Posts by Elli

The methodology we use is of the Epicurean Canon :

THE MIGRATION ISSUE (In the prism of the epicurean philosophy), by George Kaplanis, founding member of the Garden in Thessaloniki.

“Because, although as the land is divided, one has a homeland and the other has another one, but our whole world is enclosed in a perimeter, and so we all have a homeland, the whole Earth, and the world is our common home”.

("καθ΄ εκάστην μεν γαρ αποτομήν της γής άλλων άλλη πατρις εστίν κατά δε την όλην περιοχήν τούδε του κόσμου μία πάντων πατρίς έστιν η πάσα γη και είς ο κόσμος οίκος"),

Diogenes of Oenoanda. Excerpt 30, column 2 - The precious stones of philosophy, Yannis Avramidis, Thyrathen Publications.

Philosophy is thought without limits. Ideologies and politics always set their own limits.

A. REPELLING THE BARRIERS

That is, to examine the Migration Issue without ideologies and politics harassing us.

That is, using the thinking method, the values and the ethics of our philosophy.

Not only because you lighten the case from a bunch of trash, but also because the manipulation of “mass” or “mob” - that is, all of us - is now done with the use of mathematical models in an extremely scientific way.

And this way includes both ideologies and politics. Thus, a person decides with free will that he will have a specific view on a matter. At the same time, other people also decide - each one individually, always with free will - that they will have the same view on the same matter. These all together are a percentage of the total, which is ultimately the percentage predicted by the manipulation model.

B. BE CAREFUL OF WHAT YOU STEP ON YOUR FIRST PACE

So, in order to be on the right track, you have to escape the manipulation.

And how does one escape from it? With knowledge. (I stole it from modern analysts who know the manipulation models). And this knowledge will lead you to a truth, that is, to reality.

So you get away with knowing in the first place, of what is true and what is lie, or what is real and what is fantastic.

“Only this is your sure and steady hope for the discovery of the truth, and there is nο other. Your only hope is to judge and distinguish the lie from the truth... And if by chance you acquire such capability and skill, then you proceed to the control of what is being said. Otherwise, you have to know that nothing will prevent you to be dragged from your nose by anyone...” *

So you start, according to the epicurean philosophy.

C. THE FIELD

It will look strange to you, but right now I'm talking about the migration issue. That is also for us. Why the Epicurean method requires that we start from “apeiria”, the general, the undefined (infinity is the indefinite according to Anaximander). And we and the immigrants belong in this general. Immigrants do not just change only their own lives, they change ours too. So we both get into the frame. Diogenes of Oenoanda would mock me here. He has written that “the stranger is not a stranger”. I make this separation just do to determine the position they have in the field. **

Of course, very badly, I used the word “frame”. Because the frame requires an image, that is, something immobile. The best thing would be to use the word “field”, a field that can capture and include within it the events as they evolve, the field of action and the field of praxis. So the field will operate in the dimension of time, so we will move into the time, but it can also be expanded into the space, because from “us and them” I said above, if we take “us” and we continuously add other “us”, will emerge Greece, France, Germany, Europe and the whole Western world, except for Israel and Japan, for the time being.

But we also have those who emigrate. According to the Foreign Minister, on the Egyptian-Somali axis there are 150 million people under the age of twenty-five who live without prospect. He was talking about the near future and the risks of the area’s destabilization because of the islamists. Other date, like the ones we discussed online, report more than five billion people living below the poverty line. And they are candidates for immigration in the next decades.

In this point that they always tell me that I am a racist. Then, of course, I always complain to the UN. Because it never calls me to ask what I am and what I am not, to form the numbers accordingly. Of course, if changing my thoughts will make 2-3 billion people to become economically settled, then “eateon” bid it farewell according to Epicurus, that is to say that I could even become a Buddhist monk.

Quite simply, Epicurean philosophy asks us to count on phenomena, events, reality. And not in empty beliefs, that is, in words of air.

(to be continued)

Oscar wrote : Can we generalize that human beings wonder about existence, the universe and our place in it? That's how I start my conversations with any person from any religion.

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

Sorry, but I have the impression that those conversations are done in a laboratory conditions, as well as this laboratory is without windows-glasses to have an idea what happens outside this laboratory. Conversations that are done inside the safety of our home, while we are drinking fine wine and eating appetizers… but when these persons that have examined all these important issues would step outside that laboratory/home they’ll realize that the issues that had examined were existing in the world of ideas by Plato who used dialectics or else a mixture of dialectics with the logic of excluded middle by Aristotle that leads our thoughts and actions to dilemmas i.e. you have two options either black or white and there is no third.

Of course, these questions that set by Oscar are a good start for any generalization that show to us - as the epicureans say - the General picture. But let’s see the nature of the questions if are along with the study of Nature. Let’s see if the issues and all the concepts we had examined, can be applied in the reality of life on the basis of humans' experiences, and not outside the life and the reality of the experiences, because if it would be the latter, we did conversations that were based on the fantastic and the safety of our home and as Plato did to his Symposia. And when he (Plato) stepped outside the safety of his home/country, and went to the court of the king Dionysus in Syrakouses for applying his philosophical ideas, he was caught as a slave facing a real danger to lost his head, like a little mouse that got trapped in his own trap that was his idealistic ideas.

So, when we discuss for generalizations i.e. for the General Picture, we have to synthesize through history, biology, physics, economy and geography, all the parts to see/realize/understand if they are strong enough i.e. if they have many similarities (that is the analogy of the Canon) with the General picture. But in the first place, we have to clean up our minds from manipulation that is done by ideologies and politics that use, as I said above, the dialectics i.e. idealistic and stable images that are connected with a terminology i.e. using words without meaning i.e. abstract words or as we say in greek "wooden words", as well as the mixture of dialectics with the excluded middle by Aristotle.

So, in the basis of epicurean philosophy and the methodology of the Canon our thought will be without this manipulation that is setting to us limits to our thoughts and actions. The limits of manipulation that also are based on Myths that provoke to us fears.

Epicurean philosophy examines all the issues without setting limits, because its first principles are to overcome all those obstacles that are against to our survival, and thanks to Nature our survival, as it has been proved, it is synonym with the goal of pleasure. Survival without pleasure is not a survival, it's just like that motto "Lathe Viosas", which it is something just to talk about. Everything in the epicurean philosophy has a fixed bond with the pleasure. Lathe Viosas serves the pleasure, and it has the pleasure in its foundation, i.e. inside its core. If you follow the "Lathe Viosas" and you end up compromised and subordinate, then the pleasure is lost and "Lathe Viosas" loses its core and disappears.

Thus, on the basis of our philosophy i.e the Epicurean, we realize that it starts from “apeiria” the general, the undefined (infinity is the indefinite according to Anaximander). Example : Let’s examine the issue "on migration", that we confront here in my little country that is Greece (the bridge as I said it somewhere else) as a part of EU, and be focused on the separation what is fantastic and what is real. Let's examine the phenomena and the causes that caused them, lets examine the details of the causes, let's examine what is akin to them (similarities)... without forgetting what is our goal remembering, as I said, that is synonym with our survival. Because if someone would say to me that the survival is not an issue of importance, I suggest to him to be calm hanging himself on the first tree he'll find.

(to be continued)

Speaking with you for students in Universities, I would like to share with you an experience. The daughter of my companion lives in USA as she is getting a Phd in the University of Carnegie Mellon in Pittsburgh. Last year she send an email to her father when with surprise she saw an epigram that it was hanging inside her University. The epigram was the following Epicurean saying :

"We do not so much need the assistance of our friends as we do the confidence of their assistance in need". - Epicurus

Thus, her father send me her email and I answered to both of them with the following :

The epicurean saying that is hanging inside the University is the No. 34. Nevertheless, in the "friendship" and before we refer to this saying 34, in the order of epicurean sayings precede two others, which are very important. That is, we first understand the sayings 23 and 28 and then we end up with 34. Thus, we clearly see that friendship, like any relationship, is not something abstract, elusive and idealistic, but is based on mutual benefit as being applied, in a course of life, according to experience (i.e. with frankness of speech that is accompanied with actions of care). That is, to end up in 34 and to have confidence of our friends' assistance in need, we have checked them as they have checked us too. In the saying 28 the word "δοκιμαστέον" as used by Epicurus, it is at the beginning of each friendship-relationship. Because, for the approval of someone in our life and to move on, we have to run some risks too. Otherwise, if someone does not like to run some risks he would sit on his sofa staring the ceiling of his home. And whenever he would have a need to talk to someone or to be helped by someone, so then he'll talk to his ceiling.

The epicurean sayings 23 and 28 are the following :

XXIII.(23) Every friendship in itself is to be desired; but the initial cause of friendship is based on the [mutual] benefit.

XXVIII.(28). We must not approve either those who are always ready for friendship, or those who hang back, but for friendship’s sake we must run risks.

I am sad to hear that and this is a very serious issue on how Epicurean Philosophy will be helpful to this situation that concerns young people. Imo Epicuru's epistle to Meneoceus should become known to the most of the young people, since as we know Epicurus had addressed this letter to a young man.

However, in Greece we did not experience an epidemic of young persons suicides. We did experience an epidemic of adults-parents suicides when the financial crisis made them to lost their jobs, their homes and in general things that were the means that were build upon their personality. Any of their reputation was structured on things and not on themselves or on their pleasurable relationships with the very next people i.e. their values had no any value, and not purpose. And when there is no value without an aim, the desires are measured without prudence. So the desires are reaching the infinite, and may lead to the nihilism of suicide.

However Epicuru's admonishes to self-sufficiency and his sayings 44-45 are :

"The wise man when he has accommodated himself to straits knows better how to give than to receive, so great is the treasure of self-sufficiency which he has discovered".

"The study of nature does not make men productive of boasting or bragging nor apt to display that culture which is the object of rivalry with the many, but high-spirited and self-sufficient, taking pride in the good things of their own minds and not of their circumstances of external things".

Thus, for some of greek people when they did not had money to pay the loans to the banks for their luxury home they committed suicide. Because their measurement was that the things will be always the same, and the banks are our good fellows. They did not take for granted those wise greek idioms that are told by the old people saying "You do not take loans from banks, because you have to cover your bed with that blanket that fits to your bed" OR " the prudent children are cooking before they will be hungry".

Meanwhile in Greece the only epidemic of the young people is their migration to the other countries of Europe for finding better conditions for jobs. And as I learn from many sources the most of them are managed to be fine, because as we see in Nature the most adaptable in any environment is the one that survives. IMO the problem for young people is based on the inability to express their feelings of love and care to each other, and is due to their fear of the rejection from others, and many other fears e.g. for the future. They be focused to the unknown future without living the present. So, I agree that closer relationships would be a cure, as well as to understand that the purpose in life is the pleasure that is build upon values like friendship and not upon antagonism. Friendship that is based on frankness of speech and the common benefit that is accompanied with the self-sufficiency are the strongest armors and the fortresses to confront any difficult situation in every era.

I found a good work that is a M.A. by a greek lady with the name : Ourania Moliviati Toptsi.

https://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/bitstream/1137…si%20Urania.pdf

The greek words are :

Σοφός = wise

Φιλόσοφοι = philosophers

Φιλόλογοι = philologists in US and UK lexicons are the classical “scholars”.

Καθηγηταί = guides.

Συνήθεις= laymen.

Κατασκευαζόμενοι = those in preparation.

According to the above by Philodemus, I would like to mention this Epicurean Doctrine 21 : "He who has learned the limits of life knows that that which removes the pain due to want and makes the whole of life complete is easy to obtain, so that there is no need of actions which involve competition". For this reason on Epicuru's Decription of the wise man we read : "One wise man is not wiser than another".

IMO, and in the basis of gratitude for our teacher Epicurus, all we are agreed that the only WISE was him, so there is not any competition among the epicureans who is the wiser than another.

The newbies, irrespective of their age, are “those in preparation”. The philosophers are called as “guides” or as “excellent of friends”, and not “leaders” or any kind of such political terminology. And that is because the concept of the word “leader” and its meaning immediately leads our mind to the word “crowds” i.e. "the leader of crowds". Moreover, Epicurus’ Description of the Wise Man we read that : “The wise man gather together a school, but never so as to become a leader of crowds”. Thus, Epicurus understood how easily someone would fall into the trap to establish a school, and to become a leader of crowds.

Moreover, those "guides" or "the excellent of friends" they are not psychiatrists, since psychiatry is a medical school and needs a university diploma, as well as many many hours of psychoanalysis, by another psychiatrist. So, the most important that those “guides” or “excellent of friends” should do is constantly speaking and acting well of each other whether they are present or absent, because they have to be the same whether are asleep or awake.

As for myself I'm just an Epicurean lady from Hellas, and I do not accept any title as philosopher, philologist, scholar, guide, leader, but I accept that I was among to "those in preparation". As for my mentors I recognize 4-5 as excellent of my epicurean friends, and please permit me to not mention their names, as they know who they are, because I have already expressed my feelings of gratitude and pleasure to them.

As far as concerns Philodemus, and his poetry makes me to think that from many ladies of our era, he will be considered as a little "sexist". And as an Epicurean lady that uses the methodology of the epicurean Canon, I can judge and Philodemus, and his poetry too.

Oh, good to hear that Brad, it is really delicious combination with Pita bread, and also with tomatoes. I did not know that Market Lidl exist in USA !!

I have a question to my American friends, and maybe Hiram would be more informed about that : Please, do you find there in USA the famous lemons that are from Amalfi - Sorrento ? It is a region in Italy and the distance between Ercolano and Amalfi Coast is 27 km. The road distance is 53.8 km.

Hello and joy to all the epicurean friends,

“Send me a pot of cheese, so that I may be able to indulge myself whenever I wish.” - Epicurus, Fragments §39.

The earliest references to cheese production in Greece date from the 8th century BC: the technology to make cheese from sheep's or goat's milk described in Homer's Odyssey (involving the contents of Polyphemus's cave) is similar to that used by Greek shepherds today to produce feta. Cheese made from sheep's or sheep's and goat's milk was a common food in ancient Greece and an integral component of later Greek gastronomy. Feta cheese specifically is first recorded in the Byzantine Empire (Poem on Medicine 1.209) under the name prósphatos (Greek: πρόσφατος, "recent" or "fresh"), and was produced by the Cretans and the Vlachs of Thessaly. In the late 15th century, an Italian visitor to Candia, Pietro Casola, describes the marketing of feta, as well as its storage in brine.

The Greek word feta (φέτα) comes from the Italian word "fetta" ("slice"), which in turn is derived from the Latin word offa ("a morsel", "piece"). It was introduced into the Greek language in the 17th century, became a widespread term in the 19th century, and probably refers to the practice of slicing cheese in order to place the slices into barrels.

Certification : After a long legal battle with Denmark, which produced a cheese under the same name using chemically blanched cow's milk, the term "feta" became a protected designation of origin (PDO) in October 2002—which limits "feta" within the European Union to mean brined cheese made exclusively of sheep's or sheep's and goat's milk in the following regions of Greece: Peloponnese, Central Greece, Epirus, Thessaly, Macedonia, Thrace, and the islands of Lesvos and Cephalonia.

"Celibacy" could lead and to "castration". Here is in the photo how was the whole issue.

I imagine Cato the elder that would say in Latin : "ceterum censeo Imperium Romanum Orientale postea Byzantinum esse delendam".

Because from the Byzantine era has started and there was the final battle for the destruction of the genuine Greek-Roman Cosmotheasis (worldview) and as a way of life.

And as Dimitris Liantinis Dimitris says to his book “Gemma”: "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. 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".

Ionic, by C.P. Cavafy

That we’ve broken their statues,

that we’ve driven them out of their temples,

doesn’t mean at all that the gods are dead.

O land of Ionia, they’re still in love with you,

their souls still keep your memory.

When an August dawn wakes over you,

your atmosphere is potent with their life,

and sometimes a young ethereal figure,

indistinct, in rapid flight,

wings across your hills.

The Trojan horse, the deception and the great duplicity of Cavafic irony is: Julian, Emperor of Rome.

For Cavafy, Julian is the one brought up a christian. He is the covert fourth Hierarch. As a child in church he was a reader. As a youth he was a deacon at mass. He was raised in the cloisters, courtyards and cells of priests, monks, ministers and bishops. For years and years his mind was purged by the endless cycle of chanting, praying and leaning over liturgical books. Julian is a theurgic scientist. He is the emperor subservient to the Holy Synod and is responsible for organizing state governance according to the ecclesiastical system of the christians. A shame for his lauded victories in Germany as a young man which were reminiscent of that illustrious Caesar, Germanicus. Who was the ruler of mighty Rome three hundred years before. Julian denounced the Greek Epicurus and Pyrrho the skeptic. And praised the anatolian influences of Pythagoras with his communes, mysticism, belief in reincarnation and his theurgies. The primary deities in his “new religion” were not Zeus and Dionysus but Mithra and the great mother Cybele. For all intents and purposes the man was hazy and confusing. For Cavafy, Julian is the covert fourth Hierarch. The three hierarchs supposedly imbued the church with the hellenic spirit. Julian attempted to imbue hellenism with the spirit of the church. The debilitating effect is the same. An absurd conjunction so the deception may continue.

It is upon this deception that Cavafy sets up his great engine. A siege engine of such exquisite craftmanship that far surpassed the capabilities of Demetrius the Besieger for whom the poem King Demetrius was written. A powerful poem like its subject: Death. The design of the engine is such that on the face of it he seems to be ridiculing Julian and the Greeks, while in essence he is waging war against the christians. Cavafy uses the character of Julian to suggest and symbolize the contradictions and bastardization of the modern Greek. Someone who boasts and brags about their hellenism, but who in essence is christian and jewish. For Cavafy understood it deeply that hellenism and christianity are like fire and water.

The entire body of work of Cavafy, as a philosophical treatise, crystallizes into three questions. First, the matter of Theodicy and of Death. In other words, the matter of the tragic fate that awaits every human being in the world. Second, the analysis of both worldviews, the Hellenic and the Jewish. A quick reading, for example, of the poem Of the Jews (50 A.D.) will teach you more about the differences between the two perspectives than you would learn by studying a routine academic treatise 400 pages long. Third and last, his interpretation of the decline and fall of modern civilization, perceived through the kaleidoscope of the decline of the alexandrian and roman years. Cavafy is not a christian. He does not believe in heavenly kingdoms or the kingdoms of ruffians. In the Horses of Achilles, a brilliant and monumental poem about man's woe in front of the eternal calamity of death, he says that the body of Patroclus returned “to the great Nothingness”. Which is where you, I, and everyone else will return. And let us not forget that he persistently regarded the “Hellenic” idea as the noblest pursuit and attribute ever achieved by mankind upon the planet. (Dimitris Liantinis, from his book "Gemma")

Sorry Matt, but you did not read carefully whatever I wrote above. Who told you that Ganymedes was not real ? And who told you that Homer wrote just fairy tales ? The Trojan war as described by Homer was real. Every greek myth can be interpreted very clearly in accordance with reality and Nature. Ganymedes maybe was a handsome young boy that died young and had been sung by the poetical tradition. And that's all.

Morever, these were the gods of Epicurus as described by Dimitris Liantinis, and as I can understand them!

What defines the difference between Greeks and Christians? A difference that from a certain point and beyond is being opposed, opposition, rift, a fight fire with water.

This which is defines the difference is something else and clear, as the olive leaf. But for this reason exactly is ultimate and extreme.

The difference between the two is that the Greeks built a world based on observation and understanding, while the Christians built a world based on the assumption and imagination.

The observation of the Greeks is of such of a quality that always is to be ensure in practical from what is happening in Nature, and always demonstrated in tangible from the experiment in the laboratory.

BECAUSE…

The Religion of the Greeks

Ιf we count the strong position that the gods and the religions gave birth in primarily level from the fear of human towards life, and in advanced and to a second level of this matter from the fear of human towards death, then we will find that the religion of the Greeks is an exception as occurred that differently constitutes a unique mission.

The religion of the Greeks did not come from their fear, but it came from their sorrow to overcome the pain caused by rational vision for Nature and life, and death.

In other words, the religion of the Greeks created by their honest and brave attitude to overcome their pessimism and melancholy.

But between the fear of life and death, and the need of the Greeks to capitulate with their pain from what gave birth to their knowledge that the world is heavy, there is a little difference which gives the maximum effect.

The religion of the Greeks, i.e. is not the case and offspring of the imagination, like all other religions, but it is the aesthetic representation of the phenomena of Nature.

Thus, the gods of the Greeks are not neither secret and invisible presences. They are not ghosts of the mind, and wind’s constructions, hypothetical words and invents of reasons, and beings of a waking sleep.

Instead, the gods of the Greeks are the images made up from the natural phenomena with slender intelligence and dexterity. They made by fluttering of a rational imagination, the whole, the simple, the non trembling, and the prosperous.

And above all this: the gods of Greeks they attested by sensory, touching them with the hands, facing them with the eyes, there are factual and materialistic.

Apollo suddenly, is the sun and the music regularity of the Nature.

Artemis is the Moon. Both of those two sisters symbolize the light of the day and night and were born on the island of Delos, word which means the same the clarity and the light.

Neptune is the sea.

Hephaestus is the fire and the metals.

Athena is the intelligence of the human, for this she is the protector of the ingenious Odysseus.

Aeolus is the sixteen airs to the seas.

Demeter is the joy of the fruits, the wheat, the rhubarb, the apple trees and vines, as the verse of Artsivald Maklis says.

And Jupiter is the thunder and the rain, which is falling like sperm to fertilize bravely the thirsty land. That's why the Greeks near other things, they create him as the lover of the more magnificent mortal women. Lida, Europe, Ious, Leto, Alcmene, Semele, and Olympiad of Philip.

Thus, the story goes and with the thirty thousand gods of the Greeks. Everyone is also a real, functional, indestructible, the beneficial and harmful true and a beautiful natural phenomenon.

In other words, the religion of the Greeks is an aesthetic status of Nature’s elements, and in this way it is a variant of the Greek’s art.

The Geometric evidence of this proposal is given by the fact that the religion of the Greeks is all in their art.

And to respond to Matt. Hi Matt !

Wherever is a hypothesis with an immortal and blissful being there is also and the hypothesis that that being is able to feel the continuous pleasures, so then why that immortal being could not chose and the "peaderasty" ? And when the greeks spoke about peaderasty (paedi+eros) they did not mean sex with the little children i.e. under the age of sexual consent that is called as "peadophilia", but their admiration of the beautiful bodies and forms both of young men and women. The period of time of youth was from 18 years until 29 years old. The myth of Zeus that had the pleasure to admire the young beautiful Ganymedes is natural as natural is the sensation to realize that one of the moons of Zeus/Jupiter is called Ganymedes.

Homer, Iliad, Book XX, lines 233-235 wrote : Ganymedes as the loveliest born of the race of mortals, and therefore the gods caught him away to themselves, to be Zeus' wine-pourer, for the sake of his beauty, so he might be among the immortals. —

In greek language we use the greek word "παιδί" [paedi] and "παίδαρος" [paedaros] that means "big boy/guy". When we see a young man with handsome and attractive features, we say "αυτός είναι παίδαρος" means he is gorgeous, he is a very good looking big boy/guy".

According to the sources we have the natural and humanitarian Epicurus when he is addressing to his friends both the young boys/guys and mature guys i.e. men and women.

"He (Epicurus) basely flattered Mithras, the viceroy of Lysimachus, bestowing on him in his letters Apollo's titles of “Healer” and “Lord". They further charged that he extolled Idomeneus, Herodotus, and Timocrates, who had published his esoteric doctrines, and flattered them for that very reason. Also that in his letters he wrote to Leontion: “0 Lord Apollo, my dear little Leontion, with what tumultuous applause we were inspired as we read your letter.” Then again to Themista, the wife of Leonteus: “I am quite ready, if you do not come to see me, to roll around three times on my own axis and be propelled to any place that you, including Themista, agree upon”; and to the beautiful Pythocles he wrote: “I will sit quiet and await with desire your god-like coming” and, as Theodorus says in the fourth book of his work, Against Epicurus, in another letter to Themista he thinks he preaches to her.

It is added that he corresponded with many courtesans, and especially with Leontion, of whom Metrodorus also was enamored. It is observed too that in his treatise On the Ethical End he writes in these terms : “I know not how to conceive the good, apart from the pleasures of taste, of sex, of sound, and the pleasures of beautiful form.”

In the basis of Greek-Roman culture this is the conclusion : Eros is everywhere and in everything around. Eros feels the mother to her little child. Eros feels the friend for his/her friend. Eros feel the lovers. Eros feel the parents for their children. Eros is the positive and the natural of life. Eros is synonym with Zeus and eros is described to the pantheistic GreekRoman gods. Epicureans chose EROS that gives birth and life in this planet Gaia, and the mother of EROS, as Lucretius summons her to his epic work DRN, is Aphrodite/Venus.

LD wrote : <<So where does that leave the Epicureans? Hopefully far, far away from the traditional Greco-Roman deities. The deities are far from what is described in PD.1 as they interfere constantly in human affairs and are exceptionally emotional, often troubled by minor offenses committed by mortals.

Should modern Epicureans be partnering with neo-pagan reconstruction religious groups? Or promoting the aesthetic ideals of Greco-Roman religion?

In my opinion, I say emphatically NO>>.

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

In my opinion, if I would be so thirsty for a glass of water, I'll say emphatically YES to the more clean, and emphatically NO to the more muddy.

And that is because it is not wise while someone tries to clean a mess inside his home, when a neighbor enters to that home without offering a helpful hand for cleaning that mess, but in opposite that neighbor is placing more mess. It is of what someone is doing when speaks about Epicurean Greek gods. Since the vision of gods in Epicureans’ minds is engraved clean and obvious either when are awake or they are asleep. Because their desire is to practice the art to live like god among men. And the desire to live like god among men, can't be if someone follows the tradition of monotheistic false religions of our era. This is the obvious definitely and irrevocably.

Since with the usage of the Canon every issue is measured in accordance with the experiences and the circumstances in the reality we live. And the now-days we live, the circumstances are leading better to follow the Greek-Roman polytheistic gods, since they were acting more humanitarian and more natural !

Because if Epicurus lived in our era what would say emphatically on the issue of Greek-Roman gods? What he would choose among polytheistic tradition of Greek-Roman Gods and the monotheistic Christianism/Judaism/Islamism God of our era? Well, he would say emphatically YES to the former! Since the vision of the former have turned upside down not only by the opposite philosophical schools in Epicuru’s era, but by the monotheistic religions of our era. Because Epicurus insists: if the vision of gods that is engraved to the peoples’ mind is without fears is clear, and pleasurable. If the vision of gods that is engraved to the peoples’ mind produced fears is unclear and painful. If the vision of gods is heavy loaded with the burden of responsibilities on how the celestial phenomena are occurred, is unclear. If it is not, so then it is clear. What is then producing more fear and pain as a religion ? The polytheistic Greek Roman religion or the monotheistic religion?

Frankly being greek and living in our days, my vision of the image of Zeus does not produce to me any fear or any pain. I like the image of Zeus as the natural phenomenon of the thunder and the rain, which is falling like sperm to fertilize bravely the thirsty land. That's why I know that Greeks near other things, they create him as the lover of the more magnificent mortal women Lida, Europe, Ious, Leto, Alcmene, Semele, Olympiad of Philip. I prefer a god acting as human being than a god acting like an ascetic unnatural being.

So, if Epicurus lived in our era he would say (paraphrasing this paragraph from his epistle to Meneoceus which shows that he is not absolute and aphoristic on the issue on Myths for greek gods) : For, indeed, it were better to follow the myths about the polytheistic Greek-Roman gods as were more humanitarian and more naturalistic than to become a slave to the painful deeds and the necessity that provoked by the monotheistic false religions and false unnatural gods : for the former suggest a hope to lead you in the pleasure to love your city and be friendly with your fellow citizens by worship them, whereas the latter involves pains and sacrifices and fears that are imposed by authorities with such powers which know no placation.

And that also means : for the former there is a hope to lead the people to the constitution of real Democracy and pleasure, but the latter it is evidenced that lead to the sufferings of oligarchy and tyranny.

Epicurus’ Description of the Wise Man : The wise man will not become a tyrant. What the wise man will become ? A citizen that loves his city, respecting the laws when they are beneficial and pleasurable, to such an extent to live as autonomous for changing the laws if are harmful. Because the epicurean man is friendly firstly to his fellow citizens participating to the common affairs that are also the feasts of his city with the worship of the polytheistic gods. Since how you will be friendly with the strangers if you are not friendly with the familiar ones firstly? So, the Epicureans are opposite to the ideology of "globalism" that lead the people to live without identity. And the identity is rooted and in the DNA as the first principles (anticipations) that are came by Epicuru's greek ancestors.

Pericle's words in his epitaph : "Our constitution does not copy the laws of neighboring states; it is rather a pattern for others. Its administration favors the many instead of the few. This is why it is called Democracy. Our laws afford equal justice to all in their private differences. Advancement in public life depends on reputation for capability, not social standing. Class does not interfere with merit, nor does poverty bar the way. If a man is able to serve the state, he is not hindered by the obscurity of his condition.

"The freedom that we enjoy in our government extends also to our ordinary life. There, far from exercising a jealous surveillance over each other, we do not feel called upon to be angry with our neighbor for doing what he likes. Yet freedom in our private lives does not make us lawless as citizens. We respect and obey our legislators and our laws, particularly those that protect the injured, whether these laws are actually on the statute books, or belong to that code which, although unwritten, yet cannot be broken without acknowledged disgrace.... Because «τὸ εὔδαιμον τὸ ἐλεύθερον, τὸ δ' ἐλεύθερον τὸ εὔψυχον κρίναντες». i.e. we are judging that bliss means freedom; and freedom means bravery. …and they are surely to be esteemed the bravest spirits who, having the clearest sense both of the pains and pleasures of life, do not on that account shrink from danger...And "our city also provides means for the mind to refresh itself from labor. We celebrate [athletic] games and worship [to the gods] all the year round, and the elegance of our homes and businesses forms a daily source of pleasure. Our city draws the produce of the world into our harbor, so that to Athenians the fruits of other countries are as familiar a luxury as those of their own".

So, Epicurus, when he established his school/Garden in Athens, he had in his mind the above words by Pericles that survived by Thucydides. This was Epicuru's identity that came by his ancestors, these were his anticipations, since inside these words by Pericles someone could realize that the participation to the feasts of the city produced also to the epicureans pleasurable feelings indeed. That identity is proved also in their arts as well as with the building of the Parthenon that is the same proof of the pleasure they enjoyed. This is the big picture inside the Parthenon : it had neither mummies of monarchs and kings, nor relics of ascetic saints and innards of ascetic Popes, i.e. it had had not the worship of death, but the worship of life itself. It had had not the worship of the unnatural, but the worship of natural. That was the reason that inside the Parthenon was a huge statue of Athena that was virgin and remained virgin as she did not give birth to any child. In opposite Mary of christians gave birth to four children and they keep her as virgin. This is unnatural and ridicule, this is madness Epicurus would say, if he lived in our era, as he would say emphatically YES to the natural, and the humanitarian that was inside to the polytheistic Greek-Roman Gods !

Those Rotary and Lions Clubs are known to me through the persons that join them. And I know those persons, since I have speak with them, when I was to my home island in Greece. Those persons believe that there is a supreme being as the architect/creator of the Nature. So they called themselves as "Tectons", from the greek "Architecton". And their community is called Grand Lodge in greek is "Megali Stoa". From what I learned from them, as they told me, they have a lot of similar views with the stoics, stoa, and the stoicism. It is well known that stoicism has no similarities with Epicurean Philosophy, there are a lot of different views among them i.e. they have a totally different Cosmotheasis (worldview).

<<The essential qualifications for admission into and continuing membership of any regular Grand Lodge are:

1. Belief in a Supreme Being, as a minimum prerequisite, a starting point for establishing a moral way of life.
2. Membership is open to men over 21 years of age, of any race or religion, who can fulfil the first qualification and who are of good repute.>>

Welcome to @luizharaujo !

Florius Lupus, a big Hello from Hellas/Greece, and a warm welcome from me too. I hope our discussions will be very beneficial for leading us to the epicurean friendship, and the purpose of pleasure.

For the sake of happiness or for the sake of pleasure we choose and even a pain? We choose pain to acquire a greater pleasure. The cup of life has to be full to rim with pleasures. I confused what is the goal ? I say both, but I have to be more precise what is the goal that is a FEELING as the fundamental basis of happiness. Because if someone had a chance to be in an international conference of philosophy, with all those theoreticians, he also would hear the following phrases by a professor of philosophy.

- Professor : Everyone has a different opinion about "the happiness", so you have to examine the definition of the word “happiness” in the basis of Aristotelian philosophy, because if we ask any upstart he would say to us that is happy, but he won't ...

- And an Epicurean responded to him : But with my work I used the data on the happiness by psychologists, and in accordance with the observation of Nature and the human nature that all are agreed with the view of Epicurus.

- Professor : This is not philosophy, this is psychology!

- And the Epicurean responded : there is philosophy i.e. the epicurean that is confirmed by the science and the whole Nature, and it is not just words/theories.... and the conversation with that professor stopped here.

Because that Epicurean did not make CLEAR to the professor what is the GOAL. The tangible real goal and as set to us by Nature.