Posts by Elli

I am sure for Elayne as for myself, first we live and then we write, as said by Liantinis for the Hellenes !

Quote from Cassius

Elli also what about the point of whether any gods in Greek religion died, or chose to die?

Do I take it to be obvious that the Greek gods experienced pain of some degree, in that they were always fighting among themselves and being mad at each other?

Again, I am wondering about the context that was familiar to Epicurus when he started thinking about this subject.

Let's examine the Doctrine 20 which starts like this: "The (human's) flesh perceives the limits of pleasure as unlimited, and unlimited time is required to supply it...". Why does that happen? Why does the flesh perceive that there are no limits in time? Maybe because the flesh/brain/feelings/senses of the human when is born it is like the animals that have not yet the consciousness that pleasure has limits. And when the human is getting older through the experiences is realizing the issue of death, and with the hedonic calculus realizes/conceives also that has limits. But with experiences it is beneficial for the human to achieve the prudence - that teaches us - on how to become able to put our personal limits for enjoying the pleasure in life.

Do gods perceive as part of Nature that may have a "flesh" that perceives that has unlimited time to enjoy pleasure? Maybe yes, maybe they are like the animals and the humans' babies that are protected or created by Nature such as to not feel pain and enjoy the net pleasure. But however, as Epicurus points out and even the gods obey to the laws of Nature that is capable to create and them, as well as the unlimited worlds both like and unlike with ours. But why Epicurus placed the gods in intermundia (metacosmia i.e. between the worlds) ? Because he thought that yet there is infinite time for them to feel pleasure, there is also a finite space that is maybe like the void that is a "place", and as Epicurus said also for the void is an "untouched" place that makes the gods to have total inability to interact with the laws of Nature and with all worlds that created by Nature.

And continues : "...But the (human's) mind, having attained a reasoned understanding of the ultimate good of the flesh and its limits..." here is what I said above for "the consciousness of the humans" that the flesh to feel pleasure has limits and that comes from the time that human perception is his full consciousness of what is death, what is life and on how he should live well!

And now, on consciousness, please remember your experience, as I remember my experience that was an easter: when I was about 5 years old that I saw my grandfather with a slaughter man to have a hanging sheep on a tree and as the slaughter was trying to put out the sheep’s flesh, I realized that that sheep I knew, it was not alive anymore, and at the same time I realized that in that situation it was, no one could it bring it back. I felt pain and I cried so much. Then, my grandfather fooled me to bring another sheep in the farm saying that it was that sheep. And then they fooled me inside school with the god, the soul and resurrection. They fooled me with Plato's philosophy, until the day I lost my father and my brother and I realized that those issues I learned are total foolishness for making me to live like a stupid slave. And as came to my life Epicurus and his philosophy, I shout out loud : YES, this is the right way at last !

And for this Epicurus continues in this PD 20 "and having dissipated the fears concerning the time to come"..."the time to come" is a fear with a pain in anticipation on something that did not yet come for us, because when the human realizes the next people death, in the same time is realizing the fact of thyself death. For this Epicurus says death is nothing for all of us. Here Epicurus rejects this selfishness that is provoked by later Christianity. So Epicurus unites us with next others that all we are mortals. In the plurality the pain and the fear of death is eliminated also. For this when he speaks for friendship, he called it as immortal good. In plurality, he also says that in death we have no sensations and that means also there is no consciousness at all.

And he continues on the issue of this consciousness: "when the fear is dissipated in the same time it supplies us with the complete life, and we have no further need of infinite time:" Because the flesh does not care anymore for the infinite amount of time (lust for immortality), but the most pleasant time (i.e. the desire for pleasure here and now (present) with the remembrance of (past) pleasures and an expectation of (future) pleasures. This is the voyage of Epicurus in time and space that are both limited, but this is also the way to enjoy pleasure in life.

and continues :"but neither does the mind shun pleasure, nor, when circumstances begin to bring about the departure from life, does it approach its end as though it fell short in any way of the best life".

So, without the carving/lust of immortality i.e. the infinite time and infinite space human’s flesh enjoys and feel the pleasure, past, present and expectation of future, and when is time to leave from the game of life, the human sings a triumph song how WELL he lived.

So to live like god among men it is the same to live well and die well. And that means that the craving of immortality is vain, an empty belief that provokes pain and fear with the result of what ? To have depression, to not be grateful and pleased of what a great gift life is,, and the worst of all is to not think that there was also the probability : to not be born at all, which - with an image is - like the darkness of the abyss.

Conclusion : What really stupid persons exist around us, and as I say sometimes, those are the people that take from us the oxygen to breathe free in a clear air.

For them are the following Epicurean sayings :

68. Nothing is sufficient for him to whom what is sufficient seems too little.

69. The ungrateful greed of the soul makes the creature everlastingly desire varieties of in its lifestyle.

Good to hear that, but I do not accept that. Since that is one of the main causes that turned upside down the whole of our philosophy. As they connected the epicureans with good food and fine wine. To drink and eat and be merry. Moreover, we can do a hypothesis: If the molecules of the pleasure could be found in the stomach or in the small intestine then all the people that have tables with dishes full of food with cacao and omega 3, like the famous Trymalchion dinners, by Petronius would be very pleased and happy.

However, Εpicurus in the last paragraph of his letter to Pythocles in which he describes the methodology of the Canon, he speaks for senses and the "heart" -"love" i.e. feelings, and not for the stomach and the small intestine. If the heart that is a part of a whole body, which through the brain enriches with hormones the whole body can't feel the passion (eros) for the true philosophy, there will be agitation and to the stomach and to the small intestine that would be full, but in the same time will be empty of feelings i.e. depression, since the stomach is just a sack and the small intestine is just a tube of a stupid bad-ass... and sorry for such a language.

There are many molecules in the body and not just those of the small intestine. There is also the environment, there is a whole philosophy that units with consistency the Physics, the Canon and Ethics. And of course, there is the friendship that is developed in an environment. Based on friendship we feel those feelings of security for the food that fills the stomach and the existence of a shelter in any condition. Friendship with its security leads the persons to the bravery, to the liberty, to the autonomy, and to the self-sufficiency for making such contracts with such laws to not hurt each other ... Eating chocolate and smoking cannabis is not the solution. The solution comes from our philosophy that is a whole and leads to the goal of pleasure.

Trust women, since they know many things about GREAT PAINS (labor pains), and GREAT PLEASURES (breast feeding and the hugging of our babies), and as Elayne knows the important role of the Oxytocin in general :

Oxytocin is a hormone and a neurotransmitter that is involved in childbirth and breast-feeding. It is also associated with empathy, trust, sexual activity, and relationship-building.

It is sometimes referred to as the "love hormone," because levels of oxytocin increase during hugging and orgasm. It may also have benefits as a treatment for a number of conditions, including depression, anxiety, and intestinal problems.

Oxytocin is produced in the hypothalamus, a part of the brain. Females usually have higher levels  than males.

Here are some key points about oxytocin. More detail is in this article : https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/275795.php

Oxytocin is produced in the hypothalamus and released during sex, childbirth, and lactation to aid reproductive functions.

It has physical and psychological effects, including influencing social behavior and emotion.

Oxytocin is prescribed as a drug for obstetric and gynecological reasons and can help in childbirth.

Research shows that it may benefit people with an autistic spectrum disorder (ASD), anxiety, and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

Elayne Coulter to Cassius Amicus, well, in the sense that without the danger signal of pain we would die from tissue damage at a young age-- as people do who are born without the ability to feel pain-- that is how pain allows life, which is necessary for pleasure. But I do not think it is similar to matter and void. Then you would require pain in your cup of pleasure, just as void is required between the constantly moving atoms.

Although pain as a warning is necessary, the events which cause us pain are often not necessary, and we should attempt to avoid pain when the pleasure of an action is not greater. Agreeing to pains for greater pleasure is not because the pain brings balance or is necessary, but because it happens to be a result of a particular action. The pain of the death of loved ones is a necessary risk associated with the greater pleasure of deep love. But we will also love many people whom we will not grieve-- they instead will grieve us. So our pain would not have been needed for those loves.

I had another thought this morning upon waking-- if we took the approach of her last paragraph, we would be following the currently prescribed stages of grief, which is an acceptance of pain in an almost resigned manner.

My usual approach is more defiant-- I refuse to submit to pain and insist upon acting for the goal of pleasure. I don't refuse to feel pain of grief-- I just refuse to let it win.

I can't go into some of the specific occasions here... but an example is that when I was told my son would never improve from his schizophrenia enough to leave a group home, I grieved that he had an incurable illness but I refused to submit to doom. I kept searching until I found a place that agreed to try harder, and I took him there. Because I didn't give up, although he is not cured, he has a real life in the community. He has freedom, and friends. I see this as us having defied pain and insisted on pleasure, in spite of not being able to eliminate the pain.

I have done a similar thing when grieving deaths-- I have thought about how I hope my friends and family will not cave in to grief when I die and will live on seeking pleasure, including happy memories of me.

It has a more invigorating result.

Elli Pensa to Elayne Coulter : My friend Elayne, you are a genuine Epicurean !!!

Cassius Amicus

" in the sense that without the danger signal of pain we would die from tissue damage at a young age-- as people do who are born without the ability to feel pain-- that is how pain allows life, which is necessary for pleasure. But I do not think it is similar to matter and void. Then you would require pain in your cup of pleasure, just as void is required between the constantly moving atoms. "

This is a very interesting discussion I am going to have to think about. I totally agree about fighting pain every step of the way. On the other hand, I can see the possibility that we both fight it every step of the way and yet be glad that the *mechanism* is there.

I think in general we have to be alert that there can be multiple levels in what Epicurus was teaching. There is the (1) practical advice for normal intelligent people of good will, and there is (2) dialectical logical responses for the stubborn eggheads who refuse to understand that logical puzzles are not the most important thing in life. Epicurus had to deal with both types of people.

It seems possible to me that what we are discussing might be flipping back and forth between the two perspectives. Clearly (to me) it is right to fight pain every step of the way. But in the heat of battle with egghead Platonists, it might be appropriate to focus at least for that moment on the aspect from which pain is an intrinsic and inseparable aspect of human life.

Of course dealing with egghead Platonists is pretty close to pain / undesirable in itself!

Elli Pensa to Cassius : please read carefully what Elayne wrote : "My usual approach is more defiant-- I refuse to submit to pain and insist upon acting for the goal of pleasure. I don't refuse to feel pain of grief-- I just refuse to let it win".

In the above thoughts by our friend Elayne I found similarities of what Nietzsche has said :

"I have given a name to my pain and call it “dog.” It is just as faithful, just as obtrusive and shameless, just as entertaining, just as clever as any other dog–and I can scold it and vent my bad mood on it, as others do with their dogs, servants, and wives". –Nietzsche, The Gay Science.

Nietzsche's book "The Gay Science" is written after a period of illness, so, Nietzsche makes embodiedness a central tenet of his philosophy, and pain a necessary component of that embodiedness. His relationship to pain, namely treating his pain as if it were a dog to be trained and disciplined, turns pain from a thing that he submits to into a thing that has been submitted to him.

-------------------------

However, Elayne as a genuine Epicurean lady that she is, first thing first that she points out is : <<the goal of pleasure>>. Elayne does not point out a kind of gratitude, she does not move among the opposites, she does not point out anything of these things, but she points out the power of pleasure that is the right guide by Nature for her to train and disciplined any pain internal or external, so with this procedure any pain has been submitted to her like an obedient doggie ! At this point, all the genuine Epicureans shout out loud: Hooray ! This is the great moment of the evidence of the POWER that epicurean SWERVE has !!!!

I have the impression on the issue of Gods that exists a hidden serious argument by Epicurus that gods have not that humans' craving/lust for immortality, because they have total ignorance that are mortals. So, gods have not the consciousness/knowledge of what is death. They are as living in the situation like the animals or humans' babies that born with the pleasure as set by Nature. Gods, animals and humans' babies are in that clear and obvious situation, that is described with that Myth - as a general picture - which says : before Prometheus offered the fire to the humans that is a metaphor of the consciousness/knowledge what is death, and it is the same with that myth of the lost paradise with Eve, Adam and the apple. In the former greek myth redemption became to the humans when the god Prometheus himself was punished by other gods, because he gave that consciousness/knowledge what is death to the humans. It is like to hear gods saying to Prometheus : why Prometheus lead the humans to have fears and pains what is death, and not living like us ? So, be punished now ! What a great myth indeed.

But here is the huge and tremendous opposite that exists in the latter myth with Eve, Adam and the apple when it says that the humans themselves had punished by the god. So in the latter myth there is a tragedy but in parallel, there is not redemption at all. Because in the latter Myth it is a punishment to be mortal, and not a real fact that comes by Nature, and for this you can't enjoy also the pleasure that set by Nature too.

Thusly, in the latter Myth there is no redemption at all to the humans. From what really ? From the craving/lust of immortality. And what comes after as an invention ? A son of god that he was resurrected from death, and gave you the same meaning that you can be resurrected from your death too. That is to say a vain and empty hope. Thus, the craving/lust for immortality has no end. And this is the main core inside the monotheistic religions. If there won't be this main core inside them, there is no any serious fact to have their existence at all

So, here comes Epicurus to point out what is greek and non greek, and how it was made to be non greek by the foolishness that came by Plato et.al. Epicurus great proposals in his letter to Meneoceus are going like this : Hey, guys "DEATH IS NOTHING TO US", and as continues he also said : "So that the man speaks but idly who says that he fears death (as a future pain) not because it will be painful when it comes, but because it is painful in anticipation. For that which gives no trouble in when it comes is but an empty pain in anticipation".

"And therefore a right understanding that death is nothing to us makes the mortality of life enjoyable, not because it adds to it an infinite span of time, but because it takes away the craving for immortality.

For we do not seek to enjoy not the longest period of time, but the most pleasant time". This is the purpose for Epicurus : to take away that stupid craving for immortality that produces to us PAIN. Epicurus shows to us and always is focusing to the LIMITS of Nature and our nature.

For focusing on something that it did not yet come is an empty pain in anticipation. For this Epicurus suggests for being focused to the pleasures, past, present and an expectation of the future. Prudence and the procedure in the basis of our sober reasoning is the same tool that is used by us through our experiences, as we've been taught for reaching and a kind of a conclusion : on how to avoid any pain and pursue pleasure, and sometimes when we confront a pain it is for the achievement of a greater pleasure. The focusing that we might feel a pain in the future, is an empty pain in anticipation in the time being. But there is also this realization that has to be measured too as a real fact : that all we are mortals, and this is going along with the following ES by Metrodorus, but we have been taught by Epicurus that the craving/lust for immortality produces pain and fears. So with the study of Nature and epicurean philosophy you acquired that great art to live like gods among men. So, simple !

The ES by Metrodorus are :

30. Some men throughout their lives spend their time gathering together the means of life, for they do not see that the draught swallowed by all of us at birth is a draught of death.

31. Against all else it is possible to provide security, but as against death all of us mortals alike dwell in an unfortified city.

Wow, here I read a greek word that is used by medical science called as " anhedonia" and means without "hedone" i.e. "pleasure". So, is here an argument that inside our body do not exist those molecular genes which are able to produce "hedone" i.e. pleasure ? Where are those molecular genes ? Do they exist in the neurons that make also the synapses of the brain ? Do they have to do with the hormones that the brain drains into our body for its good function too ?

Our epicurean friend Elayne who is a doctor will be very helpful on this issue.

Concerning me , in the first case I blame as the main guilty all the religions, all the superstitions and all those taboos with sins that from our childhood, until the age of 5 years, and then inside school, IMO are making us such persons like robots, with such kind of tangling synapses in brain to not be operated properly, with a result to be damaged, and not producing many of these hormones such as :

The major hormones that create happy feelings are (many of the ones below also act as neurotransmitters):

• ACETYLCHOLINE: Alertness, memory, sexual performance, appetite control, release of growth hormone.

• DOPAMINE: Feelings of bliss and pleasure, euphoric, appetite control, controlled motor movements, feel focused.

• ENDORPHINS: Mood elevating, enhancing, euphoric. The more present, the happier you are! Natural pain killers.

• ENKEPHALINS: Restrict transmission of pain, reduce craving, reduce depression.

• GABA (Gamma Amino Butyric Acid): Found throughout central nervous system, anti-stress, anti-anxiety, anti-panic, anti-pain; Feel calm, maintain control, focus.

• MELATONIN: “Rest and recuperation” and “anti-aging” hormone. Regulates body clock.

• NOREPINEPHRINE: Excitatory, feel happy, alert, motivated. Anti-depressant, appetite control, energy, sexual arousal.

• OXYTOCIN: Stimulated by Dopamine. Promotes sexual arousal, feelings of emotional attachment, desire to cuddle.

• PHENYLETHYLMINE (PEA): Feelings of bliss, involved in feelings of infatuation (high levels found in chocolate).

• SEROTONIN: Promotes and improves sleep, improves self esteem, relieves depression, diminishes craving, prevents agitated depression and worrying.

The study of Nature that is through the Epicurean Philosophy may help if the persons understand that there are molecular genes inside us that are allies for the purpose of our survival. If someone connects the survival with the driving force of Pleasure, that someone is the right way for doing the huge SWERVE - Parenglisi imo.

"These are the kinds of results we would get from our statistical survey of the population of Greece as regards the disappearance of the Hellenic element and the influence of the Jewish culture. Superficially, on the documents and in name only are we Greeks. But underneath, in our very essence and our animate matter, we are Jews. And we should not be deceived by the simplistic arguments promoted by various priests and preachers that, supposedly, Christianity is one thing, Judaism another. Or that Orthodoxy is one thing, Roman-Catholicism another. Such claims are but fraudulent sophistries and overstretched naiveté. All those that insist upon such foolishness, are like those who claim that whores are different from hookers. But they both work in brothels. That a long distance runner is different from a discus thrower. But they are both athletes. That there are differences between a lymphoma, leukaemia and laryngeal cancer. But they are all cancers of some sort. Malignant blemishes that ended the lives of Cavafy and Freud. We modern Greeks resemble our ancient ancestors only in form. But the mass, this m the physicists talk about, is utterly Jewish. And the space, the spatium or this s the physicists talk about, within which the de-Hellenisation of the Greeks took place, is Christian Byzantium. And the time, the tempus or the t the physicists talk about, within whose duration the process of Jew-ification of the Greeks took place, stretches from the time of Emperor Theodosius until this very day.

Theodosius destroyed temples, ravaged ancient statues, closed down stadiums, theatres, Greek schools. All the sources that were the lifestream of the Hellenic way of life. This is why he is remembered as “the Great”. Which is the way his predecessor, Constantine, is also remembered. The Caesar who murdered his own wife and son. And they were first called “Great” by those who also called “Great” the Emperors Athanasius, Basil and all their ilk. Destroyers, forgers, vandals of the Hellenic idea. But there is another voice, persistently whispering from the shadows, that all the brutalities the Christians inflicted upon the Greeks mean nothing in the end for those that did not become Jewish-Greeks but remained Hellenic-Greeks. It rises from a distant place and is only heard by a few:

Just because we tore their statues down,

and cast them from their temples,

does not mean that the gods are dead.

This is Cavafy, dear reader, not some miser. Not some invented god. And the poem is called Ionian. It is not called Cherubicon. The dissolution and extinguishing of the classical Greek by Jewish-minded Christians lasted from the time of Theodosius until the time of Empress Eudoxia. Up to 843AD, with the official restitution of the icons. This holiday in the Orthodox calendar is celebrated annually since then, at the beginning of Spring! It is a grandiose celebration attended by state officials and foreign dignitaries. Viewed from a positive perspective, it symbolizes the triumph of Christianity. But viewed from its negative perspective, it represents the utter destruction of everything Greek. It is the tombstone of the Hellenic idea. The last stand of the moderate “Greek” against the Asian monstrosity was through Leo III, the Isaurian. He got up one morning and realized that half the population of the empire had taken up the cloth and were having a splendid time. Then, like Jesus at the temple, he began what came to be known as the Iconomachy. That story reached its sad conclusion with the light defeated and darkness triumphant. With the Sunday of Orthodoxy and the appearance of the modern Greek identity. So Greeks only by name and superficially. And Jews to the bone, the blood, the heart, the intestines and the bile. Herein lies the key, the reason and the cause of the national schizophrenia".

An excerpt from the book "Gemma", by Dimitris Liantinis and as translated from greek into english, by Yannis Tsapras.

The eminent heads of Italy were discussing around the welcoming table of Medici for the purpose to reconcile Plato and Jesus. They were dreaming of a religion that unites Christian morality and Greek Philokalia. For all this world, after Alexandrian era, Epicurus was a scandal, such a scandal was for being someone reasonable and to believe in the things that catches with his hands and the right judgments of his conclusions. Epicurus contemporaries were buried him already under calumny, slander and filthy perversions. His extensive work was neglected, lost and we owe in luck the few precious pieces that survived. Hidden for centuries like a spark in ashes were helpful as tinder when the crew of time arrived. The research and understanding have renovated his luminous figure, his genuine Greek figure, and inspired by his luminous physiognomy we restore the antiquity as it was in reality. (Excerpt from the book by the Professor of Philosophy Charalambos Theodoridis entitled "Epicurus - The True Face of the Ancient World")

And as Cassius Amicus wrote somewhere too : Just don't get confused and think that this description implies some different type of pleasure than what you already understand the word to mean. The word "pleasure" includes every possible type of mental and physical sensation you find pleasurable, from sex to fine art to fine music to whatever. There are no "good" and "bad" pleasures - pleasure is a faculty which tells you what is pleasing - nothing more, nothing less - and it's up to you to weigh and judge the consequences and decide which pleasures to pursue.

All this is why Cicero summarized the Epicurean position as "a life of tranquility crammed full of pleasures" in his Defense of Publius Sestius 10.23 ("“…Nothing is preferable to a life of tranquility crammed full of pleasures.”)

However, if you check in at the philosophy department of most any college or philosophy group on the internet, and say "Ataraxia, a state of mental tranquility free from disturbance, is the ultimate pleasure and maintaining it is how Epicureanism is applied" you will get an A+

You just have to decide whether your goal is pleasing the philosophy professors, or having a realistic understanding of what Epicurus said about how to live.

..........

It's not just the technical use of the word ataraxia that I want to warn about but the combination with the following sentence that implies that all that is necessary to get to this ultimate state is to *subtract* something:

"Ataraxia, a state of mental tranquility free from disturbance, is the ultimate pleasure and maintaining it is how Epicureanism is applied. This means eliminating superstitious views that cause fear or disturbance and accepting your own mortality."

Again, yes it is absolutely true that we must eliminate superstition (PD1) and eliminate fear of death (PD2). Those are the two biggest false opinions we confront so that is why they are highlighted.

But there is a THIRD false opinion - and that is that there is some goal in life higher or better or to be preferred over pleasure. God and Death aren't the only demons to swat, you also have to swat the demons that there are absolute guides to life such as virtue or "being a good person" or "following god" that everyone must follow. That's where PD3 and PD4 come in, but they are written in a technical way that makes them well-suited for debating Plato, but poorly suited for new students of the philosophy.

Every animal at birth, including humans before they are corrupted by "virtue" or "religion", knows that nature calls them to pursue the various mental and physical pleasures of life. That is a premise of the entire conversation, so you don't get to the best life just looking for demons to swat and subtracting them from life. if you sit in your garden and close off your life with no contact with any ordinary pleasures of mind and body, you have NOT reached the best life. You get to the best life by finding and pursuing those pleasures that matter to you, even if that means accepting some pain as the price. You fill your life with pleasures, make sure you've eliminated the two biggest pains (fear of god and fear of death) and then you are well on your way. Depending on your other circumstances unique to you, your life is both peaceful (free of the worst fears/pains) and crammed full of pleasures.

Rivelle welcome here ! First of all we have to point out that the greek words "ataraxia" and "aponia", as used by Epicurus are for the description of pleasure, when we have to give explanations to those that do not understand what the word PLEASURE means, and as Epicurus says that is our intrinsic good, and our alpha and omega. And second ataraxia and aponia i.e. a life crammed full of pleasures can't be achieved without the right study of Nature and when we use without consistency the Physics the Canon and the Ethics that are one as the whole.

"In very few words, the Epicurean philosophy is coherent. Let's dare, in an inadequate way, to treat it as a coherent system, where, from any point you can go to another. Example: We know how easy it is from the friendship, that lies in the area of ethics, to go to the repulsion, that lies in the area of Physics, and the passage from Canon, that with the relation of causes and potential effects results in some stable strategy behavior, that leads to the common benefit.

Epicurus did not distinguish Canon from Physics (we still remain in the matter of coherence). It is self-evident, because Canon is structured on the atomic theory, that is, on Physics. If you dismiss the atomic theory, Canon is left suspended and collapses. So, by changing Physics, you should also change the methodology of judgment that is the Canon. You change it too. Then, when you want to find the principles of friendship, where will you look for them? Where Plato was looking for.

Epicurean philosophy protects itself with consistency. This is its self-defense. If someone tries to change one piece with another piece from elsewhere, it will end up in nothing. If not something worse than nothing". (An excerpt of a work entitled "Epicurean View" by George Kaplanis founding member of the Garden in Thessaloniki)

The painger Agostino Scilla (1629-1700) made a series of works dedicated to philosophers. Among these at least two are dedicated to Epicurus, both made in oil on canvas. Well, this is very important information. Among the years of 1629-1700 and before the busts of Epicurus to be discovered i.e. in 1734, the painter Agostino Scilla had painted Epicurus with a face similar to our known busts. And now a question : Where Agostino Scilla saw the figure of Epicurus to paint him so similar to our known figures of his busts ? Because on the fresco by Raphael "School of Athens" that was the years 1510-1511, the conjecture for Epicurus states that is a child with a smirk, which is crowned with vine leave !

Again : description of the Canon or About Criterion and Principle.

Sorry, I forgot to say : Daniel , WELCOME, and I am so glad you are here with us !

"and, besides, love of humanity prompts us to aid also the foreigners who come here."

We presuppose, of course, that when Diogenis of Oinoanda wrote that he did not know where the stones of his wall will be gone and lost, and how they will be found again.

Yes, that is true, Diogenis of Oinoanda did a good job, but in now days he would probably say : in the basis of my love of humanity, I gave a fortune of money to build this huge wall with stones that were beneficial to the locals or to the foreigners who came, just for the purpose to build their homes or to build sheepfold for placing inside them their sheep and goats. Humans and sheep and goats all united as one for living inside homes and sheepfolds ...chewing the "grass of ignorance and nonsense" without examine and the issue that there is also a butcher that one day will visit them all.

G. THE ISSUE OF MUSLIMS

That is, the issue that they call me Islamophobic.

The matter is enormous. It would need a separate proposition. I will confine myself to the “beginnings” in general:

There is a core in there. This core constantly produces a question: If the Koran is the truth, why do we need the others? Every time they decide and act accordingly. In Spain, then, which was theirs, they had developed a great literature and culture. Until they decided that the Koran was right and burned their libraries and books.

This question is repeated every now and then, and we will have to wait to see how they will answer, these or their children, or their grandchildren, or the great-grandchildren etc. to see if we are going to get caught up in this nonsense, we or our children, or our grandchildren, etc.

But this nonsense eventually emerged.

Protagonists of this tragic farce, is a muslim heresy, the Wahhabists (if I write it correctly).

This heresy has been around for almost three centuries. They have no priests, because they do not accept the interpretation of the Koran, they believe in it and apply it verbatim - that is, literally, they consider Sunnis as heretics, the Shiites as infidels, they destroy and disappear anything different. For example, in Saudi Arabia, where they dominate, there is no longer a building older than 500 years. They demolished even the mosques. The Buddha figures that were carved in the Mountain in Afghanistan were not destroyed by the Taliban, but by them.

It's not like Al-Qaida, which was applying “you hit me - I hit you”, they only apply “I hit you”. They have declared the “djih d”, that is the sacred war, to defend “the supreme interest of human”, which is of course “the true faith”. So the struggle to conquer the infidels’ countries is a struggle for the prevailing of the Sacred Law. These are not idealists!

It is, however, for laughter and crying. Here applies what someone said, that history is repeated only as a farce. The Turks had begun the same “djih d” in the very same area to give battle to Manzikert in 1071 and to reach the Aegean immediately afterwards. In this way, the Turks conquered the primary position into the muslim society. And the map of the new caliphate includes all the lands of the Ottoman Empire and even further to the borders of their hearts.

In Europe the signs were obvious for years. Of course, the Europeans did not understand anything. They implement the strategy of Lernaen Hydra. For every idiot of theirs who kills and being killed, must happen a fermentation and other, new ones of their jump out. That's why, after the strike in Nice, the appearances with burqas and such multiplied in this area. That is why the French Authorities reacted immediately. To burn the point they cut. The aim of their strategy is to accumulate hatred from the Westerns against the Muslims, to enhance hatred and end up in conflicts, etc. They become giants through blood. The funny thing is that in another such crime earlier, a French scientist psychologist appeared on television and said that the slaughterer Jihadist did it because of the unemployment in his neighborhood. I did not stand it, I ended up looking for tranquillizers.

As you have understood, all of this is about relaxing the society’s cohesion in order to turn into an unstable system. Like that bottle we said before, standing upright with the spout down.

H. CASES OF INTERVENTION

The solutions that are being heard today are basically: 1) Open the border and whoever wants can pass through, and 2) Stand at the border with a machine gun and do not let anyone pass. From a strategic point of view, both are naive, to speak politely. They are not even strategic, they are tactical without strategy. You have to be very looser to think so. With the blinkers of ideology they can’t see in time and space, and therefore can’t evaluate the potential that, anyway, will bring the problem inside the borders in many ways.

As for my own views, I will bring three examples:

1) Once, in order for China to export products, it had to fall under the international trade treaties. It was blocked by United States. They sign a contract between each other (less than a page) that says: United States’ financial capital does whatever it wants in China and in return China enters international trade. China applies dumping (subsidizes its products) and sells half-price. It attacks India and Pakistan. India endures, but Pakistan’s industry is being destroyed. Waves of Pakistani immigrants are being created. The financial capital gives money to the ideology of “solidarity” to take care of them and “integrate” them. For humanitarian reasons, of course.

Who is the enemy? The Pakistani immigrant? China? The financial capital? Other; I don’t know - I don’t answer? If you find it, you also locate the goal. And only then you look for the solution. If you don’t find it, go for a coffee.

Because there is no strategy without goal. And without strategy you are always defeated.

2) Norway has some oil. They live like kings because of this income.

3) Algeria is the world’s third-largest producer of natural gas. Exports immigrants. New Guinea produces more oil than Norway. 70% of its population live below the poverty line.

What needs to be done: First of all, in the mental field, we must understand that we should intervene because it will be useful for our societies, that they should not be dissolved. That is, from all the scenarios, let’s investigate the “probable”, that is the most probable – this is from Letter to Herodotus - that is: either we will intervene or dissolve. That is, to understand the benefit. Because there is a huge problem for a human to understand what benefits him (Hermarchus, Philodemos, Diogenes of Oenoanda). The intervention should be political, economic, cultural, the possible combinations among them or anything else. However, all these will be the means to attain the goal, and not an end in itself. The intervention should be done where the pain is born.

The respect for the human personality that Epicurean philosophy teaches, does not allow us to leave these people helpless.

  ------------------------

* “Και μόνη σοι αύτη πιστή και βέβαιος ελπίς επί την αλήθειάν τε και εύρεσιν αυτής, άλλη δε ουδ ητισούν ή το κρίνειν δύνασθαι και χωρίζειν από των αληθών τα ψευδή . . . . .Και εί ποτε τοιαύτην τινά δύναμιν και τέχνην πορισάμενος ήεις επί την εξέτασιν των λεγομένων. εί δέ μη, εύ ίσθι ως ουδέν κωλύσει σε της ρινός έλκεσθαι υφ΄ εκάστων . . . .”. Lucian “About Heresies”, 810, "Epicurus, Texts, Sources of the Epicurean Philosophy and Art of Living", G. Avramidis, THYRATHEN Publications.

** Side by side. (benefactors and beneficiaries are not next to each other, not even Islamists with Christians and others).

1) The “Transfer” and the “Solidary».

Once, the slaves did not go to their bosses’ country alone, as they do today, but they were transferred by the bosses themselves. They had free transfer. Of course, the business required great funding, because it needed a fleet for transport, a private army, etc. We are talking about the 19th century in the US. What we call Hot Spot today, then it was called Slave Market. It was like the Super Market, but it did not sell spaghetti and such, it sold people. Founder of such a market was George Peabody, who deployed it with his company called Georgetown Slave Market. Banker Rothschild, in the position of a spokesman for his interests in London, appointed his servant George Soros... sorry, I meant George Peabody. Today, there is the Open Society Slave Super Market, run by Soros or Peabody... I don’t remember, however, his first name is George and he is an employee. This institution pays its employees to its branches called NGOs, who take care of the merchandise’s maintenance.

And all this of course must be supported by some ideology, for manipulation reasons, as we said. This ideology is obviously offhand made and it is based on the logical sensationalism that first defines the concept of antiracism and on this basis constructs the concept of racism. The field of thought that this ideology permits, starts locally from our borders with “get in” and ends to our borders with “get out”. Chronically it deals with today.

That’s why they are not in a position to think about whether other immigrants will continue to come in the future. That’s why when you tell them that the immigrant’s pain starts from his home, their feelings get frozen, the matter does not interest them. Because that pain is beyond their local authority. And when they shake their hand on the opposite shore and tell them to come, and the others drown, they feel no remorse.

Finally, I would like to note that the parallelism of Sorros and Peabody is based on the “things akin” also from the letter to Pythoklis.

2) Another cause is very simple: They don’t answer the question, why they don’t get paid for that.

3) Another cause is idealism.

A devotee of the above ideological flow has become addicted to the sense of immobility. He focuses on a wretched immigrant’s photograph, and considers that this is the whole reality. If I help him, then all right. It is enough to find the concept, a stable, immobile, eternal and unalterable idea that will solve the issue. And here it was found: “solidarity”. Therefore, the “solidary”. Then they leave the ideal world, they come to the sensible world and say to you: Since there is the concept of solidarity that solves the problems, why do you ask? You just want to create obstacles because you are a racist.

Surely some people will consider as excessive that I refer to modern slavery. I suggest using the phenomena as Epicurus wants.

There was and maybe there is an import model of foreign fishermen to the fishing boats of Michaniona. For example, we asked for 300 fishermen, and through the Egyptian Consulate 300 Egyptians came, who were working under a contract.

This, of course, is a practice that applies in many countries for a long time. This practice maintains a balance, because it also benefits the people who pay salaries and the people who receive the salary. With open borders, this balance is lost due to the law of labor offer and demand. So the person who pays salary benefits and hurts the person who gets paid for his work, who is harmed in many ways. According to the values of our philosophy, this is unacceptable. Our philosophy forbids us damaging and getting damaged. It is now known that in Europe there are companies that hire workers hourly. People of pain are constantly growing in our societies.

In other words, while controlled immigration can improve both our lives and their life, and reduces pain, uncontrolled one creates this modern form of slavery for all of us.

(to be continued)

D. US

This “us” sounds selfish, but it is natural. Personally, on this subject I would not take away something from my personal life to offer it to the migrant issue. Unless this is something superfluous. If I had an excess of potential, as Nietzsche also says. I would definitely offer to my family, my friends, my homeland and of course a weak person who would be in great need. But this alone is a whole debate, and it would be nice for anyone wishing to discuss it to make a suggestion to investigate it.

So let us include to “us” the societies that immigration is directed to. That is to say the agglomerations that human creates in order to be able to meet his necessary and natural desires originating from the instinct of survival and security. As many other animals do. Of course, as soon as people create an agglomeration, they immediately attack their neighbor, but this is another story. Now if agglomeration involves an anarchist society, the muslim society or a nation, that does not matter. I will call it society as of now, because it is simpler.

Compulsory element of society is cohesion. Without it, it dissolves. We have said that when we talked about the Epicurean philosophy that we likened to a coherent system. The society that has little cohesion is an unstable system. It’s like a bottle that you put it standing upright with the spout facing down. It falls with the slightest shake. It’s like the marriage that breaks because the husband forgot to go to the grocery. A society will also pass financial crisis and unemployment and disasters and wars and foreign occupation. What will give it the strength to overcome it all over time so it can continue to protect her members is cohesion. The means to enhance cohesion are usually religion, origin, culture, customs, etc., but all of this is well known.

I do not say randomly all of the above, I follow the methodology that Epicurus teaches us to follow dealing with “the theory of principles”, of course from the Letter to Pythocles. That is to go deep and look at the first principles, which here is the natural law of survival. At the same time, however, we must not forget that Epicurean philosophy is hostile to anything that reduces our resistance for survival.

So, my own conclusion so far is that we will help, as far as we can, without harming our society, that is to say ourselves. That is, without committing suicide.

E. THESE

We said that people who need help are billions. Including Greeks. Let us observe phenomena without fixations, without dramas and without crying. These people move and will move to meet their necessary and natural desires.

So we can answer the question of Epicurean philosophy: To what unshakable laws the power on everything is based, (* 3). Τhe driving force of continuous migration is the coverage of the necessary and natural desires. So it will not stop as long as there are causes that create this potential.

Now you will tell me that we know this, and we do not need a whole Epicurean methodology to find them. Be careful: These belong to the first principles and therefore the Epicurean method of thinking forces us to set them on the basis of our thinking.

F. THE INTERMEDIATES - THE ROUTE

But there is the ideological-political flow that calls for the borders to be left open, for those who want to come and for us to take care of their food, shelter, medical care and work. I don’t have any ideological or political objection to these. I don’t have any ideological - political confrontation with them. I just ask them to set to the foundations of their thinking these, the first principles, the unwavering laws on which the potential of migration is based. And of course their direct effect, that migration will not stop. I understand they will not. Because many years now I make the question: Do you know that migration will not stop? Do you accept this even as a possibility? And all these years I get the same answer: You are a racist. I am almost convinced that racists are some people who constantly reflect on methodological issues.

Why do not they deal with the question?

According to the Epicurean method of thought, everything is explained “steadfastly”, that is, without being shaken - stable, if they are based on multiple causes. It is the “manifold way”, which is referred to the Epicurus’ Epistle to Herodotus, and has been analyzed by our friend Demetris Altas in one of his propositions. And of course, easily, “simply”, the individual are explained, if we first investigate the general and undefined and look into the first principles. (This is from the Letter to Pythoklis). And in order to achieve this, we must stand firm on the purpose– “for which we reason out these”, also from the Letter to Pythoklis.

And what is the goal: Reduce human pain until extinction. This is from the Letter to Meneoceus. And the pain starts from the immigrant’s home, before he starts.

I will mention some causes. I recall the question: Why it is not considered as a possibility that migration will not stop?

(to be continued)