Posts by Cassius

Yes, I suspect that he probably either agreed with Epicurus exactly, but no matter what he really thought he knew that he better keep at least some of those views to himself in the interest of his politics. I seem to remember reading that Thomas Paine and some of the more radical deists resented this about Jefferson.

And that actually is another interesting topic. For a while I was reading a lot of Thomas Paine. Paine truly seems to have been a Deist, and as radical as he was I have never read that Paine talked about Epicurus directly.

The current version of this is now on GOOGLE DOCS: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VG…y7mnLYgmUc/edit

I should have addressed that point in my first post. Yes I agree that my understanding of "Deist" is a detached god, but I also understand the term to mean "supernatural" and also "created the universe." I associate the term Deist with the "clockmaker" model of the god who sets things in motion and steps back, and THAT would not be compatible with Epicurus. The part you describe is definitely compatible, but if "deist" also includes "supernatural" and "universe creater" then that part would not. Those are the issues I would like to see clarified in examining what Jefferson believed.

I think that is a great question and I agree with the concern. Given that Jefferson clearly understood Epicurus and Epicurus' contentions about the universe being eternal, I would not think that Jefferson thought of himself as a deist, and I bet a lot of the commentary just comes from the lack of familiarity people have with the Epicurean position - they don't know of any alternative to (1) Theist , (2) Deist, or (3) Atheist. I think we'd have to dig into Jefferson's own letters to determine what he thought, so maybe over time as people come across this thread they can suggest cites. But I do recall reading that Jefferson was very concerned about his words being used against him, so it may always be difficult to be sure of what he really thought, as opposed to what he wrote. Hopefully others can clarify this over time.

Glad to have you Elbrando! If you re friends of Brett then you are certainly welcome here. There is generally lots of interest in Epicurus from people into physics who appreciate Luretius, which I know would include Martin and Harrington Andros . If there's anything we can help you find let us know.

I think we'll find that most peoples' outlines are not nearly as on-point as yours, so will require lots more comment. Working out a procedure for making suggestions is fun too. I would hope others as they come by this in the future will add lots more comments, and as you think of better ways to outline you'll post updates. Should be helpful to everyone.

Welcome elbrando !

Great example of how different people stress different parts when they start the process of outlining. I think this is an excellent selection.

Excellent example for what we are trying to do here - thanks Brett!

Here are initial comments:

Especially with respect to knowledge of the physical world, we are constantly revising 'knowledge' in response to new facts and data through the scientific method <<< This is a subject where Philodemus "On Methods of Inference" has important things to say. The edition I have linked in the library here has a LOT of good commentary in the appendix by DeLacy (this is the direct link) where he unwinds what Philodemus was saying the Epicureans thought on the issue of: how do we take past experience and infer conclusions about things where we have no experience / how far can we go?

"Live and let live" - the good society is the one that allows people to express and pursue their own pleasures and only limits the former when it interfers with that selfsame pursuit of others - DeWitt says this and I largely agree, but I wonder if there are not limits to this conclusion. If the central focus is alwaysDeWitt says this and I agree on pleasure, may there not be times when the structure of the society has to adjust so as to achieve pleasure under circumstances that limit freedom (such as the Romans appointing a temporary dictator to preserve the society.) All the questions about organization of society are very interesting.

Lots more to say in later posts!

DRAFT OF AGENDA FOR ONLINE EPICUREAN 20th

Welcome to this month's Online Epicurean Twentieth. We know that the ancient Epicureans commemorated this date because the will of Epicurus contains this instruction:

"The income of the property left by me to Amynomachus and Timocrates shall be divided by them as far as possible, with the advice of Hermarchus, for the offerings in honor of my father and mother and brothers, and for the customary celebration of my birthday every year on the tenth of Gamelion, and likewise for the assembly of my disciples which takes place on the twentieth of each month, having been established in recollection of myself and Metrodorus."

(1) Everyone say hello in the order your name appears in the list to the left. Don't give too much personal information if you prefer not to, but say hello and say something brief about your interest and background in Epicurus.

(2) Moderator read something about the life of Epicurus, either from Diogenes Laertius or maybe an excerpt from DeWitt's "Philosophy for the Millions" about the significance of Epicurus.

(3) Another moderater read something from or about the life of Metrodorus. This is going to be harder to find but we at least have what Laertius said about him.

(4) Another writer read some particularly appropriate passage from a text (Letter to Menoeceus)?

(5) Call for questions or comments, with people wanting to make them typing in a request to speak, and we go in that order

(6) Call meeting to close with a reading of one of the opening passages from one of the chapters of Lucretius, starting with Chapter One for this meeting.

From Chapter 1:

When human life, all too conspicuous,

Lay foully groveling on earth, weighed down

By grim Religion looming from the skies,

Horribly threatening mortal men, a man,

A Greek, first raised his mortal eyes

Bravely against this menace. No report

Of gods, no lightning-flash, no thunder-peal

Made this man cower, but drove him all the more

With passionate manliness of mind and will

To be the first to spring the tight-barred gates

Of Nature's hold asunder. 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.

Conclude: Invite people to move to another voice/text channel after this is over if they have time and would like to talk further.

Here is an example of a raw outline composed from "stream of consciousness" that needs much revision:

1. Nature / Physics
   1. We observe nothing comes from nothing and nothing goes to nothing
   2. We observe that nature follows a pattern in which changes happen with regularity and living things reproduce their same kind (orange trees produce oranges; oranges produce orange trees, over and over. Birds don't appear in an instant in the sky, they come from eggs. Birds and people grow at a regular expectable rate.
   3. There must be a mechanism by which this pattern is reproduced.
   4. There must be, at the limit of division, some smallest level of particle which continues to survive and on which these reproducible changes originate.
   5. In order for these elemental particles to move, they must have space to move in, so there must be void.
   6. If anything exists, it must be composed of these elemental particles and void.
   7. Since nothing new is ever created or destroyed (per observation 1) the inference is that the universe has always existed, and therefore was not created by any supernatural god.
   8. Since all things which come together from elemental particles and void eventually return to particles and void, that includes my mind and body.
   9. When my mind and body disassemble and return to elemental state, I will have no further sensation and my consciousness will end; I will not go to "heaven" or "hell"
   10. The universe appears to be infinite in size, and the number of particles appears infinite (for reasons to be included here in future additions)
   11. Since the universe is infinite in size, there is nothing "outside" the universe where any supernatural god or supernatural realm might be.
   12. Modern science, as well as the observation that higher animals have free will, provide evidence that there must be a mechanism by which at some point the atoms do not move in an entirely mechanistic biilliard-ball style; this mechanism must be the "swerve" of the atom.
2. Knowledge / Truth
   1. We have no faculties of information about the universe outside of us except for the senses.
   2. We have no natural dispensation toward what to choose or avoid other than pleasure and pain.
   3. We have no inborn knowledge of facts about things outside us, but we do seem to have some sort of intuitive faculty which disposes us to process information in predisposedways (anticipations)
   4. Those who tell us that knowledge / truth is impossible are lying because they are are claiming knowledge / truth in making their statement.
   5. Reason must be based on evidence from the senses in order for the conclusions of reason to be valid.
3. Ethics / How to Live
   1. Because we concluded in Physics that there are no supernatural gods, then there is also no supernatural world of ideas, of forms, of virtues, or any other absolute standards of conduct.
   2. Because we concluded in Physics that our consciousness ends at death, there is no reason to calculate our conduct based on heaven and hell, or fear of gods.
   3. Because we concluded in Physics that our consciousness ends at death, we know that this is the only life that we will ever have, so that we must live it to the fullest now.
   4. Because we concluded in Knowledge/Truth that pleasure is the only natural faculty we have that gives us a reason to choose anything, and pain the only natural faculty that tells us to avoid things, we conclude that pleasure is the guide of life, and pain is to be avoided.
   5. Because pleasure is our only goal according to nature, we just all our choices according to whether those choices bring us pleasure or pain.
   6. There is no grounds for considering any choice or action virtuous other than whether it brings us pleasure or helps us avoid pain.
   7. Because our emotions, in telling us what is pleasurable and therefore to choose, and what is painful and therefore to avoid, are so essential to us, any idea that emotions (feelings) should be suppressed, as suggested by the stoics and others, is the height of foolishness.

Thank you Brett! I very much appreciate it as that will help get the ball rolling! When you do, please start a new thread in this forum, as that is the pattern I think will work best - If everyone has their own thread. If you run into any difficulties doing it, please let me know. I think the post editor even allows outlines - using the LIST command at top right of the menu bar.

Just as a test here's an example of using the editor here. Seems to work well! I am thinking that the thing for people to do is start their own thread, then compose their own version of something like this - starting basic and then expanding. A format like this (starting basic, like Jefferson's) will be especially helpful for people who focus only on the ethics, and really haven't thought about how the physics and the epistemology relate to the whole:

1. Nature / Physics
   
   1. Nothing but matter and void
   2. Nothing comes to nothing or goes to nothing
2. Knowledge /Truth
   1. The senses are reliable witnesses
3. Ethics / How to live
   1. Pleasure is the goal of life
   2. The Virtues are tools for the achievement of pleasure

http://epicuros.gr/pages/en.htm

8th Panhellenic Symposium of Epicurean Philosophy

February 10-11, 2018, Cultural Center of Pallini, Athens

Free entrance

The Symposium is annualy organized, with free entrance, by the Friends of Epicurean Philosophy Garden of Athens and Garden of Thessaloniki under the auspices of the Municipality of Pallini. The Pan-Hellenic Symposium of Epicurean Philosophy takes place every year in February, because Epicurus was born in that month, and always in Pallini, because that particular municipality of modern Athens metropolitan area includes the ancient Athenian demos of Gargettus, from which Epicurus originated.

Program

February 10, 2018

THE PHILOSOPHY OF EPICURUS

Greetings from the Gardens of Athens, Thessaloniki, Trikala, Chalkis, Imathias (Greece), International Friends of Epicurus

1. PRINCIPLES OF EPICURUS’ PHILOSOPHY

Praise of Epicurus by a Roman Epicurean

Introduction to Epicurean Philosophy

2. EPICUREAN THERAPY OF PSYCHE

Epicurean psychotherapy with frank criticism

Philodemus “On anger”

Lack of freedom of the dependent person and the epicurean liberation of his mind

Control of stress and Epicurean philosophy

Interval: Viewing of Posters

Music Interval: Greek songs involving Celestial bodies

3. EPICURUS AND FREEDOM

Free will in Epicurean philosophy

Free human being: a course from darkness to light

“Potentially” (segment of a film by Theodoros Maragos)

Discussion: “Mental health, freedom and happy living”

Actual symposium (dining and drinking) in a local tavern with music

February 11, 2018

EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY FROM ANTIQUITY TO OUR TIMES

4. EPICUREAN HISTORY

Important difference of sage and friendship between Epicurus and Plato

Focusing of thought into an impression as criterion of truth

Montaigne and epicurean pleasure

Reception of Epicurus by Greeks in Vienna during Enlightenment

Critique by Lenin to Hegel’s critique of Epicurus

Death in texts of Philodemus and Lucretius

Interval: Viewing of Posters

5. EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY AND SOCIETY

An Epicurean politician

Epicurus and economic theory

The Epicurean philosophy as a fence against misinformation

6. EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY AND ART

Epicurean philosophy and poetry

Criteria for Art according to Philodemus

Artistic photography and Epicurean philosophy

Discussion: “Socially happy life”

Modern Texts

Epicurus in Medicine - “HIPPOCRATIC CORPUS WORK “PRECEPTS”:

PHILANTROPY AND UTILITY IN MEDICINE” by Christos Yapijakis (2017)“Epicurean views on euthanasia (good death)” by Takis Panagiotopoulos (2017)“How the portrait of the Athenian philosopher Epicurus became known to us” by Takis Panagiotopoulos (2017)

7th Panhellenic Symposium of Epicurean Philosophy

February 11-12, 2017, Cultural Center of Pallini, Athens:A Report by C.Yapijakis

For the seventh consecutive year since 2011, more than 400 people from all over Greece, a new record of participants, gathered at the Cultural Center of Pallini in Athens in order to attend the two-day Pan-Hellenic Symposium of Epicurean Philosophy.

The 7th Pan-Hellenic Symposium of Epicurean Philosophy was unanimously a great success and took place in a warm friendly atmosphere, despite the cold weather. There were two sessions on the first day and two sessions on the second day of the Symposium with 19 oral presentations, two discussions, 6 poster presentations, as well as three artistic intervals.

At the opening session of the first day on Saturday, February 11, 2017, the Mayor of Pallini Athanassios Zoutsos said that a website with the Declaration of the Right of Happiness in the European Union has been launched (www. eudaimonia.eu) with information regarding a future campaign of collecting signatures in order to bring the issue to the EU parliament. The initial greetings of representatives from the Greek Gardens were followed by the friendly greetings from Hiram Crespo (International Society of Friends of Epicurus), from Geoff Petersson (Garden of Sydney, Australia), and from Cassius (newepicurean.com, USA).

Session 1 PRINCIPLES OF EPICURUS PHILOSOPHY started with a hymn to Epicurus written by Lucretius and beautifully recited by actor Giorgos Klonis. Then, the presentations ”Life of Epicurus” by Christina Toumba and “ The philosophy of Epicurus” by Kostas Triantafyllidis covered a broad introduction for those attendants with limited knowledge of Epicurus and his philosophy.

Session 2 LUCRETIUS AND SCIENCE was dedicated to the 600 years anniversary of the discovery of the manuscript of Lucretius' masterpiece “On the nature of things” (1417-2017), and its influence to natural philosophy and science. All presentations showed the scientific verification of Epicurean concepts. “Lucretius and Physics” covered by Giannis Alexakis who covered among other things the Brownian motion and the uncertainty principle, “Lucretius and Astronomy” by Fiori Metallinou showed the vastness of the universe and multiplicity of worlds, “Lucretius and Biology” by Christos Yapijakis discussed evolution of living organisms by natural selection, neurobiology, laws of genetics and extraterrestrial life, “Lucretius and Psychology” by Anna Pagoropoulou revealed the similarity of Epicurean ethics with cognitive psychotherapy, and “Lucretius and Sociology-Criminology” by Erasmia Bitsika illustrated the crime prevention capability of the Epicurean philosophy.

The Session was followed by guitar playing by Antonios Erimos of musical pieces “Dust in the wind” (Kansas, USA), “La vita è bella” (Nicola Piovanni, Italy), “Imagine” (John Lennon, UK), “A felicidade” (Antonio Carlos Jobim, Brazil), while at the same time the lyrics translated in Greek were shown.

Session 3 EUZOIA (GOOD LIFE) AND EUTHANASIA (GOOD DEATH) started with presentation “Epicurean views on euthanasia (good death)” by Takis Panagiotopoulos who discussed Epicurus' death and the Epicurean attitude that a good life leads to a good death. Evangelos Protopapadakis discussed the “Epicurean, Stoic and Kantian views regarding suicide”, while Dimitris Liarmakopoulos spoke about good life without the fear of death. Finally, a live discussion on the matters of good life and good death kept the audience until 10 pm, when it was interrupted so that the Friends of Epicurean Philosophy could participate in an actual symposium with dining, drinking, and dancing in a nearby taverna .

On Sunday, February 12, 2017, the Symposium started with Session 3 EPICUREAN HISTORY that included two talks, “The Stoic Epictetus against Epicurus” by Babis Patzoglou and “The hetera philosopher Leontion” by Kostas Kalevras.

Session 4 EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY AND SOCIETY had many very interesting talks. Antonis Bilisis “On education” referred to the importance of introducing the teaching of the Epicurean Canon in Greek high school, so that younger generations be may able to develop a critical way of thinking and approaching reality. Panos Alexandropoulos discussed “Epicurus and Maslow: On needs and desires” showing the similarities between the two thinkers. The American professor Gerald Gutenschwager spoke in Greek regarding “Epicurus and social theory” analysing by an Epicurean point of view the last fifty years of social movements, and focusing on cultural creatives of the last twenty years. “Epicurean view” by Giorgos Kaplanis showed that an advice in an Epicurus' letter might be viewed in different context by different people who do not see the whole picture. Dimitris Altas discussed thoroughly the subject of the “Declaration of happiness in the European Union: conditions and consequences” illustrating that it is of great importance for the future destination of the European Union for the benefit of its people. The Session was followed by an artistic interval in which the Dutchman Francesco Bertels played some selected piano and accordion pieces, while the enthusiastic audience sang along.

The final Session 5 PRESENT AND FUTURE OF EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY included presentations “Thoughts of the Garden of Athens” by Litsa Pitsikali and “Thoughts of the Garden of Thessaloniki” by Aphrodite Kouroudi. Litsa discussed the proposal of publishing an english book of the best presentations of the 7 Panhellenic Symposia, as well as the vision to organize in 2020 the first International Symposium of Epicurean Philosophy in Athens. Aphrodite mentioned the intended publication of a short version of the Epicurean Canon in an effort to propose its teaching in Greek high school.

The following discussion stirred the audience of the Symposium about several issues. When someone asked the question why Epicureans are not acting politically to change the dire situation in Greece, the easy answer was that we are doing great many things with open access (conferences, open meetings, books, websites) in order to inform as many people as possible so that they may critically change their mentality. The paradigm of the discovery of Lucretius' poem six hundred years ago was mentioned as a text that changed the course of the Western world. The Epicurean philosophy helped people in ancient times and during the Enlightenment and modern times to make themselves and their environment better.

From the six poster presentations, that were viewed during the intervals of the Symposium, the audience seemed to discuss more the following: - “Sociobiology and Epicurean altruistic egoism: From selfish gene to human cooperation” by Christos Yapijakis - “The discovery of Lucretius' De rerum natura” by Takis PanagiotopoulosThe ProgramFebruary 11, 2017

THE PHILOSOPHY OF EPICURUS

Greetings from the Gardens of Athens, Thessaloniki, and other cities of Greece, International Friends of Epicurus

1. PRINCIPLES OF EPICURUS’ PHILOSOPHY

Life of Epicurus

Lucretius “On the nature of things” (excerpt recitation)

The philosophy of Epicurus

2. LUCRETIUS AND SCIENCE (1417-2017)

Lucretius and Physics

Lucretius and Astronomy

Lucretius and Biology

Lucretius and Psychology

Lucretius and Sociology - Criminology

Interval: Viewing of Posters

Music Anthology by Antonios Erimos (guitar): Dust in the wind (Kansas), La vita e' bella (Nicola Piovani), Imagine (John Lennon), A felicidade (Antonio Carlos Jobim)

3. EUZOIA (GOOD LIFE) AND EUTHANASIA (GOOD DEATH)

Epicurean views on euthanasia (good death)

Philosophical views on euthanasia

Epicurean euzoia (good life)

Discussion: “Euzoia (good life) and euthanasia (good death)”

Actual symposium (dining, drinking, dancing) in a local tavern with music

February 12, 2017

EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY FROM ANTIQUITY TO OUR TIMES

4. EPICUREAN HISTORY

The Stoic Epictetus against Epicurus

The hetera philosopher Leontion

Interval: Viewing of Posters

Music Anthology by Francesco Bertels: Selected piano works

5. EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY AND SOCIETY

On education

Epicurus and Maslow: On needs and desires

Epicurus and social theory

Epicurean view

Declaration of happiness in the European Union: conditions and consequences

6. PRESENT AND FUTURE OF THE EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY

Thoughts of the Garden of Athens

Thoughts of the Garden of Thessaloniki

Discussion: “Present and Future of the Epicurean Philosophy”

WORLD CONGRESS IN PHILOSOPHY (WCP 2016) “THE PHILOSOPHY OF ARISTOTLE”

Athens, 9-15 July, 2016

Aristotle and his influence on later philosophy

"The influence of Aristotle in Epicurus' modification of atomic physics"

Christos Yapijakis

Outlines are important in learning Epicurean philosophy. Epicurus advised in the letter to Herodotus that everyone should be able to reduce the major principles of the philosophy to a simplified outline of the main points. Epicurus wrote:

"Those who have made some advance in the survey of the entire system ought to fix in their minds under the principal headings an elementary outline of the whole treatment of the subject. For a comprehensive view is often required, the details but seldom. To the former, then—the main heads—we must continually return, and must memorize them so far as to get a valid conception of the facts, as well as the means of discovering all the details exactly when once the general outlines are rightly understood and remembered. It is the privilege of the mature student to make a ready use of his conceptions by referring every one of them to elementary facts and simple terms. For it is impossible to gather up the results of continuous diligent study of the entirety of things unless we can embrace in short formulas and hold in mind all that might have been accurately expressed even to the minutest detail."

We know that Thomas Jefferson followed this advice because we have the outline he himself included in his letter to William short in 1819. Here it is in Jefferson's own handwriting (link to full text of letter) -

Outlines, however, must be applied to particular circumstances in order to be useful. We have an interesting example of this in Jefferson's letter to William Short. Jefferson provided to Short his summary of Epicurean philosophy in general principles, but Jefferson also pointed a particular error that Short was committing: Even though Short considered himself to be an Epicurean, Short was misinterpreting the philosophy by thinking that Epicurus advised rest and repose as the goal of living. Jefferson corrected this error - an error still widely committed and spread by commentators today - by advising action to pursue pleasure, rather than repose:

"I take the liberty of observing that you are not a true disciple of our master Epicurus, in indulging the indolence to which you say you are yielding. One of his canons, you know, was that “that indulgence which prevents a greater pleasure, or produces a greater pain, is to be avoided.” Your love of repose will lead, in its progress, to a suspension of healthy exercise, a relaxation of mind, an indifference to everything around you, and finally to a debility of body, and hebetude of mind, the farthest of all things from the happiness which the well-regulated indulgences of Epicurus ensure; fortitude, you know is one of his four cardinal virtues. That teaches us to meet and surmount difficulties; not to fly from them, like cowards; and to fly, too, in vain, for they will meet and arrest us at every turn of our road. Weigh this matter well; brace yourself up."

Notice how Jefferson in the same letter described "in-dolence" as "the greatest felicity," while at the same time rebuking Short for pursuing indolence! This is an example of how Epicurean terminology cannot be considered superficially, and must be considered closely if it is to be applied correctly.

We each therefore need to learn to understand Epicurus thoroughly so that we do not misapply his advice. As an aid in following this path, this special forum group has been set up at EpicureanFriends.com, where you are invited to post your own personal outline as you study Epicurus. As you post, you can then receive comments and suggestions from others that will give you ideas and advice about how you can improve your personal outline.

The first step in applying Epicurean philosophy is to understand Epicurean philosophy, so you should first start with an outline of your understanding of Epicurus' views.

Next you can consider your own personal application. Although Epicurean philosophy has general principles that apply to everyone, Epicurus also emphasized the reality of the individual context in which we must apply the general principles. A good way to proceed in applying Epicurean principles is to outline your own application. Each person has their own context of concerns and spheres of action in which to consider how to pursue pleasure and avoid pain. The details of each individual outline will therefore vary according to those circumstances. Your detailed personal outline will eventually be too private to post, but general outlines can be included here for public discussion.

Here is an example of the variety you can expect:

Some people are already sufficiently confirmed in their own understanding of the nature of the universe that it is appropriate for them to stop (at least at first) with a broad conclusion, such as:

"Nature: The universe operates on Natural principles, and is not influenced by supernatural forces."

Others, however, will want to outline the study of the universe (physics) in much more detail so that they can understand, and hold with confidence, the reasons why this conclusion (the universe operates on natural / non-supernatural principles) is true.

Most, in all likelihood, are somewhere in between, and they need to outline the fundamentals of how nothing exists except matter and void, that nothing is ever created from or destroyed to nothing, and similar observations that underlay the fundamental conclusion that the universe is natural.

Here are a few suggestions for posting your first outline:

1. Keep it simple. Don't try to cover every aspect of Epicurean philosophy in the first outline. Make sure to cover the main points first.

2. Although you want to keep the outline simple, you also want to cover the three major branches of Epicurean philosophy: (1) The nature of the universe, (2) The nature of knowledge, and (3) The nature of how to live.

3. Don't delete your first outline post, but copy it over into new posts and make the changes there. That way you can follow the progression of your thoughts as you refine your understanding.

The best thing to do is go ahead and post your outline even if you think it is incomplete. A major benefit of this exercise is thinking through the process, and others can make suggestions for additions or changes as you go through the drafting process. You will no doubt find yourself redrafting over and over as you apply the general rules to your particular situation.

Remember: copying someone else's outline and adopting it as yours does nothing to advance your understanding of Epicurean philosophy or how it should be applied in your life. You may think that someone else has already developed the ultimate Epicurean outline, and think that it is sufficient to adopt it for yourself. A full understanding requires that you can state the principles yourself and explain why each of them is true and important.

Here's a good example of the pitfall of copying without understanding:

One of the most well-known outlines of Epicurean philosophy is the "Tetrapharmakon": (1) Don't fear God, (2) Don't fear death, (3) What's good is easy to get, and (4) What's bad is easy to avoid.

This is a very easy to remember and concise statement of certain aspects of the first four principal doctrines. However if you do not understand the reasoning behind it, you can easily become discouraged, dismayed, and completely turned off from Epicurean philosophy. Many people reading the Tetrapharmakon immediately think to themselves: "Why *shouldn't* I fear god? Why shouldn't I fear death? I don't find that what is good is easy to get and I certainly don't find that what is bad is easy to avoid!" These people dismiss Epicurus as just another ivory-tower academic, and they miss his true insights completely.

Only someone who is familiar enough with Epicurean philosophy to understand the reasoning behind the Tetrapharmakon can use it appropriately. It takes study to understand Epicurus' reasoning that gods are not to be feared because such "divinity" as may exist is perfect and does not interfere with mortals. It takes study to understand Epicurus' reasoning that death is not to be feared because there is no consciousness after death. It takes study to understand the reasoning behind "the good" being easy to get, "the bad" being easy to involved" and why the issue of "limits" is relevant to the question at all.

Absent study into the reasoning of Epicurus, a too-brief summary can seem trite and off-putting. It is therefore necessary for each student to build up - step by step - their own understanding of Epicurean philosophy. Only then can they construct in their own context an appropriate outline that reflects their own understanding and assists them in applying Epicurean principles to their own lives.

This is a new project and we will be working out many kinks as we go along. However the process of working together with other student of Epicurean philosophy to produce an outline most suitable for yourself should be a beneficial process to everyone involved. Get get started as soon as you can at www. Epicurean friends.com.

TO GET STARTED: In the list of forums you see above at the top of this page (Epicureanfriends.com / Forum / General Discussion & News / Personal Outlines of Epicurean Philosophy). Click on Personal Outlines of Epicurean Philosophy and select CREATE THREAD. Then just start typing your outline and any descriptions / explanations / or requests for suggestions!

https://discord.gg/mdQY8WW

It is an example how good debate really contributes toward sharpening our thoughts on things.

I started this graphic with the intent of having Column A be "Pleasure" and Column "B" be friendship, prudence, and a list of the "virtues." However in reading the Letter to Menoeceus closely, that is not how Epicurus summarizes his own philosophy of life.

Cassius AmicusGroup Admin Ross if you agree that Pleasure is the only thing desirable in and of itself, and that the only reason for anything to be choiceworthy (including friendship, wisdom, prudence or any other "virtue") is because of the pleasure that is brought from it (including the avoidance of unnecessary pain), then we are agreed on the major point of discussion.

As to the minor point that you believe you should limit yourself only to "modest pleasures" I think you are misreading Epicurus and limiting your life unnecessarily. I believe that advocacy of that position in a group devoted to promoting the study of Epicurean philosophy should never go unchallenged due to the error it would cause others to follow if accepted. Having made that point again, however, I move on and wish you well.

The point of a discussion group is to discuss, and we've done that in this thread, so there are certainly no hard feelings or ill wishes on my side of this conversation.1

Manage

Like
· Reply · 1h

Ross Ragsdale I just didn’t want to flood the feed with more comments. If that’s fine I’m game ?.

I don’t feel we’re preaching self-denial or “monkish” virtues in advocating what is described in the letter to menoeceus, which is what I believe you fear the most. We still enjoy ourselves, but we use prudence to determine which pleasures are worth our time and which pains are worth enduring.

Let’s take sex and exercise as examples. Sex for the most part is pleasurable. Sex with a condom is less pleasurable (although some may disagree, I’d wonder if they were using the condom correctly if they actually thought that the physical sensation felt more pleasurable). If a college student hooks up with someone and they aren’t sure whether or not the other person has an sti, or they aren’t sure that the other person uses birth control, the sage or wise man would use contraception even though it’s less pleasurable at the moment, it’s better to use one to avoid future pains such as unplanned pregnancies or stis. We pick the less pleasurable activity to avoid pain. Some may just avoid sex altogether if they’re that worried about the other participant’s/s’ health.

Now for exercise—when you’re out of shape it hurts to exercise. Literally mostly painful sensations (my necessary evil is 30 min of cardio most days). Cardio however, is one of the best ways to preserve and promote one’s physical health. The painful sensations at the moment in the end lead to a more pleasant state of being and sensation, assuming that the person in question is using an adequate understanding of anatomy and mechanics. It results in more pleasure because they’re physically healthier, better blood pressure, less preventable diseases, etc. If this state isn’t pleasurable, then it at least a consistent way to avoid pain.

I don’t see how that’s a misreading, and I don’t see how that’s a minor point? It is a very important distinction to make. The only time a pleasure would not be considered choice worthy is if it lead to a greater pain (e.g. refraining from contraception or drinking in excess to the point of nausea/vomiting, or a bad hangover the next day). Could you please point me to any of the letters or works written by Epicurus that disagree with this analysis?
Manage

Like
· Reply · 52m · Edited

Cassius Amicus Ross I have absolutely no problem with what you wrote in this last paragraph, and I certainly have no problem with the letter to Menoeceus. I am only replying to your specific statement earlier: "Because of the situation in which we find ourselves, heaven filled with only stars rather than involved gods, our best chance of living the good life, a life of modest pleasure and ataraxia, we need friendship and practical wisdom, aka. prudence."

You very specifically stated that "the good life" is "a life of modest pleasure and ataraxia." A statement defining the good life must always be scrutinized because all else follows from what one defines as the ultimate good. And the ultimate good is not "modest pleasure" but "pleasure." I gather that you think this is an unimportant distinction, and I agree with you that Epicurus tells people to choose their pleasures carefully. But his philosophy is not built on choosing "modest pleasures" as the definition of the goal, because that is not the goal. Epicurus says so specifically in the letter to Menoecus ("Again, we regard independence of outward things as a great good, not so as in all cases to use little, but so as to be contented with little if we have not much, being honestly persuaded that they have the sweetest enjoyment of luxury who stand least in need of it. ... To habituate one's self, therefore, to simple and inexpensive diet supplies all that is needful for health, and enables a man to meet the necessary requirements of life without shrinking, and it places us in a better condition when we approach at intervals a costly fare and renders us fearless of fortune.")

Epicurus makes the same point with blinding clarity in VS63: "There is also a limit in simple living, and he who fails to understand this falls into an error as great as that of the man who gives way to extravagance." There is simply no way to square this statement with a rule to "only pursue modest pleasures" - but there is no contradiction when one realizes that when "pleasure" is the goal, then whether the particular pleasure to pursue is modest or luxurious is going to be determined under the circumstances then and there existing to the person. When appropriate we enjoy "simple" pleasures, but when appropriate we enjoy luxury, just as Epicurus says (in why we are in a better position to enjoy luxury when it is available.)

I think some people see exactly what I am saying without further explanation, but some people take exception to this as if I am suggesting that simplicity is bad, or that pursuing luxury is good. I am not saying that at all. What I am saying is that one of the prime, continuing, tempting, and most common arguments against Epicurean philosophy is suggesting that there is something besides PLEASURE that is the goal of life. The people who advocate "virtue" as the goal frequently begin by suggesting that certain types of pleasure are more to be preferred than others because they are more worthy, or more noble, or more virtuous, or more *something.* And the most frequently suggested substitute for "pleasure" is "simple pleasures" or "modest pleasures."

But there is nothing in Epicurean philosophy that says a "simple pleasure" is more to be preferred than any other kind of pleasure except for ONE factor: That factor is that in many cases (but not all), more complex pleasures entail greater pain in acquisition or in result than the pleasure is worth. That is why we sometimes choose pain, or sometimes defer an immediate pleasure. Since pleasure and pain are inverse, the problem (and the ONLY problem) with complex pleasures is that they frequently cancel out the pleasure they bring (or worse) due to the pain they bring. The point here is that the choice is still measured in NET pleasure/ pain, not in whether the activity is "simple" or "complex."

Modifiers on the word "Pleasure" as the goal of life were not generally used as far as I know by Epicurus or Lucretius, The reason modifiers were not used is clear: Epicurean philosophy is ultimately practical and the furthest thing from idealism. In an atomist universe with human free will it is impossible to say that a certain course of conduct is ALWAYS going to lead to such and such a conclusion. We cannot even say that Metrodorus MUST be either alive or dead tomorrow. The only thing we can say as a rule about our choices is that we should seek pleasure and avoid pain. Often simple pleasures are the better choice, and as Epicurus said it is better to acclimate oneself to living within one's means so as to be more likely to be independent. But on other days luxuries are easily within reach, and it is natural and proper to enjoy them when we can do so without undue cost, again just as Epicurus said, especially since we have no concern about not having those luxuries tomorrow.

That's why defining the goal of life to be "modest pleasure" is as much an error as defining the goal of life as "immediate pleasure" or "luxurious pleasure" or "friendship" or "music" or "art" or any other single "type" of pleasure. "There is also a limit in simple living, and he who fails to understand this falls into an error as great as that of the man who gives way to extravagance."

Brett. Martin Ferguson Smith published by Hackett is the most current and scholarly. IMA of you want a poetic version Humphries "The Way Things Are" is best. The free one that is most likely to be literal and trustworthy is Munro. Bailey is free and more recent than Munro and probably easier to read but Bailey was no friend of Epicurus. Thats the state of affairs as I see it. I have pdfs of the free versions linked at www. http://Newepicurean.com/library

Hiram I looked at your page - is that a QUOTE from Lampe, or your summary. If a quote would be good to keep this for regular use.

And if not a quote, STILL good for regular use!