Posts by Matt

If he truly believed they were real, that of course is the preferred traditional opinion, we are able to discuss the inner details of why he believed they were real without evidence.

Hi Oscar,

You are correct Epicurus did not posit personal gods, but he did posit that his gods were real. The problem is that he asserts their reality without evidence of any kind. Ultimately that would be a form of idealism.

Like I said before, a person has to justify their position on this given the evidence and testimony. I personally consider it a lie or fabrication if he presented something to be true without evidence. Especially if he knowingly presented this while disbelieving it. That would be a serious offense. But we hope that was not true.

This is topic has been debated ad infinitum especially among the core members here. My counter views represent those who criticized Epicurus on this subject (both pagan and Christian).

Though the subject is endlessly discussed with no reconciliation, It represents an important critical analysis of a very important aspect of the philosophy. If anything it lends itself to a modern version or continuation of Cicero’s dialogue.

And of course I respect your positions on all points Cassius. As always. ?

Yes indeed, Lucretius does open his work with a hymn honoring Venus.

There is no question that the ancient Epicureans did in fact have reverence for the ancient Roman and Hellenic deities, at the very least in some allegorical or poetic sense. Basically that the deities represented forces of nature or human emotion.

Obviously an allegorical god is not the same thing as a real “atomic” god. The issue is that Epicurus himself posits that the gods are in fact real. Going as far to give them particular attributes and sensations. Yet without giving any evidence of their existence as specifically described.

Epicurus may have known his gods did not exist, but he promulgated a very specific theology that assured his followers that they do in fact exist only to avoid accusations of atheism. In this case, a person needs to be able to look past or justify a complete theological fabrication (an outright lie) by Epicurus himself, which in my opinion is an ethical dilemma that casts a very long shadow.

It’s an interesting study.

I have been interested in Epicurean Theology for the last few years. I’ve argued that it can be a linchpin aspect of the philosophy if it is examined very, very closely and carefully.

But I’m an oddball of the group.

Once again, welcome!

Hi Clive,

I wanted to swing by and welcome you. I’ve been taking a short hiatus but I would enjoy discussing your thoughts further when I return.

If you read further up the thread you’ll see that there are three positions modern Epicureans take on the gods issue. Two of which posit that the gods do not actually exist and one (the Traditional view) that they fundamentally do exist.

This discussion is primarily concerned with the Epicurean conception of deity and whether the gods, as specifically described by Epicurus, are capable of existing or not. Some Epicureans hold that there are real beings, as real as you and I are existing in the universe or the intermundia. Others are claiming pure atheism and still others claim they are not real but just allegorical and artistic interpretations of the human psyche and nature.

Great looking newsletter!

Yes, yes, yes!

New Years is definitely a wasted holiday in the midst of winter. Just a few more weeks until the opening out of the underworld is visible!

Unfortunately I work in an office with no windows. Upwards of 12 hours a day. Of course during the winter months it’s intolerable...dark in the morning when I wake up and dark when I get out. Add the New England snow into the mix and it’s a surefire way to get SAD.

But spring is hopefully around the corner!

Eye strain due to iPhone screens and computer screens is a sure thing these days. I try, during my down time at work, to not just blankly stare at the front page of the news or social media anymore. I’ll often just look away for a bit and try to refresh my eyes.

I constantly swap the colors and themes. I get bored easily. I prefer the dark colors, it’s easier on the eyes. Like using night mode on a Kindle or iPad.

The blinding white backgound can be too much in the AM when checking messages.

Hi Oscar!

It’s a pleasure to speak with you.

I have not heard of Michael Huemer, but I will certainly take a look at his work. Thank you for recommending it.

I’m sure you picked up on it, but my use of the term Persian is not an ethnically centered concept within this group, but rather one used by a few Epicureans here to denote someone who is an antagonist of the Epicurean philosophy or Hellenism in general. Obviously this idealism hearkens back to the Ancient Greek and Persian conflict that no one alive today has any stake in, but it’s used as a perjorative by Epicureans who consider the ancient Persians the archetypal monolithic enemy of Hellas and can be applied to any number of modern antagonists today.

I personally don’t use the term in this specific context outside of this group, simply because it has no particular significance to anyone other than 300 movie fans.

Matt

Yep! That’s what I was trying to do! Haha

I knew you would object, I will sustain it so as to not fall into a spiraling wormhole of theology ad nauseam tonight... for everyone’s wellbeing and sanity.Haha

Ok so I’ve been meditating on this for the last couple of days and I’ve come to a conclusion...

I agree with Nate that all anyone would be doing trying to capture an “ideal” Epicurean deity in canvas would be just reinventing the wheel. From a universal point of view, it’s just not going to work or even be meaningful to the philosophy.

So here’s what I’ve come up with...

I believe that Epicurean philosophy (in modern times) owes a serious explanation for their gods. My personal opinion is that the “metacosmic” deities are really, really difficult to maintain for the average adherent of the philosophy. So what I believe will work with the philosophy in modern times is a very soft pantheism.

This shifts all the focus off the idealized deities and puts it right back on nature. What is deity? It’s nature. What would we use for images? Beautiful images of nature. The best sunsets, sunrises landscapes, seascapes, star fields and galaxies.

This soft pantheism differs from the more Stoic pandeism and panpsychism, that affirms that a divine mind is immanent and active in everything.

With a soft pantheism there is some wiggle room, not much for a faint agnostic flavoring of Providence. Enough to satisfy former religious theists and not enough to drive ANY dogmas or doctrines at all. Basically Providence in this scheme is the observable fact that that we have cosmic order that is conducive to life and self reflection as opposed to undefined molecular chaos swirling in the void.

So those are my thoughts on this...

The easiest transition for a theist to the Epicurean system is to promote nature oriented pantheism. No images of gods, just universally beautiful images of nature. Things that give pleasure and please the eye.

I will be very interested to observe the results if that project gets off the ground because it would illustrate more clearly what the Epicurean deities would have to be like according to the philosophical descriptions. Like I've said previously, I don't know if its even possible to do this given their very particular description, but I think it would be interesting to see.

You'll then be able to compare them against the old Greco-Roman depictions to see where they diverge.

Then you can pit them against other deities from other religions and philosophy to see where they stand.

I would definitely think you'd want to incorporate the imagery from On the Nature of The Gods.

I think the general concept behind Hindu Iconography has a great potential to help in creating an image. The Hindus have mastered that art form.

That way you avoid being associated with something that perhaps does not represent your philosophical convictions.

I think it would be an interesting artistic exercise to attempt to create an "Epicurean Deity" based solely on the philosophical description, devoid of the polytheistic accretions.

Nate would be the man for that for sure.