Posts by Cassius

Regularly Checking In On A Small Screen Device? Bookmark THIS page!

  • Stoics Aren't Ascetics... It's Those Epicureans!

    Quote

    But it is not so. Stoicism is not asceticism and a Stoic is not a monk. In fact, it is the school of the pale Epicureans that is closer to the ideal of abstemiousness. The Stoic proposal is far broader and it extends far beyond the narrow passage of the ascetic way. The history of transmission of Stoic ideas, the piercing lack of many ancient sources and some intricacies of the doctrine account for the popularity of the ascetic misinterpretation. And yet, the time has come to disavow it.

    He can claim and disavow asceticism all he wants, but protests don't change what is in the philosophy, and it's far from "intricacies of doctrine" that lead to the common understanding - from the past to the present - that Stoicism embraces asceticism and all other ways of escaping from the temptations of "pleasure."

    As I read the article it is a series of assertions almost entirely devoid of citations to authoritative Stoics to support his position. This weak statement by Seneca that he'd rather wear a toga than walk around naked is about the best he offers.

    Quote

    These points don’t exhaust all that I have to say against the ascetic misinterpretation. Yet, I hope they provide an outline of my anti-ascetic stance. For the record, I’m tempted to mention, as a closing argument, that the ancient Stoics themselves provided a wide array of explicit suggestions that they didn’t have any harsh ascetism in mind. As Seneca put it “I prefer to display the state of my soul clad rather in the toga and shoes than showing naked shoulders and with cuts on my feet” (On the Happy Life, XXV.2).


    One thing I would take away from reading this is is something to consider when you're making an argument against an existing consensus (whether the consensus is that Stoicism is all about asceticism and virtue or that Epicureanism is all about retirement and tranquility). If you want to be taken seriously t's generally a good idea to (1) reinforce even a basic introduction with some clear citations that support your position, (2) deal quickly with the citations that appear to undercut your position.

  • Lecture on practical application of Epicureanism

    I agree with Kalosyni but thanks for posting it Tau Phi! It's a recent attempt at a general presentation on Epicurus by a professor, and he's honest that he doesn't represent himself to be presenting Epicurus favorably. It's good for us to see these and think about how they could be done better.

    One initial thought I have is that he is clearly aware of On Ends Book One and how Torquatus sets up the issue (asking what is the highest good) but instead he just cherry picks some points (the natural and necessary division and friendship) and as a result of losing their context what he picks out seems incoherent.

    And he never once says (as far as I picked up) that Epicurus advised that we will sometime choose pain in order to achieve a pleasure that is worth more to us than the pain that is involved.

  • Episode 257 - There Is No Necessity To Live Under Necessity - Part 1

    Like last week as to Idealism vs realism I will work together to put together an outline of topics to cover. In the case of "Fate," I'd like to be sure we spend enough time talking about the real-world / psychological aspects of accepting there is such a thing as "fate," rather than spend all the time on the swerve and how Epicurus rejects determinism. I think there's a lot of "connection" we need to draw in the harmful psychological aspects that we don't normally talk about as much as we should.

    Here is first draft of the raw outline. I will fill it in with sources and other topics as we proceed toward Sunday's recording.

    Lucretius Today Episode 257 - Fate, Necessity, Determinism

  • Cicero’s Stoic Paradoxes - General

    From the Rackham edition intro - this is interesting - I have read the slashing and burning attack on Stoicism in the latter parts of On Ends - so what explains the discrepancy, and what was Cicero's true opinion?

    Quote

    This book consists of six short essays setting out the most striking ethical doctrines of the Stoic school of philosophy : that virtue is the sole good, and the sole requisite for happiness; that all good deeds are equally meritorious and all bad deeds equally heinous; that folly is insanity and slavery, wisdom the only freedom and the only riches. In other writings Cicero criticizes these doctrines as extravagant and pedantic — see especially De Finibus iv. 74-77 and Pro Murena 60-66 ; but in his preface here, § 4, he expresses his warm acceptance of them.

  • Cicero’s Stoic Paradoxes - General

    Thank you for posting this Matteng! This is not something I recall running into recently, and I think it will serve as a very good thing for us to review. I haven't yet had a chance to read the full article, but I see that the full work being referenced is available in a Rackham translation here, pages 252-305.

    As you indicate, we will definitely wish to go through these and discuss what would be the expected Epicurean response to each one. I think we'll likely want to devote one or more podcast episodes to this as well. This list makes it easy to highlight the Stoic-Epicurean divide.

    The wikipedia page is here, giving the following summary of the five major propositions, of which on first glance I would say -- just looking at the tities -- that Epicurus would definitely dispute 1, 3, and 6, on their face. The others are also dependent on the meaning attached to the word "virtue," but on first glance I'd say would require more explanation than do 1, 3, and 6, which I'd say are flatly wrong on their face. I am very tempted to put 2 in the same category as flatly wrong, but a complete discussion of it would require going through PD05.

    I: Virtue is the only good

    In this book Cicero presents the Stoic classifications of what elements of life are genuinely good, and what elements are not good. There are three different qualities of something being genuinely good: righteousness (rectum), intrinsic honor or nobility (honestum), and intrinsic virtue (cum virtute). This can be understood as the inner person, and the choices and actions that they engage in.

    Pleasure and wealth cannot be genuine goods because they lack the crucial properties that a genuine good should have.[3] Genuine goods should satisfy desire and make their possessor happy.[3] Spurious or apparent goods do not satisfy desires, but rather, arouse yet more desire, as well as fear that one might lose these things that they presently possess.[3] Cicero also argues that something cannot be a good if an evil person can possess it.[3] Thus wealth and pleasure cannot be a genuine good.[3]

    Humans alone among all animals possess reason, and this alone allows humans to pursue the good.[5] The good therefore should be defined exclusively in rational terms and thus the moral life should be ordered according to reason.[5]

    II: Virtue is sufficient for happiness

    Virtue is all that is needed for happiness.[8] Happiness depends on a possession which cannot be lost, and this only applies to things within our control.[5]

    III: All the vices and all virtues are equal

    All good deeds are equally meritorious and all bad deeds equally heinous.[4] All virtues are equal as this corresponds to the same impulse towards the good.[5] Cicero does not attempt to defend the Stoic position of the moral equality of all offenses; instead he offers a weakened version that offenses of the same sort are equal.[3] He notes the Stoic position that all crimes are equal since they all involve the same intent to break the law, but he then argues that crimes do not bear the same penalty since the matter depends on the status of the person injured and that of the criminal.[5] Thus he ends up imposing gradations of vice based on external factors.[5]

    IV: All fools are mad

    There is a substantial lacuna at the beginning of this section.[3] The remaining part argues that every fool is an exile and the wise person cannot be harmed.[3] Cicero attacks an unnamed personal enemy for causing his exile.[5] The essay is thought to be a thinly veiled attack on Cicero's enemy Clodius.[4] Cicero asserts that his own exile was not a hardship since he possessed the correct Stoic wisdom and virtue.[5]

    V: The sage alone is free

    Only the sage is free and every fool is a slave.[8] Cicero attacks an unnamed military leader who is unworthy of command because he cannot control his passions and thus is not free.[5] The target here may be Lucullus.[4] Cicero satirizes costly luxury and affectation of connoisseurship in collecting works of art.[4] Freedom involves the rational control of one's will. Only the sage is free since he freely chooses the good.[5]

    VI: Only the wise person is rich

    If a rich person's wealth is measured by the quantity of their goods, then a wealthy person with no virtue is poor, since virtue is the only good.[3] People confuse reasonable needs with unreasonable desires and this leads people in power to pursue irrational passions.[5]

    Cicero De Oratore, Vol.-ii : H. Rackham : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
    Book Source: Digital Library of India Item 2015.186497dc.contributor.author: H. Rackhamdc.date.accessioned: 2015-07-07T20:01:20Zdc.date.available:...
    archive.org


    Alternate Translation by Cyrus Edmonds:

    Cicero's three books Of offices; or, Moral duties; also his Cato Major, an essay on old age; Laelius, an essay on friendshisp; Paradoxes; Scipio's dream: and Letter to Quintus on the duties of a magistrate. Literally translated, with notes, designed to…
    52
    archive.org


    Cyrus Edmonds commentary on Stoicism from this text page 264:

    Quote

    The ethical doctrines of the Stoics have attracted most attention, as exhibited in the lives of distinguished Greeks and Romans. To live according to nature was the basis of their ethical system ; but by this it was not meant that a man should follow his own particular nature ; he must make his life conformable to the nature of the whole of things. This principle is the foundation of all morality; and it follows that morality is connected with philosophy. To know what is our relation to the whole of things, is to know what we ought to be and to do. This fundamental principle of the Stoics is indisputable, but its application is not always easy, nor did they all agree in their exposition of it. Some things were good, some bad, and some indifferent ; the only good things were virtue; wisdom, justice, temperance, and the like. The truly wise man possesses all knowledge ; he is perfect and sufficient in himself ; he despises all that subjects to its power the rest of mankind ; he feels pain, but he is not conquered by it. But the morality of the Stoics, at least in the later periods, though it rested on a basis apparently so sound, permitted the wise man to do nearly everything that he liked. Such a system, it has been well observed, might do for the imaginary wise man of the Stoics ; but it was not a system whose general adoption was compatible with the existence of any actual society.

Unread Threads

    1. Title
    2. Replies
    3. Last Reply

    2. Philodemus' "On Anger" - General - Texts and Resources 20

      • Cassius
      • July 8, 2025 at 7:33 AM
    3. Replies
      20
      Views
      6.9k
      20

    4. Kalosyni

      July 8, 2025 at 7:33 AM

    2. Mocking Epithets 3

      • Bryan
      • July 6, 2025 at 9:47 PM
    3. Replies
      3
      Views
      417
      3

    4. Bryan

      July 6, 2025 at 9:47 PM

    2. Best Lucretius translation? 12

      • Rolf
      • July 1, 2025 at 1:59 PM
    3. Replies
      12
      Views
      1.1k
      12

    4. Eikadistes

      July 1, 2025 at 1:59 PM

    2. The Religion of Nature - as supported by Lucretius' De Rerum Natura 4

      • Kalosyni
      • June 23, 2025 at 12:36 AM
    3. Replies
      4
      Views
      950
      4

    4. Godfrey

      June 23, 2025 at 12:36 AM

    2. New Blog Post From Elli - " Fanaticism and the Danger of Dogmatism in Political and Religious Thought: An Epicurean Reading"

      • Cassius
      • June 20, 2025 at 4:31 PM
    3. Replies
      0
      Views
      2.4k

Finding Things At EpicureanFriends.com

What's the best strategy for finding things on EpicureanFriends.com? Here's a suggested search strategy:

  • First, familiarize yourself with the list of forums. The best way to find threads related to a particular topic is to look in the relevant forum. Over the years most people have tried to start threads according to forum topic, and we regularly move threads from our "general discussion" area over to forums with more descriptive titles.
  • Use the "Search" facility at the top right of every page. Note that the search box asks you what section of the forum you'd like to search. If you don't know, select "Everywhere." Also check the "Search Assistance" page.
  • Use the "Tag" facility, starting with the "Key Tags By Topic" in the right hand navigation pane, or using the "Search By Tag" page, or the "Tag Overview" page which contains a list of all tags alphabetically. We curate the available tags to keep them to a manageable number that is descriptive of frequently-searched topics.