked on the ground, when overtaken by night, covering themselves up with leaves and boughs. Yet never with loud wailings would they call for the daylight and the sun, wandering terror-stricken over the fields in the shadows of night, but silent and buried in sleep they would wait, till the sun with rosy torch carried light into heaven; for accustomed as they had been from childhood always to see darkness and light begotten time about, never could any wonder come over them, nor any misgiving that never-ending night would cover the earth and the light of the sun be withdrawn for evermore. But what gave them trouble was rather the races of wild beasts which would often render repose fatal to the poor wretches. And driven from their home they would fly from their rocky shelters on the approach of a foaming bear or a strong lion, and in the dead of night they would surrender in terror to their savage guests their sleeping-places strewn with leaves.
[988] Nor then much more than now would the races of mortal men leave the sweet light of ebbing life. For then this one or that other one of them would be more likely to be seized, and torn open by their teeth would furnish to the wild beasts a living food, and would fill with his moaning woods and mountains and forests as he looked on his living flesh buried in a living grave. But those whom flight had saved with body eaten into, holding ever after their quivering palms over the noisome sores would summon death with appalling cries, until cruel gripings had rid them of life, forlorn of help, unwitting what wounds wanted. But then a single day gave not over to death many thousands of men marching with banners spread, nor did the stormy waters of the sea dash on the rocks men and ships. At this time the sea would often rise up and rage without aim, without purpose, without result, and just as lightly put off its empty threats; nor could the winning wiles of the calm sea treacherously entice any one to his ruin with laughing waters, when the reckless craft of the skipper had not yet risen into the light. Then too want of food would consign to death their fainting frames, now on the contrary tis plenty sinks into ruin. They unwittingly would often pour out poison for themselves; now with nicer skill men give it to their son’s wife instead.
[1011] Next after they had got themselves huts and skins and fire, and the woman united with the man passed with him into one [domicile and the duties of wedlock were] learnt [by the two], and they saw an offspring born from them, then first mankind began to soften. For fire made their chilled bodies less able now to bear the frost beneath the canopy of heaven, and Venus impaired their strength and children with their caresses soon broke down the haughty temper of parents. Then too neighbors began to join in a league of friendship mutually desiring neither to do nor suffer harm; and asked for indulgence to children and womankind, when with cries and gestures they declared in stammering speech that meet it is for all to have mercy on the weak. And though harmony could not be established without exception, yet a very large portion observed their agreements with good faith, or else the race of man would then have been wholly cut off, nor could breeding have continued their generations to this day.
Bailey 1921
[907] Wherefore again, he who feigns that when the earth was young and the sky new-born, such animals could have been begotten, trusting only in this one empty plea of the world’s youth, may blurt out many things in like manner from his lips; he may say that then streams of gold flowed everywhere over the lands, and that trees were wont to blossom with jewels, or that a man was born with such expanse of limbs, that he could plant his footsteps right across the deep seas, and with his hands twist the whole sky about him. For because there were in the earth many seeds of things at the time when first the land brought forth animals, yet that is no proof that beasts of mingled breed could have been born, or the limbs of living creatures put together in one; because the races of herbage and the crops and fruitful trees, which even now spring forth abundantly from the earth, yet cannot be created intertwined one with another, but each of these things comes forth after its own manner, and all preserve their separate marks by a fixed law of nature.
[925] But the race of man was much hardier then in the fields, as was seemly for a race born of the hard earth: it was built up on larger and more solid bones within, fastened with strong sinews traversing the flesh; not easily to be harmed by heat or cold or strange food or any taint of the body. And during many lustres of the sun rolling through the sky they prolonged their lives after the roving manner of wild beasts. Nor was there any sturdy steerer of the bent plough, nor knew any one how to work the fields with iron, or to plant young shoots in the earth, or cut down the old branches off high trees with knives. What sun and rains had brought to birth, what earth had created unasked, such gift was enough to appease their hearts. Among oaks laden with acorns they would refresh their bodies for the most part; and the arbute-berries, which now you see ripening in wintertime with scarlet hue, the earth bore then in abundance, yea and larger. And besides these the flowering youth of the world then bare much other rough sustenance, enough and to spare for miserable mortals.
[945] But to slake their thirst streams and springs summoned them, even as now the downrush of water from the great mountains calls clear far and wide to the thirsting tribes of wild beasts. Or again they dwelt in the woodland haunts of the nymphs, which they had learnt in their wanderings, from which they knew that gliding streams of water washed the wet rocks with bounteous flood, yea washed the wet rocks, as they dripped down over the green moss, and here and there welled up and burst forth over the level plain.
[953] Nor as yet did they know how to serve their purposes with fire, nor to use skins and clothe their body in the spoils of wild beasts, but dwelt in woods and the caves on mountains and forests, and amid brushwood would hide their rough limbs, when constrained to shun the shock of winds and the rain-showers.
[958] Nor could they look to the common weal, nor had they knowledge to make mutual use of any customs or laws. Whatever booty chance had offered to each, he bore it off; for each was taught at his own will to live and thrive for himself alone.
[962] And Venus would unite lovers in the woods; for each woman was wooed either by mutual passion, or by the man’s fierce force and reckless lust, or by a price, acorns and arbute-berries or choice pears.
[966] And trusting in their strange strength of hand and foot they would hunt the woodland tribes of wild beasts with stones to hurl or clubs of huge weight; many they would vanquish, a few they would avoid in hiding;
[970] And like bristly boars these woodland men would lay their limbs naked on the ground, when overtaken by night time, wrapping themselves up around with leaves and foliage. Nor did they look for daylight and the sun with loud wailing, wandering fearful through the fields in the darkness of night, but silent and buried in sleep waited mindful, until the sun with rosy torch should bring the light into the sky. For, because they had been wont ever from childhood to behold darkness and light begotten, turn by turn, it could not come to pass that they should ever wonder, or feel mistrust lest the light of the sun should be withdrawn for ever, and never-ending night possess the earth. But much greater was another care, inasmuch as the tribes of wild beasts often made rest dangerous for wretched men. Driven from their home they would flee from their rocky roof at the coming of a foaming boar or a mighty lion, and in the dead of night in terror they would yield their couches spread with leaves to their cruel guests.
[988] Nor then much more than now would the races of men leave the sweet light of life with lamentation. For then more often would some one of them be caught and furnish living food to the wild beasts, devoured by their teeth, and would fill woods and mountains and forests with his groaning, as he looked on his living flesh being buried in a living tomb. And those whom flight had saved with mangled body, thereafter, holding trembling hands over their noisome sores, would summon Orcus with terrible cries, until savage griping pains had robbed them of life, all helpless and knowing not what wounds wanted. Yet never were many thousands of men led beneath the standards and done to death in a single day, nor did the stormy waters of ocean dash ships and men upon the rocks. Then rashly, idly, in vain would the sea often arise and rage, and lightly lay aside its empty threatenings, nor could the treacherous wiles of the windless waves lure any man to destruction with smiling waters; then the wanton art of sailing lay as yet unknown. Then, too, want of food would give over their drooping limbs to death, now on the other hand ’tis surfeit of good things brings them low. They all unwitting would often pour out poison for themselves, now with more skill they give it to others.
[1011] Then after they got themselves huts and skins and fire, and woman yoked with man retired to a single [home, and the laws of marriage] were learnt, and they saw children sprung from them, then first the race of man began to soften. For fire brought it about that their chilly limbs could not now so well bear cold under the roof of heaven, and Venus lessened their strength, and children, by their winning ways, easily broke down the haughty will of their parents. Then, too, neighbours began eagerly to form friendship one with another, not to hurt or be harmed, and they commended to mercy children and the race of women, when with cries and gestures they taught by broken words that ’tis right for all men to have pity on the weak. Yet not in all ways could unity be begotten, but a good part, the larger part, would keep their compacts loyally; or else the human race would even then have been all destroyed, nor could breeding have prolonged the generations until now.
Episode 75 of the Lucretius Today Podcast is now available. In this Episode 75 we will read approximately Latin line 821-924 of Book Five. We will talk about the initial forms of life on earth, and how we can judge what was possible, and what was not possible, in their arising to life. As always, please let us know any comments or questions in the thread below:
I saw Eikadistes dropped by and liked this thread. I need to ask him this - I really like that allegory of the oasis graphic and kept it on the front page, this time with a link that directs the reader here for explanation: Nate's "Allegory of the Oasis" Graphic
I need to go back and be sure I have those panels described correctly, but I know I am forgetting the picture that is in panel 8, and one of the figures in panel 7. Is that Aristotle and Michelangelo, or do I remember those wrongly?
I think over time we developed a lot of explanation but it's probably not reasonable to ask a new reader to go through the whole thread; I need to pull out a simple statement of the meaning of each panel and pin that in the opening post.
Thanks to AdamsAndVoid and to others who commented privately, I have now taken additional time to make many of the suggested changes and smooth out some of the rough edges that resulted from moving material around from many different locations.
Please let me know if anyone sees additional changes that should be made. Nothing in an Epicurean universe is ever finally at rest, and certainly the design of this website isn't either. Maybe not for as long a time as can the Epicurean gods, but so long as we can keep our atoms together we'll keep refining and trying to make this a better place.
[This may be repetitive and should be deleted - just parking it here temporarily} Here is the advice of Thomas Jefferson on living an active Epicurean life:
"I take the liberty of observing that you are not a true disciple of our master Epicurus in indulging the indolence to which you say you are yielding. One of his canons, you know, was that “that indulgence which prevents a greater pleasure, or produces a greater pain, is to be avoided.” Your love of repose will lead, in its progress, to a suspension of healthy exercise, a relaxation of mind, an indifference to everything around you, and finally to a debility of body, and hebetude of mind, the farthest of all things from the happiness which the well-regulated indulgences of Epicurus ensure; fortitude, you know is one of his four cardinal virtues. That teaches us to meet and surmount difficulties; not to fly from them, like cowards; and to fly, too, in vain, for they will meet and arrest us at every turn of our road. Weigh this matter well; brace yourself up." - Thomas Jefferson to William Short, October 31, 1819.
A Feature of Our Forum - Follow The Advice Of Epicurus: Outline Your Understanding Of Philosophy
Epicurus' Letter to Herodotus: "Those who have made some advance in the survey of the entire system ought to fix in their minds under the principal headings an elementary outline of the whole treatment of the subject. For a comprehensive view is often required, the details but seldom. ... For it is impossible to gather up the results of continuous diligent study of the entirety of things unless we can embrace in short formulas and hold in mind all that might have been accurately expressed even to the minutest detail."
It's not until you scroll way down the page that you see a section devoted to "New User Orientation" -- make that a stickied Thread and link it from the top of the home page in the Welcome section.
Thank you for the time to write that detailed post. Everything you wrote was helpful and I will especially tend to this suggestion!
Hello and welcome to the forum @AaronAgassi
This 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 / Rules of the Forum our Not Neo-Epicurean, But Epicurean and our Posting Policy statements and associated posts.
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 some 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 other viewpoints, 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 by our community of happy living through the principles of Epicurean philosophy.
One way you can be most assured of your time here being productive is to tell us a little about yourself and personal 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 have which would help us make sure that your questions and thoughts are addressed.
In that regard 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.
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.
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.
Welcome to the forum!
Here's the Conclusion paragraph, which I don't think does justice to the depth of the work. it's written as if the Stoics were an and advance in a proper direction from the Epicurean viewpoint. As you would expect, I think that the reverse is true - the Stoics went on a rabbit hunt that totally threw away the trail that Epicurus had pointed out. I would say that the reason that Epicurus did not "propose a positive theory of universals as concepts" is that Epicurus would have held this to be error. the mind alone does not make a rose a rose.
I think the details of the article are excellent in pointing to what Epicurus actually proposed it is that makes a rose a rose. To repeat a comment from earlier in the thread, Epicurus' way of looking at things may be foreign to us but that doesn't make it wrong. And the current world may be so caught up in Platonism and rationalism that "concepts" and 'conceptualism" are the be-all end-all of all analysis, but that doesn't make it correct, and that doesn't make Epicurus wrong. Had Epicurus in fact "proposed a positive theory of universals as concepts" - if in fact he had been a "nominalist" in that sense - he would have been violating his own premises, and I think Epicurus would reject that direction out of hand. A rose is a rose whether we assign it that name or not. The tree that falls in the forest when no one is around does make a sound. And I am also firmly convinced that we do not determine whether the cat is dead or alive by looking at it. All of these seem to me to be related issues that deserve much clarification.
And they deserve clarification and discussion early in the process of studying Epicurus! This is something that needs to be hammered out in preparation for elementary school lessons - otherwise we spend a lifetime never really grasping where Epicurus was going.
.4. Conclusion
The comparison between the Stoic and the Epicurean criticism of Platonic ontology shows the difference between elimination and con-version of the Ideas into an ontological system which, on both accounts, denies the existence of supra-sensible items. The different forms their reactions take on, marks the difference between the Stoic view about bodies as existing and incorporeals as subsisting, and the Epicurean view that body and void alone exist. However, both accounts meet in rejecting the Ideas from reality, considering generic items to be de-pendent, to varying degrees, on the workings of the mind. With the theory of preconceptions, the Epicureans move towards a basic form of conceptualisation of reality, but it is the Stoics, with their concern with genera and species who propose a positive theory of universals as concepts.
OMG THIS is a memorable paragraph, and what a line! "A rose is a rose, that is, a whole, not a juxtaposition of properties."
The formulae in Her. 69 all point towards considerations about body which go beyond the actual perceiving of distinct properties, the ἐπαισθήματα mentioned by Diogenes Laertius (D.L. X, 32)58: the distinct perceptions which cannot refute one another, and attest the truth, or trustworthiness of all perceptions. Rather, on the basis of the different ἐπαισθήματα (e.g. red colour perceived through sight, sweet perfume perceived through smell, velvety texture perceived through touch etc.), a perceiver has what Epicurus calls an ἔννοια, a conception, say, of a rose (Her. 69). And indeed, a rose is a rose, i.e. a whole, not a juxtaposition of properties. Thus Epicurus insists, with the repeated use of ὅλον and ἀθρόον especially in the discussion of the status of properties, that a body is really a whole or a whole is really a body, repeating twice in less than ten lines, that what is referred to as the ὅλον is «by us, called body» (Her. 70, 5 and 71, 4-5). Thus it is our mind, our way of thinking, which enables us to grasp the body as the whole it really is; for an ἔννοια, elsewhere referred to as an «ἐπίνοια» (Her. 45, also D.L. X, 32), corresponds to the further stage after sense-perception, in which reasoning and memory have a prominent role in forming a mental presentation of reality. The passage from percep-tions, («irrational and without memory») to the conceptions a person has, is described in the following manner: as always proceeding from sense-data with the addition of the mind’s arrangement of the data, through direct experience (περίπτωσις), or by analogy (ἀναλογία), by resemblance (ὁμοιότης), or by composition (σύνθεσις) and eventually also with some form of reasoning (τι καὶ τοῦ λογισμοῦ, in D.L. X, 32).
This is very close to what I was looking for and why I think Epicurus would object to a too-superficial labeling of being a "nominalist." What an on-point article!
This rapid overview is relevant to our present purposes in bringing forward one main point: namely that, in acknowledging certain ‘mental capacities’ (in the main, a form of reasoning and memory) in addition to sense-perception, the objects of knowledge do not shift to an intelligible realm52, but rather, on the contrary, are all the more tied down to what is observed53. For it is possible, according to Epicurus, to recognize in the observable reality, with the help of memory and λογισμός, certain regularities which are the basis for knowledge – without these being immanent or separate universals. Thus, the distinction made by Aristotle in the first chapter of the Metaphysics, namely between experience on the one hand which yields knowledge of certain particulars (Met., A 1, 981a9), and art, or science, which is of universals and of which particular individuals are instances (Met., A 1, 981a10-12 and a16) – and which a person can have also without experience, given that an art can be taught (Met., A 1, 981b9) – is resolved, on the Epicurean account, into one unique path towards knowledge. For experience is the art or science which is able to yield knowledge of regular and generic features of reality, exhibited by the individual beings which compose it, without this knowledge being limited to a specific knowledge of this or that individual. It is possible to have knowledge on the basis of experience, without there being universals and thus without knowledge being of universals.
