Posts by Cassius

Just for fun I thought it would be interesting to speculate as to the "high water mark" of the Epicurean movement in the ancient world. I have a nomination, even down to the day: October 3, 42 BC.

The reason I suggest that day is that this is the day that Gaius Cassius Longinus, a self-proclaimed Epicurean, was defeated at the Battle of Philippi.

Up until the moment of defeat, according to my understanding of the history, the world had advanced to the place where:

1. There was continuing existence of the original school of Epicurus in Athens, and presumably all of Greece and much of the Greek-influenced East had significant Epicurean presence.
2. According to Cicero, Epicurean philosophy had "taken Italy by storm."
3. Epicurean Philosophy was so widely regarded that Cicero felt obliged to devote a large section of his work "On Ends" to describing and opposing it.
4. Cicero's best friend (Titus Atticus Pomponius) and leading citizen of Rome was an Epicurean.
5. Julius Caesar, leading citizen of Rome and temporary dictator, had Epicurean viewpoints on certain subjects, if not an Epicurean himself (or at least he was accused of this during the Cataline conspiracy).
6. Julius Caesar's father in law was the prominent Epicurean Piso, owner of what is now known as the Villa of the Papyri in Herculaneum.
7. Popular works by Catius, Amafinius, Rabirius, and others were circulating in the Roman world.
8. People later to become Epicurean-inspired poets like Horace and Virgil were on their way up in life.
9. Lucretius had written and published "De Rerum Natura."
10. Cassius Longinus had publicly converted to Epicurean philosophy, and we know other Roman generals, including Panza, had also done so.
11. Philodemus of Gadara, and others, were at working continuing to spread Epicurean philosophy.

Had the battle of Philippi been won by Cassius Longinus (as a result of a better performance by Brutus, who was not the same level of military leader as was Cassius), then the Roman world would have been:

1. Led by a Consul who was a self-proclaimed Epicurean.
2. The school of Epicurus and the spread of Epicurean philosophy would have likely gained official sanction and therefore wider adoption.

Instead, with the Senatorial forces suppressed after the result of the Roman Civil War was complete:

1. Octavian / Augustus clamped down on private associations in Rome (which is significant if we presume that any organized Epicurean movements were private associations).
2. The Empire consolidated power and the social climate became significantly more concerned with duty and obedience and sacrifice for the state than ever before.

Let me know your thoughts on this suggestion, as well as alternatives.

Thank you Michele!

Yes it is a huge problem, and I think about the same thing not only in my finding the material I have accumulated, but I would like to see some of our work preserved to be of benefit to others for a long time. The technology age is both blessing and curse but we have to work to turn it into the tool that sparks the flame of a new Epicurean revival

As for the DeWitt family, I think some of this I discussed earlier with Oscar, who is a student at the University of Toronto. As you're probably aware DeWitt was a professor there, then his son was a professor at the University of Illiinois. The grandson told me that unforunately as first his grandfather and then his father died, papers were discarded as part of the normal process of clearing estates.

The one thing that was able to retrieve from the grandson was this picture of Norman DeWitt on a farm machine!

These additional pictures of Professor DeWitt I found myself, years ago, by googling:

https://newepicurean.com/behold-the-fac…ntworth-dewitt/

I find this one humorous and with the kind of look I could almost imagine Epicurus showing, when surrounded by his students:

Excellent comment about Frances Wright -- you are correct!

I have tried to contact them and I know that he has a grandson, who was very nice by email. I asked him if there were surviving family papers and he indicated that there were not - anything that is left is at the University of Toronto.

What are the best three resources for a beginning student to read?

1 - Norman DeWitt 'Epicurus and His Philosophy" which will give you the necessary overall context of what you are about to read in the next two sources.

2 - Diogenes Laertius' Biography of Epicurus which will give you the primary source material from which everyone works.

3 - Lucretius "On The Nature of Things" in a *narrative* translation which will give you a trustworthy example of the thought process of an ancient Epicurean and how it starts with physics about the nature of the universe, the nature of the human soul, and the primary role of sensation over "logic." The current authoritative version is by Martin Ferguson Smith by Hackett publishing, but there are free public domain ones at this link - https://epicureanfriends.com/wiki/doku.php?…ature_of_things

Only after you've got a good grounding in the overall philosophy will you be in a position to understand why the modern summary "Epicurus was a strange hedonist because he defined pleasure as the absence of pain" is so ridiculously inaccurate and demeaning to the man and his legacy to humanity.

If you asked me for a fourth, I would say Cicero's "On Ends" which gives from the pen of someone who knew them intimately more of the big picture of the logical arguments from opposing schools with which the ancient Epicureans were dealing.

I know that one of our core members, Eikadistes , is pretty much in the direct path of Dorian, but there could be others here who are also, without our knowledge. Nate, I hope you, and anyone else who lurks the group who might be from Florida or in the direct path, remain Safe. Maybe you will be forced to stay inside for a while and compose us some suitable Epicurean music or graphic artwork - it's been a while since we have seen any!

Welcome @Bellavista ! When you get the time, please introduce yourself and let us know a little about your background and interest in Epicurus.

Quote from Charles Edwins

It is also important to be ambitious and challenge adversity when you see fit, for the opposite is to sit idly and be "content with what you have". Epicurus was an extremely ambitious person who took the risk to found a school to teach his controversial teachings right between Plato's Academy and the Stoa. He also wrote over 300 books on various subjects, we should strive to always work or produce something.

Oh my, you have won hundreds of bonus points with me for that one!

If you recognize that then I can't imagine you'll ever decide that living in a cave on bread and water would be the ideal life, or that we fail at being good Epicureans if we don't choose to do so!

Quote from Charles Edwins

It is also worth noting that what is terrible in life is easy to endure.

And this formulation is why I am so careful not to overuse or apply the Tetrapharmakon too broadly. On its face this statement would be perceived by many people to be ridiculous, uncaring of their suffering, etc. And since this statement does not come from Epicurus himself, but from an uncertain author in a Herculaneum papyrus without surrounding context, I would be very careful applying it too broadly.

My personal view is that the best way to deal with this issue is to cite the full PD4 -

"4. Continuous bodily pain does not last long; instead, pain, if extreme, is present a very short time, and even that degree of pain which slightly exceeds bodily pleasure does not last for many days at once. Diseases of long duration allow an excess of bodily pleasure over pain." -

...While at the same time remembering that this is part of a sequence of philosophical positions that are (IMHO) clearly intended to address anti-Epicurean talking points (Plato's Philebus in particular) that concerned the viability of pleasure as the theoretical highest goal.

I find it very difficult to believe that Epicurus ever looked at a suffering friend and said "What is terrible in life is easy to endure" or anything like that.

The Tetrapharmakon is an easy to use formulation for those who understand the theory, but IMHO this formulation is the worst of the four, with "don't fear the gods" coming in second, "what's good is easy to get" third, and the least offensive (because it is most true to the sense of the PD from which it comes) being "don't fear death."

Quote from Charles Edwins

In addition, you must resist and avoid the desires that are both; natural and unnecessary and unnatural and unnecessary.
However, there may be some leniency towards desires that are natural and unnecessary such as having a healthy sex life or going out with friends to a nicer restaurant.

As you note here there is a tension involved. I was also going to ask you "What sections, if any, of this outline do you think are the "weakest" or need better articulation. I personally think the "natural and necessary" division is helpful for analysis to the extent that it reminds us that pleasures that require great effort will probably entail great pain, but if we then turn that into an absolute standard by thinking that the same same pleasures are going to entail the same difficulties for everyone, then we risk erecting a false standard that falls into the same trap as thinking that "virtue" is the same for everyone everywhere.

Quote from Charles Edwins

In addition to acknowledging that quote, we must dispel the fear that we will not accomplish what we have wanted prior to dying.
To dispel that fear, you must acknowledge that if you regret what you have not done or what will be done in the future, ask yourself if you regret not being a part of the past and the discoveries/activities of yore.
If you do, then think why you are in a constant negative-feedback loop of never being satisfied with what you can do right now within your lifespan.

This is a very interesting thought that I have not seen made before. I want to think about this one but I pulled it out in hopes that others can comment to. No doubt we want to avoid being in a constant negative-feedback loop. However i think I am wondering whether sentences two and three really address the same point.

Can or should we entertain a sense of urgency about what we want to accomplish before we die separately and apart from the question of whether we regret being a part of history before we were born?

Wow that is a great and elaborate outline Charles. You've really given some thought to each aspect of Epicurus. Is this recent with you, or have you been studying the physics and the epistemology in addition to the ethics?

There are many many details that can be discussed and I will start with just a few:

Quote from Charles Edwins

We are not born with innate knowledge of our surroundings or of the universe, upon birth our minds are like a blank slate to be filled through direct sensory experiences, much like Locke's tabula rasa.

Rather than disagree with you on this, let me ask you: (1) Have you read DeWitt's material on Anticipations? (2) What do you perceive Anticipations to be?

Quote from Charles Edwins

A fourth criterion can also be applied: "presentational applications of the mind", for discussing things which we cannot observe, but can perceive directly but strictly in our minds.

This you presumably read in Diogenes Laertius. What is your understanding as to why Epicurus had only three criterion, and what is your understanding as to why other/later Epicureans added the fourth category?

Quote from Charles Edwins

Part of that conduct, includes virtue and its purpose, the purpose of living pleasurably, not as a reward to live in the afterlife.
To live pleasurably alongside virtue, one must use virtue as a stepping stone when one sees fit, not the other way around.

On these two items, how do you define "virtue" and how does one determine what is virtuous in any particular set of circumstances?

Great information and thanks again for joining us! And all at NINETEEN years of age??!!

I have not read this article myself, but I know Joshua thinks it is interesting. This is a link originally provided by Hiram but lost in the recent glitch.

https://www.academia.edu/33195167/Comin…gUUUwi6eMSk_eeE

Google translate does an amusing job on the title of the article, but it's clear nevertheless that the Epicurean Festival was a great success. Congratulations Michele Pinto!

Quote from JJElbert

or b.) Preserved by being made into a church.

I used to presume that the state of the forum and related areas was the result of some kind of barbarian action to burn and/or knock down all the buildings, because what else short of an incredible earthquake could produce that kind of result.

But now I gather that most all of the damage was intentional harvesting of stone over the centuries, so presumably that means the real barbarians were the churchmen.

Michele I apologize that we've lost your last post. I know some of the links so I will reconstruct now....

OH no did we lose the Michele Updates too!?? GRRRRR. I will reconstruct what I can - I think I have most all of what Michele posted, and I think I can find Hiram's link too.

Compare photos like this one below to downtown areas that were pulverized in Europe and Japan in World War II. Today those cities have been rebuilt to the point where the damage is barely visible.

But just like with the Parthenon in Athens, the ruins of the capitals of the cities that the Judeo-Christian conquerors demolished have been pretty much left out the open for all to see, as if they were buzzards leaving picked-over bones behind.

I suppose the religionists thought the ruins would be a good reminder to everyone of their power, and would serve as a warning that their power should never be challenged.

I hope there are a lot of people who see these ruins and think of how much better this world would have been if it had followed the lead of Epicurus rather than these religionists.