Posts by Cassius

More comments:

Cassius:

Yes it does have its uses when wielded by the right hands, and it is so well known today that it has to be dealt with regardless of what we might think about it. I wish we had an example of an actual ancient Epicurean using it in context and explaining it from his or her perspective. Many of the passages that seem so tricky I think are perfectly understandable given the right perspective, which they would have had and of which we have been robbed for 2000 years.

Elli Pensa Cassius my friend, I agree with you ...the "tetrapharmakos" is that kind of schooling as it is for the little children when they are starting the nursery school. We the greeks when we learned the alphabet we sung an old song that goes like this :

Αlpha, beta, gamma, delta...

bring all the books,

and a pencil and a paper,

to write all the things,

to write little letters

that are the God's little things. ( i.e. the little letters and the little things that we learn at school are derived from god and are ending to the god).

So, that old song we have learned at nursery school stopped to the four letters, as four medicines means in greek the tetrapharmakos. And I wonder now where are the other letters of the greek alphabet ? Where is our alpha and omega that is pleasure inside the tetrapharmakos? It does not exist inside and that old song we sung in nursery school, and in the tetrapharmakos. Sorry guys, but inside wrong hands and the tetrapharmakos is like that old greek song we said in nursery school. That's the whole issue, I suppose. Every little and condensed issue, when you see it reading or hearing and is about the EP, as a honest Epicurean, you have to make it huge, clear, mature, grow, strong and obvious connected it with the real GOAL !

Cassius:

The formulation does have its uses, just like these rhymes do. But I think its grossly overused, and mostly by people who have no affinity for a pleasure-based philosophy. In fact, this formulation does not even mention "pleasure" at all, which is probably the main reason it goes down so well with those who interpret Epicurus as consistent with the Stoics.

And one of the best ways I can think to caution people about it is to point out that we have ZERO-NONE-ZERO evidence of any Epicurean from 300 BC to about1800 AD (whenever the scroll was deciphered) ever citing this formulation in any intact text written by a recognized Epicurean. Even this text itself is (1) not intact, and (2) not without doubt written by Philodemus, and (3) even if written by Philodemus, we don't have his backup explanation for why it is good, rather than a child's rhyme. And even after 1800, we don't have the original text (just a drawing of a reconstruction) and we don't have any way to assess the accuracy or the mindset of the person who transcribed it. Nor do we know if the person who transcribed it would endorse the use being put to his transcription.

I would be very grateful if someone reading this who is an expert can cite exceptions to the list of cautions I've just cited, but in my reading (which is pretty wide by now) I have not seen a single instance of it being cited, much less endorsed, by an authoritative proponent of Epicurean philosophy.

Elli says:

Epicurus used the word "Xάρισι" and "χάρη", and this word is given in english with the word "favor". For "gratitude in greek is "ευγνωμοσύνη". Αnd for gratitude there is a need of a feeling. E.g. someone makes you a favor and you feel pleased and grateful to return it back someday. That being does not feel neither anger nor gratitude. Because it does not take and not give to inferior beings like us. And why we are inferior? Because we still make wars by our fears and greed, and as we do not do anything to change all these, we say : our goal is "the absence of pain".

Godfrey , as we compose them, to of the sources I personally am looking at are:

Bailey's Extant Remains

Epicurism.info wiki

I have also collected versions at our own wiki here, but mine is a collection rather than a primary source.

We've been working on a couple to illustrate PD1 and should be ready to start a series of posts soon. Here is the text I am thinking of using with each graphic. Suggestions for improvements?

"Please comment and share. Can you compose a graphic that would better illustrate this Epicurean point? Please add your own version to this thread, and we will use these in the future to help spread the ideas of Epicurus on the internet."

This is Bailey from his Extant Remains

Good question - I will make sure Elli sees that!

Interesting that Epicurism.info has: A blessed and imperishable being neither has trouble itself nor does it cause trouble for anyone else; therefore, it does not experience feelings of anger or indebtedness, for such feelings signify weakness.

http://wiki.epicurism.info/Principal_Doctrine_1/

If I were making a list in this category I would also advise having pets. Not to be morbid, but the lessons learned when they die really make a useful impact I think.

This is a really big issue and getting worse all the time. It has great benefits but great costs so we really need to be sure we have estimated the end result correctly.

I bet there are many apt cites to the same point to support this, but I remember first from Diogenes Laertius that Epicurus said that the wise man "will be fond of the country."

I think one way to generate more and better quality visitors would be to encourage sharing of the graphics we've created (or will create) that illustrate the Principal Doctrines and the Vatican Sayings. We probably ought to make a habit of posting one per day, or every couple of days, as a regular feature, for discussion. We can add some kind of legend to the bottom back to the forum, and encourage sharing on places like Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, etc.

In order to do that I'm trying to organize the graphics that Elli has done in the past in the gallery. I think I can tag each graphic, and also create a thread in the forum section dedicated to each graphic.

The place to start is PD1 and I'll move forward as fast as I can. But in order to see if it will help to post this, does anyone have good graphics for PD1 that they can add to this thread? Then I'll make sure it gets in the right place for reuse.

As soon as we get the first couple of doctrines in line I'll start a regular series of regular posts.

This thread will be for graphics for PD4

This thread is for graphics for PD3

This thread will be for graphics for PD2

This thread will be for graphics to illustrate PD1

Some FB responses:

E:

If I lived as if I would die tomorrow, I would actually do some different things than I would anticipating that I may live another 20-30 years, and the difference is important. I don't want to endure 20 years of diabetes, but if today were my last day I'm sure I would not give any thought to the long term consequences of my food choices. I would likely not do any income producing work at all today if it were my last day-- but that would be a bad idea if I plan to have food and shelter on an ongoing basis for several more years. I would take no concern for protecting myself from a hangover, an STI or bankruptcy if I were dying tomorrow. The hedonic calculus would not be the same.

However, I do remind myself that I only get ONE life, however long it lasts, every day when I wake up, to make sure I remember not to postpone happiness!

-----

N: Is there a difference?

Is it more reasonable to pump your flooded basement by pushing all of the bad water out? Or by pumping all of the good air in? The goal is to get the water out, regardless of whether you focus on replacing the bad water with fresh air, or by having fresh air displace the bad water. Six one, half-dozen the other.

Similarly, if we're trying to –– let's say –– 'get over a cold', then pursuing pleasure might look like 'drinking orange juice', 'soaking in warm water', and 'resting your head'. Avoiding pain might look like 'NOT drinking rotten milk', and 'NOT soaking in cold water', and 'NOT putting more stress on your head'.

Tomato, tomato, right?

Cassius Amicus

I think it helps to look at it this way: Why do you see yourself pursuing music and art, Nate, just because you have free time you want to fill and you're tired of cleaning your fingernails?

No, you pursue art because you LOVE art, and because of the deep emotional feeling that it gives you to pursue it. In general, do you really HATE pain with the same intensity that you love pleasures such as art? Are these things of equal significance in life, especially given the analysis that pain is not to be overly feared because it is short if intense and manageable if long?

From that point of view you are not indifferent to the choice you make. Yes you COULD devote yourself to lining up the tomatoes in your refrigerator in FIFO order, and that would avoid the pain of not being able to fine the freshest tomato. But what do you LOVE in life? And what makes life worthwhile?

Isn't it important how someone prioritizes your thought processes? I'm thinking also that reducing priorities to mathematical equivalences isn't a good idea either, since the model (math) isn't the same as the reality (our feelings).

Cassius Amicus Maybe another way of asking the question. Would we really expect the young person who sets out in life thinking "My goal is to avoid pain!" to end up in similar places as the young person who sets the goal "My goal is to pursue pleasure"? It seems to me intuitively correct that they will NOT end up at the same place, but describing why is an interesting exercise. I'd love to see some people comment on this formulation of the question.

E:

I have a friend who rides motorcycles and who likes to say that if people look at potholes, they tend to drive into them. Don't know if original with him. But I agree, in that the way the human mind works, if we concentrate on avoiding something ("don't think of a white bear"), sometimes we wind up with it on our minds more. If we focus on avoiding pain, we will be reminding our brains "pain, pain" in order to stay away from it, and we can actually experience a little bit of pain just from thinking about it. We will be constantly watching for pain to make sure we avoid it, and in doing so, we will probably find more pain than we would have otherwise.

Whereas if we primarily focus on pleasure, even just thinking "pleasure" provides a little taste of what we are aiming at. We will be watching and thinking of what we can do right now and later that will be most pleasurable, so even the looking for what's next is a pleasant process, and we will be more likely to notice pleasurable possibilities if we are watching out for them.

Elli Pensa

Why someone wants to avoid something that is not present ? Because he does not want to enjoy the present ! But does he know that this present becomes quickly the past ? As for the future does not belong totally to us. So life is wasted, and when death comes, he lived a life to avoid not the pain actually, but the pleasures that life has....It is like that one who does not want to fall in love, because he wants to avoid to run some risks of getting to know the other, without leaving himself free to feel the heartbeats of love. That's the whole issue. Usually the stingy persons are acting like this. They do not want to give and to get. They are reluctant to share ANYTHING with another person. So, if their option is to stay alone just to avoid pain, I would like to tell them : Please do not forget to take your pills of anesthesia.

Bryan

Pain and pleasure are kind of relative to the person's perspective. One person's "pain" is another's pleasure. Take getting drunk as an example. But suppose for a moment that pain and pleasure were always objective things and everyone knew exactly that was painful and pleasurable from birth. Since pain and pleasure fall on a scale of degrees, in order to answer this question we'd have to find a choice between 2 equally evaluated choices.

It's really hard to answer this question without being glib about degrees of pain/pleasure. But if it were up to me I would pursue pleasure as that has an effect on me personally more than pain affects me. Maybe it's really to each his/her own.

Cassius Amicus

"But suppose for a moment that pain and pleasure were always objective things and everyone knew exactly that was painful and pleasurable from birth." With only mild modifications I think this is exactly what Epicurus said. We know pleasure and pain because we FEEL it, and the feeling is what it is. We don't always predict the long-term results of actions very well, and frequently we pick something and get a very different result. But the fact that different people have different feelings in eating a type of food, for example, or that pleasures and pain vary intensity, does not do anything to undermine the basic point that feelings of pain and pleasure are our ultimate faculty of feeling what to pursue and what to avoid.

Bryan

I got yah Cassius. Thanks.

T

I am guessing that you are since pain is mostly unavoidable in life that pleasure would be more of importance to pursue than avoiding pain.

Cassius Amicus

I am not sure that the unavoidability is really the issue as much as the issue is that the shortness of life, plus the pain that all of us experience, means that pleasure is in short supply during the brief duration of our lives, so it makes no sense to do anything other than to pursue net pleasure during the brief time that we have --- from a "Seize the day" type of perspective.

N:

I think that, a lot of times, 'pleasure-pursuit' utilizes 'pain-avoidance' as the most effective mechanism to pursue pleasure. 'Hedonic Calculus' often calls for 'anxiety-reducing mechanisms' as much as it does for 'peak experiences'.

It's like having a migraine, or breaking a bone, or some other injury or abuse. In those circumstances, pursuing your talents and fulfilling your passions isn't nearly as desirable as is receiving a morphine IV and taking a long nap.

N:

Needless to say, I see what you guys mean in terms of distinguishing 'pursuing something you want' from 'avoiding something you dislike'.

Cassius Amicus

N, I want to be sure to say that I do a agree with you that in those circumstances you are talking about, pain avoidance clearly DOES deserve to be the main focus. There are huge numbers of unfortunate / tragic situations in the world where people are in such pain that getting out of it is totally consuming. I absolutely get that, and do not mean to undercut that perspective.

BUT, and this is a big but, I do think Epicurean philosophy tends toward the more cheerful perspective that for MOST people and MOST of the time, pleasure is achievable, even if we have to lower our expectations to extremely simple living. The pleasure we get from extremely simple living when that is all that is available to us is definitely worth living for.

So that's the foundation of the simple living perspective, but in many cases, MORE is possible than "extremely simple" living, and where more pleasure can be obtained at a cost of pain that we judge to be worthwhile, then by all means we should act to gain that, and not accept simply the minimum available to us.

Cassius Amicus

Remember this from the Jefferson Head and Heart letter, which contains the phrase "the greater part of life is sunshine"

Heart. And what more sublime delight than to mingle tears with one whom the hand of heaven hath smitten! To watch over the bed of sickness, & to beguile its redious & its painful moments! To share our bread with one to whom misfortune has left none! This world abounds indeed with misery: to lighten its burthen we must divide it with one another. But let us now try the virtues of your mathematical balance, & as you have put into one scale the burthen of friendship, let me put its comforts into the other. When languishing then under disease, how grateful is the solace of our friends! How are we penetrated with their assiduities & attentions! How much are we supported by their encouragements & kind offices! When heaven has taken from us some object of our love, how sweet is it to have a bosom whereon to recline our heads, & into which we may pour the torrent of our tears! Grief, with such a comfort, is almost a luxury! In a life where we are perpetually exposed to want & accident, yours is a wonderful proposition, to insulate ourselves, to retire from all aid, & to wrap ourselves in the mantle of self-sufficiency! For assuredly nobody will care for him who care for nobody. But friendship is precious, not only in the shade but in the sunshine of life; & thanks to a benevolent arrangement of things, the greater part of life is sunshine.

https://newepicurean.com/the-greater-part-of-life-is.../

(Note: it appears that "redious" is in the original, not a mistype)

Turning back to being more serious for a moment, that's one of the multitude of reasons that we can't just sit back and contemplate as being the best way to live. it's just a fact of nature that unless we act to learn, to study, and to protect our own interests, bad things are going to happen to us. Lots of those bad things are pretty basic like disease, bad weather, hunger, and the like, but there *are* other people out there who are just as likely as any virus or bacteria to upset our desire and ability to live happily, and taking the position that "we're all children of god" or "we're all brothers and sisters" doesn't solve the problem.

I think part of the term for that is "rent-seekers"!

Yes that's my experience with Rotary and Lions too Elli. But the format, stripped of its theist problems, probably makes good sense, as it ends up being primarily a regularly lunch meeting of friends, punctuated with a few outside projects. Short of a "book club" format, a regular lunch effort with a speaker probably would be a good start.

Great question. I've used that just as a general allusion to "enemies of Greece" such as in the phrase which is attributed to Epicurus by Diogenes of Laertius. But the concept of there being "enemies" who are working against our happiness is (in my view) beyond dispute, so it's great to consider who/what might fit into that category.

On page 237, Dewitt writes: "Metrodorus, a more impetuous individual than the master, afforded exceptional opportunities to the adversary. In some publication he had written: "The pleasure of the stomach is the beginning and root of all good, and the things of wisdom and the refinements of life have their standard of reference in this." (cites to Usener's Epicurea, 409).

However that statement does not seem to be attributed to Metrodorus by other commentators. such as here: http://monadnock.net/epicurus/fragments.html

This is from page 387 of Bailey's Extant Remains:

This too is relevant, but doesn't answer this particular question:

More from Bailey - who are Duen and Korte?

Also -

DeWitt spoke very highly of Bignone in his book (in the introduction, if I recall) so perhaps picked this attribution up from Bignone(?)

Probably it is not a major issue as to which of them said it, as either could have, but if this is an error in DeWitt it would be good to track it down.