Welcome @ekyrian !
When you get a chance please introduce yourself and tell us about your background and interest in Epicurus. It would be helpful also if you could include how you found the EpicureanFriends forum, as that would help with our publicity efforts in the future.
Yes Todd great to have you here. There are many many issues with Facebook and I hope here we have more focus and less distraction.
If we are going to get the most out of Epicurus and of life we have to take control of our own time and spend it more wisely than mindlessly scrolling through largely idle chatter. FB has its uses but it will never be the community we need.
And the community we need has to be built with our own efforts and initiatives. We now have enough numbers in the USA that it is realistic to talk about group projects and even meetings on the horizon. I hope we are soon off the ground with a regular podcast, as we already have a regular Skype conference call on Sunday mornings which is a prelude to that.
It will continue to be a challenge to develop new content in the face of the knowledge that much of what is already out there is essentially advice to be passive and reclusive, but that is what Epicurus and the other initial founders did -- they stood up and opposed what they thought was wrong.
Even if you only continue to lurk you are welcome, but if on any aspect you have a special interest please let us know and we will work to incorporate that talent.
For example I am sure you have seen Joshua's poems, Nates and Ellis graphics, JAWS's outline, Martin's research posts, and Hiram's work. (And although it wasn't focused on this forum, what about Michele's festival?)
There is a lot to be done and its in the doing that we get the most benefit. This is a good place for us to collaborate free of any agenda but Epicurus.
So welcome aboard!
Another commentator says: "Pleasure is a joy of the mind. I love that definition."
Cassius replies:
We should remember all the usual cautions as to translations and shades of meaning, but "joy" is a word which clearly describes the presence of an intense form of pleasure. "Joy" is not a word that can be easily squared by those who allege that Epicurus was limiting his ambition to "absence of pain."
Yes there is a way to square the two terminologies, but not by the modern adoption of stoicized suppression of ordinary views of mental and physical pleasures. Cicero knew that that such an argument would never fly, because he knew well that those who understood Epicurus understood "pleasure" in the normal sense of the word, including taste, music, smooth motion, and the other "pleasures by any of the senses in the whole man."
That last phrase - "pleasures by any of the senses in the whole man" is the really explosive definition in this passage that anti-Epicureans don't like.
Elayne says:
"One thing hasn't changed... that humans produce cultures where it's "shameful" to pursue pleasure! I have been wondering if that is part of the reason for the persistence of supernatural religions. I see people use imaginary beings as an excuse, which their fellow believers don't argue with. "The holy spirit told me to do it" comes in as handy as "the devil made me do it"-- an excuse for a day off from work (sabbaths), for enjoying sex (in Judaism), etc. My grandfather used to tell people his doctor told him he couldn't eat whatever food he didn't like.
Telling the unvarnished truth, that we are making decisions for pleasure, instead of making up an excuse, is a brave action. The more of us who tell the truth to our friends, the more they may feel courage to tell the truth as well, and this silly embarrassment over pleasure could be ended."
Old Tullius was no friend of Epicurus, but in attacking him Cicero preserved important information which allows us to see the true nature of what
Epicurus meant by "pleasure" - and it wasn't just "absence of pain":
That would be great too, and possibly more effective than other ways of spreading the message.
As doe me I never read any of the books but was very impressed by the movies. (Only saw the first three)
Excellent Joshua! Great content, smooth wording, never sacrificing clarity for the sake of elegance but always elegant too!
A post by Elayne... regarding this link: https://psywb.springeropen.com/articles/10.11…yHZIg7Jm-rjNez4
One of the ways we interact with reality is through the evidence of our senses (and their instrumental extensions). I thought you might be interested in seeing some evidence regarding the relationship of freedom to happiness (pleasure).
Rather than getting caught up in politics or national comparisons, I think it's worth looking at some key points in the write-up. I was very pleased to see the researchers define happiness in terms of people liking their lives-- to me, that means they are understanding that happiness is made of pleasure, because "liking" is impossible to understand without the feeling of pleasure.
Notice that not just freedom but awareness of freedom was important for happiness.
I love that they ended their paper by saying we need to have "guts" to live freely and happily!
I think this relates to our philosophy in three key ways. First, freedom from absolute "necessity"-- from hard determinism-- is critical to the coherence of Epicurean Philosophy. Without a probabilistic future, aka the swerve, the whole philosophy falls apart. Our knowledge of that core freedom inherent in matter itself, without any supernatural intervention, is important to our happiness.
Second, what the researchers call psychological freedom seems to correspond to our sense of agency-- our ability to choose and avoid-- and it affects whether or not we have a pleasurable life. Epicureans are not fatalists.
Third, having freedom from outside interference by other humans was also important for happiness in this study. I would say this is likely similar to other conditions Epicurus found useful for pleasure, in that there can be individual variations-- it's not going to be an absolute. Epicurus could not imagine a happy life without friendship-- for some of us, freedom to live as we choose is as inseparable from pleasure as friendship, and the specific types of freedom we want will vary. I personally have a high need for freedom-- when I am asking myself what will be the outcome if I do an action or not, one of the factors I consider is how the action will affect my freedom, because I know loss of freedom tends to reduce my pleasure.
Pleasure is still the goal-- freedom can be a tool. I'm a hiker, and we have a saying "hike your own hike", HYOH. 😃
Welcome @Todd !
When you get a chance please introduce yourself and tell us about your background and interest in Epicurus. It would be helpful also if you could include how you found the EpicureanFriends forum, as that would help with our publicity efforts in the future.
Welcome Ataraxia ! When you get a chance please introduce yourself and tell us about your background and interest in Epicurus. It would be helpful also if you could include how you found the EpicureanFriends forum, as that would help with our publicity efforts in the future.
This last part gets back to the issue that since life is desirable, it is always desirable to live longer if it can be done net pleasantly. I think all deductions that would contradict that are on conflict with what Epicurus intended and derive from intrusions from ascetic viewpoints.
Yes I agree with Hiram there. The key problem is the word "universe" which I take to mean, in the older conventional sense - "Everything that exists."
In Epicurean theory it is not "Everything that exists" that will collapse upon itself, but only a localized solar system / star system / galaxy or whatever wider astronomical term floats your boat as long as that term reflects something less than the whole. This is part of the issue that "everything that comes together eventually splits apart" but that can't contradict the "nothing comes from nothing" first premise.
The universe as a whole would not collapse into nothing because it is eternal and time (never came from nothing) as well as boundless and there is no space "outside it" or "beyond it" from which it could collapse.
Now of course I know there are modern theories that might contradict this, but we're first concerned about understanding what Epicurus taught. I personally agree with the Epicurean model of the universe, but of course I can still acknowledge that others might want to dispute that. What's important is to stay precise and keep distinction between (1) what we think, what (2) Epicurus taught, and (3) what some segment of modern theoretical physicists might allege.
. Cassius wasn't into Indian music and sought to change the tune (the song is actually by musicians from Germany), but I loved and relished this song from the moment I heard it.
We have a wide variety of tastes and preferences in our Epicurean Work. I am very much in the "Western" tradition and Hiram is, I perceive, not, but that has not stopped us from collaborating when possible.
Good to hear! Every time we get confident ahead of time it usually works out badly, so I hope this one is already passed by.
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:
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:
Instead, with the Senatorial forces suppressed after the result of the Roman Civil War was complete:
Let me know your thoughts on this suggestion, as well as alternatives.
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!
