Posts by Cassius

Argh I am wasting your time on this discussion I am afraid. I think my issue is that I don't see which figure is hugging a female - I will go back and look closer.

michelepinto -

In a more recent thread Joshua and I took a sidetrack and Joshua expressed his opinion that he felt differently than Elli on this question, and that he thought the figure identified as "2" in Elli's graphic above, as is often stated (perhaps on the wikipedia page too).

I don't think you were communicating with us regularly when this debate started, and in fact I see the original post is so old that some of the graphics have now disappeared. I am not sure I can reconstruct those but I will see what I can do.

But my reason for posting this is: I think this is a very interesting debate, and I wonder if you have an opinion not only on the main question but on:

(1) Do you think knowledge of Epicurus' true appearance was ever COMPLETELY lost to the world?

(2) Do you know anything about the history of what he was thought to have looked like, and when that became solidified?

I think I have read that there was a discovery at Herculaneum of a bust that had his name etched on it, so at that point any debate would have ceased. However it is also my impression that there are MANY surviving busts of Epicurus, along with rings, and I find it very difficult to believe personally that NO ONE in the world retained an accurate tradition.

And of course that gets us back to the question - Even if we presume that some people some places knew that Epicurus was not bald and pudgy, what do we know (if anything) about Raphael's connection to that knowledge, or his own description of who these characters are supposed to represent.

If you have any insight, or know anyone we could ask, that would be greatly appreciated!

Well just to be up front and on the record I am going to have to side with Elli on this one, but it's a multi-layered issue and that's why I asked about the history - it's certainly possible that there is some record that would substantiate the possibility that Raphael intended what you mean.

Back when Elli posted the article there was some additional discussion with one of the other Greek activists on the issue of "Was knowledge of the true face of Epicurus ever really TOTALLY lost, or are we just talking some people in some areas thought it was lost while other areas / other people had access to one or more of the relatively large numbers of busts of Epicurus that apparently survived the ancient world. I tend to think that given the hurdles of communication back in those years it's entirely possible that some people were well aware of what Epicurus looked like and others were not, but I have nothing to back that up other than I don't think it is likely logical that digging up a single bust in Herculaneum was the first time that any living human had an inkling of Epicurus' true face in 500 or 1000 or 1500 years.

Then there are the issues of the people involved in the mural in Italy and who knew what.

I think the details of all that historical debate are as interesting, perhaps more so, than the debate on where we think Epicurus "should" have been placed.

Like I said I side with Elli's interpretation, but I think there's a lot more to be learned from discussing the issue.

Come to think of it I believe this debate all took place before we came into contact with Michelle Pinto. I will see If I can post something somewhere to see if he has an opinion on this.

Note to self: I need to go back to the article and check this - I do not recall Elli suggesting that the figure of Epicurus was hugging the female figure:

Quote from JJElbert

The main question with that article is whether the man "hugging" Leontion is meant by the illustrator to signify Epicurus. Groping the 'courtesan', and all that.

OK I see! These are "interpretational" arguments that I can certainly understand. I was thinking that you were referring to some specific clues that you saw referenced in the British museum article beyond just the mural itself. That's what I wanted to be sure to file away in my mind - whether you saw some new data that I'd missed. Thanks for elaborating!

Quote from JJElbert

Thank you for following up on that, Don; I was up far too late last night.

I also found that British Museum article, and I found the illustrations very interesting. Elli wrote an article a few years back on what she believes was the misidentification of Epicurus in Raphael's School of Athens. I think at some point I'll write an article or make a video arguing the other side in that debate, looking at Diogenes Laertius, the Nuremburg Chronicle, and De Claris Mulieribus for clues.

1 - Yes I think Jstor has some level of free plan most of the time -- 5 articles at a time, or something like that (?)

2 - So just to be clear on your earlier comment, the issue you noticed is that there may be some evidence that the wreathed figure was intended to be Epicurus? I am thinking i am much more interested in hearing your poetry than seeing you get diverted on that, but if you could summarize in a sentence of two what you think may be there I would love to file that away in my mind too

Quote from JJElbert

Thank you for following up on that, Don; I was up far too late last night.

I also found that British Museum article, and I found the illustrations very interesting. Elli wrote an article a few years back on what she believes was the misidentification of Epicurus in Raphael's School of Athens. I think at some point I'll write an article or make a video arguing the other side in that debate, looking at Diogenes Laertius, the Nuremburg Chronicle, and De Claris Mulieribus for clues.

you mean you think there are clues that the pudgy guy with the head wreath is Epicurus? Or was intended to be him? Don't bite off too many projects at one time but that is one I hope you'll be able to follow up on because if there are relevant source materials it would be interesting.

Great information thank you Don!

It may be anonymous but I presume there must have been some context in which it was found, you think?

Thank you for that report and picture, Titus. So you also have one from them of Epicurus and are pleased with it?

Please do Philos. My wife speaks German and I have been meaning to get her help on this but if you go first I will let you do the first test. The price and size makes it sound like a very good value.

I currently have a bust of Epicurus that seems to be made of similar material that I got off eBay years ago, and now I am wondering if mine originally came from there.

Philos thank you for reminding me of this it totally slipped my mind. I have not tried. Have you (or anyone who sees this thread) ordered from these links?

Hello and welcome to the forum Philos Armonikos !

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.

1. The Biography of Epicurus By Diogenes Laertius (Chapter 10). This includes all Epicurus' letters and the Authorized Doctrines. Supplement with the Vatican list of Sayings.
2. "Epicurus And His Philosophy" - Norman DeWitt
3. "On The Nature of Things"- Lucretius
4. Cicero's "On Ends" - Torquatus Section
5. Cicero's "On The Nature of the Gods" - Velleius Section
6. The Inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda - Martin Ferguson Smith translation
7. A Few Days In Athens" - Frances Wright
8. Lucian Core Texts on Epicurus: (1) Alexander the Oracle-Monger, (2) Hermotimus
9. Plato's Philebus
10. Philodemus "On Methods of Inference" (De Lacy version, including his appendix on relationship of Epicurean canon to Aristotle and other Greeks)
11. "The Greeks on Pleasure" -Gosling & Taylor Sections on Epicurus, especially on katastematic and kinetic pleasure.

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!

I had heard of it in the past, and probably skimmed some of it, but when I saw how anti-Epicurean it was I just moved on That's why it's great to have division of labor so people can follow their own interests and still contribute to the common storehouse of knowledge. Definitely it is good though to have time to catalog criticism and review the actual or probable Epicurean responses. Not all of us have time for the Socratic method and we shouldn't have to waste years of our lives fending for ourselves through the swamp, so the "Epicurean criticism of Socrates" seems very valid to me. But if we are so situated where we DO have the time and the inclination, it definitely helps deepen understanding to have a command of the arguments from both perspectives -- and then take sides

Thanks Joshua!

Joshua is there any way you can post the text that you expect to cover, as well as a link to the full poem. I am embarrassed to say I have not re-read the full poem and I need to do that. I can't recall what the poem says about dreams and there are lots of implications of that issue. I need to get up to speed as soon as I can with potential issues in response to be sure to cover. Don and Godfrey and others - are you familiar with the poem?

This is another great video by Eoghan and I highly recommend it. We haven't had a good in-depth discussion in a while about the differences between the Stoics and Epicureans, and this video highlights the essential points. There are a couple of minor points that I might suggest be said differently, but they are minor and discussion of those will be good for bringing out the subtleties. I hope everyone gets a chance to view this and comment. Thanks again Eoghan for your work!

Yes I think it definitely lends itself to being listened to rather than just read, but I did note that you referred to the picture of Jerome that someone listening would not be able to see. There are lots of directions you can go with this so for now I'll just wait to see your preferences. Plus, as I expect to do later with the Lucretius today podcast, you can always take the finished podcasts and repackage them in different formats for later use. I personally have not found a good *free* way to host the mp3 files and get them listed in the major directories, and that's why I went with Spreaker.com as the cheapest option I could find. But the technology behind all this is very interesting in itself (at least to me) so I am glad that you are posting info about how you are going about creating and posting.

I'm particularly interested in how you are using OBS. I see that lots of people use that for streaming and adding in multiple sources into a single final product, but for the moment I haven't seen the need to do that myself -I just edit the audio in audacity, and if I were using video I would just use my video editor. But maybe there are advantages to using OBS that I need to explore.

Hello and welcome to the forum @oinoanda !

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.

1. The Biography of Epicurus By Diogenes Laertius (Chapter 10). This includes all Epicurus' letters and the Authorized Doctrines. Supplement with the Vatican list of Sayings.
2. "Epicurus And His Philosophy" - Norman DeWitt
3. "On The Nature of Things"- Lucretius
4. Cicero's "On Ends" - Torquatus Section
5. Cicero's "On The Nature of the Gods" - Velleius Section
6. The Inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda - Martin Ferguson Smith translation
7. A Few Days In Athens" - Frances Wright
8. Lucian Core Texts on Epicurus: (1) Alexander the Oracle-Monger, (2) Hermotimus
9. Plato's Philebus
10. Philodemus "On Methods of Inference" (De Lacy version, including his appendix on relationship of Epicurean canon to Aristotle and other Greeks)
11. "The Greeks on Pleasure" -Gosling & Taylor Sections on Epicurus, especially on katastematic and kinetic pleasure.

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!

This post has previous versions that are saved.

Listening now! Thanks! - Finished and I think it is excellent! i will publicize as best I can. Great work and looking for more Joshua!