Posts by Cassius

You are very welcome! Your comment calls to mind why I think it is so important not to underplay the role of Epicurean physics. We don't just start with abstractions and manipulate them, we start back at basics of elemental particles and void and the absence of an overall supernatural creator, and the absence of a center to the universe. Within such a universe how could it even be conceived that there would be "one size fits all" arrangements?

But the key to me was to help me break out of the "Either chaos or divine creator" alternative. These don't have to be the only alternatives, even though there is massive pressure to force us into one of those two paradigms. Some things are in fact determined and "necessary," while some others are not.

In this context I always remember the Rolfe Humphries wording of the passage from Book 1 of Lucretius about "what can be, and what cannot...."-

So his force,

His vital force of mind, a conqueror

Beyond the flaming ramparts of the world

Explored the vast immensities of space

With wit and wisdom, and came back to us

Triumphant, bringing news of what can be

And what cannot, limits and boundaries,

The borderline, the bench mark, set forever.

Religion, so, is trampled underfoot,

And by his victory we reach the stars.

Welcome C. Florius Lupus ! I like good Roman names! When you get a chance please tell us about your background and interest in Epicurus, and your mastery of Lucretius which no doubt you read in our mother tongue!

No problem about delayed responses - my life interferes with my philosophy time too!

However at times it's good to refocus in ways that just scrolling back over the thread doesn't fix.

In this case, I think you're probably thinking of some practical applications of these ideas that it would be good for us to pursue.

We started off talking about the dead end of valueless virtue. I think most of our discussion since then has revolved around how there are both "guard rails" or "banks" that lead generally in the same directions for everyone, but with a wide flow with lots of room for individuality within the banks.

One implication of this is to reinforce the conclusion that one size doesn't fit all in the field of ethics, but I bet you are thinking about other applications. What do you think?

What do you guys think of the phrase 'Pre-Verbal Memory'?

I think the pre-verbal part is descriptive as one part of the process we're talking about, but I am not sure it conveys the full scope. And in regard to the memory part I am not sure that that would be correct. I realize it is not a given that anticipations are going to be parallel in every respect to the feelings, and to the sensations, but I think Epicurus seems firm that both the feelings and the sensations are incapable of memory, and I suspect that as a faculty of the canon of truth that anticipations would not be capable of memory either.

• Actually that observation goes right to the heart of the DeWitt objection to the DL description of anticipations as a stored picture (presumably stored in memory).
  
  There's absolutely no doubt that we do have a faculty of memory, and that we do store pictures, and that we do use stored pictures to process our thoughts. The issue continues to be whether THAT PARTICULAR process, which clearly exists, is what Epicurus was referring to. The DeWitt position, by which I am still persuaded, would be that we're talking about a faculty that is different from the storing and processing of pictures. The DeWitt position would likely be stated that the faculty enables us to assemble all sorts of separate sensations into a form that we then store, and it is the process of assembly, not the storage, that is the faculty of anticipations.
  
  The analogy Nate would be that you, as an artist, hear all sorts, of sounds, but that you organize only certain sounds into a composition that you store in your mind, and play on your piano, as music. The storage and repetition certainly occur, but the "faculty" part that even gets you to the party is that you have a "knack" for assembling sounds into music.
  
  Same with a painter. The painter's eyes see all sorts of colors ands shapes, but there is some faculty within the painter's mind that selectively observes only some of them, and assembles them into the picture in his mind that he then paints again and again. The issue of remembering the picture is of course part of our mental processes, but our minds would never have assembled what our eyes report to it into a picture unless our minds had knack for assembling disparate pieces into a whole.
  
  It seems to me that to parallel with sensations and feelings in terms of having no memory, and in terms of having no opinion, anticipations have to be a "faculty" constituting "the knack to assemble" rather than any single picture, or any single memory of a picture. Once we make judgments to assemble something into a word, opinion has necessarily been a part of that, since words are not universal symbols.

Nate I am concerned my suggestions are probably too much work, so don't worry about them of course if you don't have time. I just wanted to post these thoughts for future use when we have time. I particularly think it will be good for future use to be able to clip out "scenes" from within the total, and that way regularly post parts that point back to the whole.

Nate I woke up this morning thinking further. Yes it will be good to have a final product with blank boxes to allow sort of like a "coloring book" effect -- people can write out their own description.

But I also realize that the graphics lend themselves to breakdown into individual panels, each of which illustrate some aspect of the Epicurean story. And the bubbles can effectively be what the lead character is thinking (or a description of the scene).

In other words, as you have said, the first panel illustrates the young animal at birth. The important thing here is that all animals pursue pleasure and avoid pain at birth, before they are corrupted by false religion and false philosophy.

Then each panel along the way, the animal (animalS????) confront a hazard and then deal with it using an Epicurean doctrine. They confront the scary Grim reaper, but defeat him (move past him) by realizing that death is nothing to us/absence of sensation, and so on.

That's the main thought, but not I realize another thought. Perhaps this is not possible/doable, but maybe the answer to the theme that draws everything together is to carry through the progression that what we have here is a GROUP of young animals, and it is the GROUP that goes through the progression, and that throughout the progression it is the PIG (representing Epicurus) who calls out the answer to each challenge.

In other words the fear/incorrect view could be placed in the mouth of some other animal, while the hog/Epicurus points out the answer, all the way through. I say hog because perhaps the best image for the Epicurus/hog as the panels progress is not some chubby round pig but a Razorback hog, or other obviously strong and fearless hog, that the young pig grows into over time.

The drawing of Gullenbursti as pointed out to me by Jason - https://newepicurean.com/slashing-anoth…of-a-norse-god/

I think you are probably limited by the program in terms of the Graphics that you can use, but I'm mainly just thinking out loud.

Already your graphic can be used in this way ; i am thinking in terms of how we can capture individual parts and then post those regularly as separate illustrations, which then can also be added together into the big picture.

OK I am thinking too that each major point on the diagram represents a challenge to which there is an Epicurean response for overcoming it.... And filling out a blank box helps to reinforce to each person what that response is.

Nate I just had an idea. Just like I think it is attractive for people to set up their own outlines of Epicurean philosophy, I wonder if at some point it might also be interesting and helpful if people wrote their own commentary to each step of your diagram. Perhaps we could generate an alternate version of the diagram with blank boxes and ask people what they would write at each step.

What do you think of that? And if we did use it that way, I doubt it would require any change in the diagram, unless you've come up with any new ideas.

It might take some time to get this off the ground and maybe some examples (like with the outlines) but I think this might be a useful twist. What do you think?

Thanks to Takis Panagiotpolous for this info and link:

http://www.epicuros.gr/pages/en.htm?f…Irh7Dq4F39hcZWI

"So, it all comes down to whether a person believes in what revealed religions have to say." << I definitely agree. It's a matter of "faith" in the end, and that is pretty much an issue of what kind of evidence we are going to accept before we believe something.

Thanks Condorcet and good to hear from you. I haven't changed my views much since then, and I continue to think of this in terms of an alternative to what I understand to be the false choice set up by most people.

I still think of this in terms of the attempt to make us choose between chaos and divine order. I think Epicurus points accurately to the universe being operational through the properties of the elements, which are in fact neither "chaotic" in the sense of truly random, nor ordered by a master-mind divine creator.

In the same way, as you say, people are human and their passions follow much the same river - the river has banks, and virtually everyone lives within those banks. But within the banks of the river there's a huge diversity of preferences, and different groups are going to form their own currents and desire to move in different directions within the banks, generally going in the same direction, but powerfully wanting to take different paths to get there.

So at one and the same time different currents can separate themselves and find their own passions with each other, while all the different currents still stay within the banks of the river. We don't need to choose between radical libertarian individualism and totalitarian authority that suppresses all individual feeling.

There's always going to be some friction, apparently, as currents scrape against each other and as individuals desire to move from one current to another, but the big picture seems to me that it's wrong to totally take sides and think that only the libertarian and authoritarian extremes are possible.

(It's been a long day here and I may have strayed off topic but I think I am addressing your comment.)

Thanks for posting that DL

Nate thanks again for all your work on this. I am sure over time we'll find ways to improve it, but this version is very usable as is. I am trying to set up my office to get ready to make a series of audio-visual presentations and I am definitely planning on using this for one of them. I hope to get to that soon.

If we can do this from our world, then there is no reason to think that something similar has not been done from innumerable other worlds throughout the universe, an innumerable number of times before -

"Moreover, there is an infinite number of worlds, some like this world, others unlike it. For the atoms being infinite in number, as has just been proved, are borne ever further in their course. For the atoms out of which a world might arise, or by which a world might be formed, have not all been expended on one world or a finite number of worlds, whether like or unlike this one. Hence there will be nothing to hinder an infinity of worlds." - Epicurus - Letter to Herodotus

LD are you suggesting that title for THIS thread, or for a separate thread. Might be something to combine into one. I have moved most all of the comparison topics to this category so what do you think? Two subcategories, or one? Comparing Epicurean Philosophy With Opposing Philosophies and Religions

OK very good -- I will move all the "Comparison" threads to a new category so they will all be together.

Outstanding point JAWS. "When we view happiness as the peak of a mountain we set ourselves up for failure. There is no such summit that can be reached that would mean lasting happiness simply because we got to the top, imho." That calls to mind a LOT of the problem that happens when we try to fit Epicurean into theistic paradigms. How COULD there be a summit, or a point of final rest, in a universe which has no center and is constantly in motion. The very thought of such a point is inconceivable, so when Epicurus discusses "happiness" as "the goal" (Torquatus did, but did Epicurus ever really use that construct?) we have to understand happiness as only snapshot along the path, and not in any sense a final ending point or summit.

LD that reminds me that we ought to set up a thread for references in the New Testament that appear to be related to Epicurus. DeWitt has already done the work for us in "St Paul and Epicurus" but most people don't take the time to read that. Suggestion for best way to title and set up that thread?

LD this could turn into a long thread over time - perhaps you should make the title of the thread more descriptive?

I think years ago I also read the "Painted Word" which goes along with FBTOH but I can hardly remember. I see my thoughts have changed a lot over the years and art theory is something that I don't have well developed thoughts on today.