Posts by Cassius

Also I should post this link to Haris' website: https://epicurusphilosophy.com/

Haris has put a tremendous amount of effort into his site and the book, and I really hope we can encourage him to do more with both. He has a very good background that lends credibility to his work, he is a Greek who writes in English, and he is friendly to the "DeWitt perspective." I think he has an account here but he has not posted much, which is fine because he's obviously involved in producing new comment. If we can encourage him by giving him good feedback I think that would be a great addition to "the cause."

That's great Don. I posted that link because Martin tells me he has read it and is ready to post his comments. I think it is also possible that Haris is working on a second edition, so if you get to read it and comment then I am sure that would be helpful to Haris, as I will be sure he knows about the comments. But don't let it sidetrack you too long from DeWitt

Please use this thread to discuss Hars Dimitriadis' "Epicurus And The Pleasant Life"

Having had the opportunity to speak with Elli several times I have definitely heard the ePICurus pronunciation. I am so used to the Anglicized version that I can't bring myself to use it, but it sounds like that is the original pronunciation.

I will tag Elli here to help us but I happen to know that she is going through some very difficult family health issues right now so it may be a while before we hear from her.

Very very interesting. He was clearly very familiar with Epicurus and had thought about him carefully. I had no idea about all this but I will definitely add Maugham to my list of people to follow more closely.

Oh My Gosh That is GREAT! Thank you! Never had a clue that that existed! Please post more as you find it! Thanks!

Also I should ask - What comes after that? Does Philip get a reply?

Also, I know nothing whatsoever about Maugham or that book other than that it is famous. However I'll likely file that quote away in a special place. Please be sure to post if there are other aspects of that book that are relevant to our use of it.

Episode 19 of the Lucretius Today Podcast is now available.

Welcome to Episode Twenty 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. Be aware that none of us are professional philosophers, and everyone here is a self-taught Epicurean. 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.

Before we start with today's episode let me remind you of our three ground rules.

First: Our aim is to go back to the original text to bring you an accurate presentation of classical Epicurean philosophy as the ancient Epicureans understood it, not simply repeat for you what passes for conventional wisdom about Epicurus today.

Second: We won't be talking about Epicurus from the point of view of modern political perspectives. Epicurus must be understood on his own, and not in terms of competitive schools which may seem similar to Epicurus, but are fundamentally different and incompatible, such as Stoicism, Humanism, Buddhism, Taoism, Atheism, and Marxism.

Third: We will be approaching Lucretius exactly as he intended, with the goal of understanding the fundamental nature of the universe as the essential base of Epicurean philosophy. From this perspective you will see that Epicurus taught neither the pursuit of luxury nor the pursuit of simple living, as ends in themselves, but the pursuit of pleasure, using feeling as the guide to life, and not supernatural gods, idealism, or virtue ethics. As important as anything else, Epicurus taught that there is no life after death, and that any happiness we will ever have must come in THIS life, which is why it is so important not to waste time in confusion.

Remember that our podcast home page is LucretiusToday.com, where you can download a free copy of the versions of the poem we are reading, and our home for discussion of Lucretius and all other aspects of Epicurean philosophy is Epicureanfriends.com

Now for today in this Episode 20, we will discuss how the universe is infinite in size.

Now let's join our discussion with Elayne and Charles reading today's text from Book One.

-------

Note: In previous episodes we have discussed:

• (1) Venus / Pleasure As Guide of Life: That Pleasure, using the allegory of Venus, is the driving force of all life; That the way to rid ourselves of pain is to replace pain with pleasure, using the allegory of Venus entertaining Mars, the god of war;

• (2) The Achievement of Epicurus: That Epicurus was the great philosophic leader who stood up to supernatural religion, opened the gates to a proper understanding of nature, and thereby showed us how we too can emulate the life of gods;
• (3-4) So Great Is The Power of Religion To Inspire Evil Deeds! That it is not Epicurean philosophy, but supernatural religion, which is truly unholy and prompts men to commit evil deeds;
• (5) On Resisting The Threats of Priests And Poets: That false priests and philosophers will try to scare you away from Epicurean philosophy with threats of punishment after death, which is why you must understand that those threats cannot be true; That the key to freeing yourself from false religion and false philosophy is found in the study of nature;
• (6-7) Step One: Nothing Comes From Nothing. The first major observation which underlies all the rest of Epicurean philosophy is that we observe that nothing is ever generated from nothing.
• (8) Step Two: Nothing Goes To Nothing. The second major observation is that nothing is ever destroyed completely to nothing.
• (9) The Evidence That Atoms Exist, Even Though They Are Unseen. The next observation is that we know elemental particles exist, even though we cannot see them just like we know that wind and other things exist by observing their effects.
• (10-11) The Void And Its Nature. We also know that the void exists, because things must have space in which to move, as we see they do move.
• (12) Everything We Experience Is Composed Of A Combination of Matter And Void. Everything around us that we experience is a natural combination of atoms and void.
• (13) The Things We Experience Are Properties and Qualities Of Atoms And Void And Cease To Exist When Their Atoms Disperse. All things we experience around us are either (1) the properties (essential conjuncts; essential and unchanging) or qualities (events; inessential and changing depending on context) of bodies. All these arise from the nature, movement, and combinations of the atoms, and cease to exist when the atoms which compose the bodies disperse. Therefore it is incorrect to think that ideas or stories such as that of the Trojan war have any permanent existence.
• (14-15) Atoms Are Solid And Indestructible, And Therefore Eternal. The argument that atoms are solid and indestructible and therefore eternal.
• (16) The Atoms Are Never Destroyed, they Provide Continuity To All Nature, and there is a strict limit on Divisibility of All Things.
• (17) All things are not made of a single element, such as fire, as some philosophers assert - such as Heraclitus, who asserted all things are made of fire.
• (18) All things are not simply formed from the four classical elements (earth, air, fire, and water) - here there reference is to Empedocles who was a great man, but greatly fallen.
• (19) All things are not made of tiny pieces of the same thing, or of tiny pieces of all things, as Anaxagoras suggested.

-------------------

Here is the text that will be covered in Episode Twenty. The Latin version of Book One has this as beginning at approximately line 829 of the Daniel Brown Edition and of the Munro Latin Edition here.

There are a total of about 1115 lines in book one, so we approximately halfway through.

Daniel Brown 1743 Edition:

[950] But since I taught the principles of matter are solid, are eternal, evermoving, nor are destroyed; now, come, let us inquire whether they have an end, or are by nature infinite: and since we have found a void or place, or space in which all things are moved, let us now see whether the universe, made up of void and body, be circumscribed, or does to a profound immensity extend.

[957] This All, therefore, does not admit of bounds; for if it did, then it must have something extreme: Now, no extreme can be, unless it lies beyond those things whose bounds, or whose extreme it is, from whence they may be seen, and beyond which our faculty of sight can reach no further. Now since we must own, that nothing can be beyond the All, this All has therefore no extreme, it has no ends, no bounds; nor does it signify what spot of this great All you stand upon; for on what part soever you are fixed, you have a wide and infinite space around you every way.

[966] But if this wide extent of space be finite and circumscribed, let a man stand upon the utmost verge, and from thence throw a dart, whether you choose this dart, with mighty force thus cast, should reach the mark designed, and fly swift on, or whether you think that something should hinder or oppose its flight, and one of these you must confess; now either way you are caught, and can't escape: You are forced to own this All lies wide extended without bounds. For whether there be something that does hinder and stop its flight, so that it cannot reach the mark designed, and there rest still and fixed; or whether it flies forward, there this end you cannot fix: for if it stops, then something must lie beyond the utmost verge; and if it flies, there is a space beyond the extremist brink. And thus I follow close, and wheresoever you place the extremes bounds, I still demand what comes of your dart? So that no bounds can anywhere be fixed, but space immense will always give a passage to its flight.

[983] Besides, were this All's extended space shut up by certain bounds in every side, and was by nature finite, then this mass of matter, pressed by its solid weight, had long ere now sunk to the lowest place, and therefore nothing under the vault of heaven could have a being, nor could there be heavens at all, or the sun's light. For then the seeds of things that had been sinking from all eternity would in confusion lie on heaps; by now the principles of bodies having no rest at all, are ever moving, because there's no such thing as lowest place, to which they may descend, no fixed abode where they should rest; but things are ever carried by motion never-ending, through every part of this vast All, from whence the active seeds of things arise, and are eternally supplied.

[997] Further, we see one thing bounds another; the air bounds in the hills, the hills the air, the earth shuts up the sea, and then again the sea surrounds the earth; but this great All nothing exterior to itself can bind. For the nature of this place, this empty space, is such, that rivers of the swiftest stream, were they to run for ages infinite, with a perpetual current, could not run through it, or ever by their running prove that they had less of their course to run; so vastly wide this mighty space of things extended lies on all sides, every way, without all bounds.

[1006] Besides, the laws of nature do provide, that this universe of things will not admit of limits to itself, because body is bound to void, and void bound to body; and by this mutual termination it is, that this great All becomes immense; for were not each a bound until the other, were body not a limit set to void, the void would be infinite, and all finite bodies would be dissolved, and so nor sea, nor earth, nor the bright heavens, nor mortal race of men, nor sacred bodies of gods could be one moment of an hour; for the seeds of bodies being disunited in themselves, would fly, and quite dissolved, be carried through the void; or rather, being never joined, had formed no being; for once scattered through this space, they could not be compelled to join again.

[1020] For certainly the principles of things could never range themselves in form or order, by counsel, or by wisdom of the mind, nor any compact make how each should move; but being changed in various forms, and struck with many blows, they are driven through this void for many ages, and having tried all kinds of motion, and of union, they at length by chance are so disposed to frame those bodies of which this Universe of things consists. And these seeds once thrown into convenient motions, and keeping in the same for many ages, is the true cause that rivers, with a large supply of waters from their streams, fill up the greedy sea, and the earth, supported by the sun's heat, renews the fruits, and the race of living creatures flourish, and the rolling stars of heaven are kept alive; all which could never be, if from this infinite mass a supply of seeds flowed not, from whence decaying things might rise, and live, and be from age to age repaired.

Munro:

[950] But since I have taught that most solid bodies of matter fly about for ever unvanquished through all time, mark now, let us unfold whether there is or is not any limit to their sum; likewise let us clearly see whether that which has been found to be void, or room and space, in which things severally go on, is all of it altogether finite or stretches without limits and to an unfathomable depth.

[957] Well then, the existing universe is bounded in none of its dimensions; for then it must have had an outside. Again it is seen that there can be an outside of nothing, unless there be something beyond to bound it, so that that is seen, farther than which the nature of this our sense does not follow the thing. Now since we must admit that there is nothing outside the sum, it has no outside, and therefore is without end and limit.And it matters not in which of its regions you take your stand; so invariably, whatever position any one has taken up, he leaves the universe just as infinite as before in all directions.

[966] Again if for the moment all existing space be held to be bounded, supposing a man runs forward to its outside borders, and stands on the utmost verge and then throws a winged javelin, do you choose that when hurled with vigorous force it shall advance to the point to which it has been sent and fly to a distance, or do you decide that something can get in its way and stop it? For you must admit and adopt one of the two suppositions; either of which shuts you out from all escape and compels you to grant that the universe stretches without end. For whether there is something to get in its way and prevent its coming whither it was sent and placing itself in the point intended, or whether it is carried forward, in either case it has not started from the end. In this way I will go on and, wherever you have placed the outside borders, I will ask what then becomes of the javelin. The result will be that an end can nowhere be fixed, and that the room given for flight will still prolong the power of flight.

[983] Lastly one thing is seen by the eyes to end another thing; air bounds off hills, and mountains air, earth limits sea and sea again all lands; the universe however there is nothing outside to end. Again if all the space of the whole sum were enclosed within fixed borders and were bounded, in that case the store of matter by its solid weights would have streamed together from all sides to the lowest point nor could anything have gone on under the canopy of heaven, no nor would there have been a heaven nor sunlight at all, inasmuch as all matter, settling down through infinite time past, would lie together in a heap.

But as it is, sure enough no rest is given to the bodies of the first-beginnings, because there is no lowest point at all, to which they might stream together as it were, and where they might take up their positions.

All things are ever going on in ceaseless motion on all sides and bodies of matter stirred to action are supplied from beneath out of infinite space.

Therefore the nature of room and the space of the unfathomable void are such as bright thunderbolts cannot race through in their course though gliding on through endless tract of time, no nor lessen one jot the journey that remains to go by all their travel: so huge a room is spread out on all sides for things without any bounds in all directions round.

[1006] Again nature keeps the sum of things from setting any limit to itself, since she compels body to be ended by void and void in turn by body, so that either she thus renders the universe infinite by this alternation of the two, or else the one of the two, incase the other does not bound it, with its single nature stretches nevertheless immeasurably.

[But void I have already proved to be infinite; therefor matter must be infinite: for if void were infinite, and matter finite] neither sea nor earth nor the glittering quarters of heaven nor mortal kind nor the holy bodies of the gods could hold their ground one brief passing hour; since forced asunder from its union the store of matter would be dissolved and borne along the mighty void, or rather I should say would never have combined to produce any thing, since scattered abroad it could never have been brought together.

[1020] For verily not by design did the first beginnings of things station themselves each in its right place guided by keen intelligence, nor did they bargain sooth to say what motions each should assume, but because many in number and shifting about in many ways throughout the universe they are driven and tormented by blows during infinite time past, after trying motions and unions of every kind at length they fall into arrangements such as those out of which this our sum of things has been formed, and by which too, it is preserved through many great years when once it has been thrown into the appropriate motions, and causes the streams to replenish the greedy sea with copious river waters and the earth, fostered by the heat of the sun, to renew its produce, and the race of living things to come up and flourish, and the gliding fires of ether to live: all which these several things could in nowise bring to pass, unless a store of matter could rise up from infinite space, out of which store they are wont to make up in due season whatever has been lost.

Bailey:

[950] But since I have taught that the most solid bodies of matter fly about for ever unvanquished through the ages, come now, let us unfold, whether there be a certain limit to their full sum or not; and likewise the void that we have discovered, or room or space, in which all things are carried on, let us see clearly whether it is all altogether bounded or spreads out limitless and immeasurably deep.

[957] The whole universe then is bounded in no direction of its ways; for then it would be bound to have an extreme point. Now it is seen that nothing can have an extreme point, unless there be something beyond to bound it, so that there is seen to be a spot further than which the nature of our sense cannot follow it. As it is, since we must admit that there is nothing outside the whole sum, it has not an extreme point, it lacks therefore bound and limit. Nor does it matter in which quarter of it you take your stand; so true is it that, whatever place every man takes up, he leaves the whole boundless just as much on every side.

[966] Moreover, suppose now that all space were created finite, if one were to run on to the end, to its furthest coasts, and throw a flying dart, would you have it that that dart, hurled with might and main, goes on whither it is sped and flies afar, or do you think that something can check and bar its way? For one or the other you must needs admit and choose. Yet both shut off your escape and constrain you to grant that the universe spreads out free from limit. For whether there is something to check it and bring it about that it arrives not whither it was sped, nor plants itself in the goal, or whether it fares forward, it set not forth from the end. In this way I will press on, and wherever you shall set the furthest coasts, I shall ask what then becomes of the dart. It will come to pass that nowhere can a bound be set and room for flight ever prolongs the chance of flight. Lastly, before our eyes one thing is seen to bound another; air is as a wall between the hills, and mountains between tracts of air, land bounds the sea, and again sea bounds all lands; yet the universe in truth there is nothing to limit outside.

[983] Moreover, if all the space in the whole universe were shut in on all sides, and were created with borders determined, and had been bounded, then the store of matter would have flowed together with solid weight from all sides to the bottom, nor could anything be carried on beneath the canopy of the sky, nor would there be sky at all, nor the light of the sun, since in truth all matter would lie idle piled together by sinking down from limitless time. But as it is, no rest, we may be sure, has been granted to the bodies of the first-beginnings, because there is no bottom at all, whither they may, as it were, flow together, and make their resting-place. All things are for ever carried on in ceaseless movement from all sides, and bodies of matter, are even stirred up and supplied from beneath out of limitless space.

[997] The nature of room then and the space of the deep is such that neither could the bright thunderbolts course through it in their career, gliding on through the everlasting tract of time, nor bring it about that there remain a whit less to traverse as they travel; so far on every side spreads out huge room for things, free from limit in all directions everywhere.

[1006] Nay more, nature ordains that the sum of things may not have power to set a limit to itself, since she constrains body to be bounded by void, and all that is void to be bounded by body, so that thus she makes the universe infinite by their interchange, or else at least one of the two, if the other of them bound it not, yet spreads out immeasurable with nature unmixed. [But space I have taught above spreads out without limit. If then the sum of matter were bounded,] neither sea nor earth nor the gleaming quarters of heaven nor the race of mortal men, nor the hallowed bodies of the gods could exist for the short space of an hour. For driven apart from its unions the store of matter would be carried all dissolved through the great void, or rather in truth it could never have grown together and given birth to anything, since scattered abroad it could not have been brought to meet.

[1020] For in very truth, not by design did the first-beginnings of things place themselves each in their order with foreseeing mind, nor indeed did they make compact what movements each should start, but because many of them shifting in many ways throughout the world are harried and buffeted by blows from limitless time, by trying movements and unions of every kind, at last they fall into such dispositions as those, whereby our world of things is created and holds together. And it too, preserved from harm through many a mighty cycle of years, when once it has been cast into the movements suited to its being, brings it about that the rivers replenish the greedy sea with the bounteous waters of their streams, and the earth, fostered by the sun’s heat, renews its increase, and the race of living things flourishes, sent up from her womb, and the gliding fires of heaven are alive; all this they would in no wise do, unless store of matter might rise up from limitless space, out of which they are used to renew all their losses in due season.

This is just a placeholder to note that Gassendi's Epicurus as it appeared in English in Thomas Stanley's encyclopedia is available on Archive.org as uploaded by me here: https://archive.org/details/Stanle…ssendi/mode/2up

This was discussed on the NewEpicurean blog here: https://newepicurean.com/new-page-dedic…ne-of-epicurus/ with the transcription prepared by me and our friend Ilkka here: https://newepicurean.com/epicurus/gassendis-epicurus/

Hello Cyril. I presume given choice of user name that I recognize you from the past.

I hope you are doing well, but we do have the forum rules in place for a reason. Will move you to level two - watching but not participating.

If something changes in your perspective in the future, feel free to send me a private message here and we can reevaluate.

Note for forum regulars:

I think all of us who are the type of person for whom this forum is targeted know the basic issues, and we are either open-minded or more or less firmly in the camp of holding that pleasure including both tranquility plus the "active" pleasures, as DeWitt argues, and not just simply the amorphously Buddhist-like "absence of pain."

Another way of looking at this is that in Epicurus' terms, "pleasure" includes at least what it is generally thought by normal people to include, plus more. The opposite and regrettably majority position is that "pleasure" means less than, or foreign to, what normal people think it includes. That's the direction taken by those who consider Epicurus to be kin to the Stoics, and others schools of that persuasion, and that's why they find offensive the interpretations of DeWitt, and Nikolsky, and Gosling & Taylor, and others I could list.

But rather than delete the account, this can serve to remind regular readers of the reason for the forum rules. There are many opportunities for people like Cyryl to discuss their views elsewhere on the internet. On the other hand, there is only one group (that I know of) dedicated to what we are trying to do here in building a positive community of people who think Epicurus meant everything he said about pleasure.

So that's why it has seemed best to keep a tight leash on this aspect of the argument. It is too easy for casual users to think that anti-Dewitt interpretation is the only one available, and get demoralized before they understand the big picture and the issues at stake.

-------------

Update: After a further private exchange, Cyryl is no longer with us.

Hello and welcome to the forum cyryl !

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!

https://dbcs.rutgers.edu/all-scholars/8654-dewitt-norman-wentworth     (thanks to Don for this link!)

DEWITT, Norman Wentworth

Details

Date of Birth: September 18, 1876

Born City :Tweedside

Born State/Country: ON

Parents: Hiram & Margaret Conland D.

Date of Death: September 20, 1958

Death City: Lincoln

Death State/Country: IL

Married: Katherine Ida Johnston, 26 Sept. 1906.

EDUCATION: B.A. Victoria College, U. Toronto, 1899; Ph.D. U. Chicago, 1906; additional study at Jena & ASCSR.

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: Prof, class. Lincoln Coll. (Lincoln, IL), 1904-5; instr. class. Washington U. (St. Louis), 1905-7; prof, class. Miami (Oxford, OH), 1907-8; prof. Lat. Victoria Coll., U. Toronto, 1908-45; dean arts Victoria Coll., U. Toronto, 1924-8; actng. prof. Cornell, 1928-9; corr. fell. Royal Acad. Mantua; fell. Royal Soc. Can., 1925; pres. CAMWS, 1938-9; pres. APA, 1946-7.

DISSERTATION: “The Dido Episode in the Aeneid of Virgil” (Chicago, 1907); printed (Toronto, 1907).

PUBLICATIONS: “The Campaign of Epigram against M. Antonius in the Catalepton,” AJP 33 (1912) 317-23; “The Arrow of Acestes,” AJP 41 (1920) 369-78; “Virgil's Copyright,” CP 16 (1921) 338-44; “Virgil at Naples,” CP 17 (1922) 104-18; Virgil's Biographia Litteraria (Toronto, London & New York, 1923); “Aeneid IV, More Feriae,” AJP 45 (1924) 176-8; “Litigation in the Forum in Cicero's Time,” CP 21 (1926) 218-24; Ancient History for High Schools (Toronto, 1927; rev. ed., 1933); A Brief World History (Toronto, 1934); “Parresiastic Poems of Horace,” CP 30 (1935) 312-8; “The Epicurean Doctrine of Gratitude,” AJP 58 (1937) 320-8; “Epicurean Kinetics,” CP 36 (1941) 365-70; Demosthenes. Funeral Speech, Erotic Essay, Exordia and Letters, trans, with Norman Johnston DeWitt, LCL (Cambridge & London, 1949); Epicurus and His Philosophy (Minneapolis, 1954); St. Paul and Epicurus (Minneapolis & Toronto, 1954); “Vesta Unveiled,” Studies Ullman (1960) 48-54.

NOTES: DeWitt was for many years a mainstay of classical education in Canada. His reputation as a Vergilian was founded on his dissertation and secured by his later book; the treatment of the Appendix in the latter earned him the sobriquet “the Verrall of American scholars,” as well as election to the Royal Academy of Mantua. His lifelong attachment to Epicurus is revealed in his last two books, in which he defended Epicurus from the charge of vulgar hedonism and sought to demonstrate the affinities of his thought with that of St. Paul. The extent of De Witt's influence as a teacher is attested by several generations of students and by his books for Ontario schools; in the second of these he strongly stressed the need for an internationalist perspective in history and current affairs, and in the former he developed his aphoristic definition of history as “the evolution of the unintended.”

SOURCES

CanWW 7:287; Globe and Mail (22 Sept. 1958) 35; MacDCB 189; NYTimes (22 Sept. 1958) 31; H. Bennett, Phoenix 12 (1958) 139-40; PRSCAA (1963) 79-81; WhNAA 427.

AUTHOR
Robert L. Fowler

Yes Don. Some years ago I went through and downloaded from JSTOR everything I could find that DeWitt published, and there are quite a number of articles, which even today I have not found the time to read. At that time JSTOR didn't have a "free" option for non-universities, but they do today and I guess these are now more readily available than they were then. Maybe at some point we can put together at least the very least a list of links to the articles.

Lots more good comments Eugenios - thanks for posting! I don't recall your mentioning DeWitt's article on Organization of Epicurean Groups -- I don't have time to check it for more footnotes but it's surely relevant to this part. DeWitt's "Organization And Procedure In Epicurean Groups"

Great observations, Eugenios, and those are very helpful to add here. I know when i first read the book that I did not go through the footnotes systematically so it is very helpful that you are doing so and posting about them.

i do think I remember also thinking that the letter-writing comment seemed stretched, so I am in pretty much full agreement with your comments here. I think the detail on the gods speaking Greek is in the chapter on the true Piety, citing Cicero's 'On the Nature of the Gods, but again I agree that more detailed footnoting throughout the book would have made our job today a lot easier.

Jon - Newepicurean was my original blog I have used since 2010. When I set that up I knew that the Dewitt direction I was taking would not be popular in Academia, and more than that I knew I wanted to clearly separate from the Stoic synthesizers.

After about five years I realized I was pretty clear about the ultimate issues and I knew I wanted to build more "community" so I set up Epicureanfriend.com for that purpose. I continued to use NewEpicurean at times but devoted most of my time here.

As far as Epicurusmagazine.com goes, that is a recent startup for the sole purpose if highlighting our best articles so people don't have to search too hare to find the starting points.

In terms of monitoring them, I will make sure that everything of significance starts here at Epicureanfriends, so if you check in here regularly you will catch everything.

All of this stems from the perspective that it is best to make the positions very clear on the deeper and more "divisive" as quickly and clearly as possible so that people can decide whether to invest more time in Epicurus, or consider him just another rosebud to pick from a smörgåsbord, which seems too often to be the general approach.

On May 19, 2020, new user Jon M posted:

Feelings and Kinds of Feelings

Hello, I am new here and am not quite sure how to use this Forum. Never mind.

I will introduce myself by making a comment on Elayne's excellent article 'On Pain, Pleasure, and Happiness'. I notice no one has commented on it for a while.

I have a suggestion for a tweak in her terminology.

Elayne, you quote Diogenes Laertius X.34 saying "the feelings are two, pleasure and pain" which is a literal translation, but Hicks translates "They [Epicureans] affirm that there are two states of feeling, pleasure and pain".

My guess is that he says there are two 'states' of feeling because to say there are two feelings (only) is counter to normal usage. In everyday speech we have lots of feelings: I feel warm, I feel angry, I feel flu-like, and so on.

Diogenes Laertius was a racy kind of tabloid-newspaper writer, and perhaps did not pick his words like a careful scholar. Also he is not saying Epicurus said this, only 'they' ie the Epicureans. So I feel happy, like Hicks, to tweak him.

If you say that pleasure and pain are two kinds of feelings, then this gets you out of lots of issues.

First it is more in keeping with normal English: I feel warm and it is pleasurable, ie pleasure is the kind of feeling it is. I feel angry and it is a painful kind of feeling.

More importantly, it allows you to talk about neutral feelings, which you and Cassius had some discussion about.

What I think you are saying, using my language, is that there is no third kind of feeling, often called 'neutral', neither pleasure nor pain.

I can agree that there is no third kind of feeling, while accepting the neutrality of my having no particular feelings about something. Certainly I will have no conscious feelings attached to the large number of inputs to my senses every second that I am not conscious of. And surely there are lots of things in the periphery of my consciousness that I am neutral about. I don't care one way or the other about that cup that my eyes have just glanced over.

But if my brain decides that any experience is salient enough to be picked out and focused on, then I will have one or more feelings about it, and of all the feelings I might have about that thing they will be divided into two kinds: pleasurable and painful.

I agree completely then that it is not productive to focus on the neutral or to try and be neutral. To blank out all feelings and remain conscious is impossible, and to attempt to find a third kind of feeling that is neutral, (adukkham-asukhā, as the Buddhists say, neither painful nor pleasurable), is what you call a 'fancy pleasure', a dead-end street leading to pain and quite counter to Epicurus.

This has become a long first post, but thanks to you and Cassius for maintaining a splendid website. It is good to see such high-quality writing about Epicurus all in one place.

-- Jon M

Thank you Jon, for your post and your supportive comments. Welcome and we look forward to many discussions about Epicurus. Your post in comment on Elayne's article is now here here: Discussion of Article: "On Pleasure, Pain and Happiness"

Also, Jon M , may I ask, did you find this article here at the forum, or on Epicurusmagazine.com? It would help our "advertising" efforts to know how you found this.

Hello and welcome to the forum Jon M !

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!

Thank you Godfrey. Sounds like you are making some progress in TGOP. That book has a ton of good detail and I don't think it gets the prominence it deserves. Very hard to find even in libraries.