Posts by Martin

New Graphics: Are You On Team Epicurus? | Comparison Chart: Epicurus vs. Other Philosophies | Chart Of Key Epicurean Quotations | Accelerating Study Of Canonics Through Philodemus' "On Methods Of Inference" | Note to all users: If you have a problem posting in any forum, please message Cassius  

  • Analysis of Video By Sabine Hossenfelder ("You Don't Have Free Will But Don't Worry")

    Malte Hossenfelder's book "Epikur" is in the library of Cologne. I read it there and wrote a review at:

    Thread

    On Malte Hossenfelder's book "Epikur"

    Malte Hossenfelder's book (Verlag C. H. Beck oHG, Munich 1991, 3rd., updated edition, 2006, ISBN 978-3-406-54122-3) is one of a series of the publishing company on thinkers. Apparently, the publishing company limited the size of the book and thereby the level of detail.

    The book depicts Hellenistic philosophy as the origin of individualism and Epicurus as the most prominent pioneer of individualism. It is a good introduction to Epicurus' philosophy when the reader is on the alert for some…
    Martin
    November 12, 2021 at 5:18 AM

    His much bigger book on Hellenistic philosophy would be needed to go more into details of his reasoning but that book was not in the library.

  • On Malte Hossenfelder's book "Epikur"

    Malte Hossenfelder's book (Verlag C. H. Beck oHG, Munich 1991, 3rd., updated edition, 2006, ISBN 978-3-406-54122-3) is one of a series of the publishing company on thinkers. Apparently, the publishing company limited the size of the book and thereby the level of detail.

    The book depicts Hellenistic philosophy as the origin of individualism and Epicurus as the most prominent pioneer of individualism. It is a good introduction to Epicurus' philosophy when the reader is on the alert for some shortcomings.

    Hossenfelder appears to be sympathetic to Epicurus' philosophy. Unfortunately, he came up with some misleading oversimplifications which seem to contradict Epicurus' extant texts and how we interpret them here on this forum.

    He seems to overlook that Epicurus' philosophy is not only a logic system but refers to human nature as ultimate "irrational" motivation and to the nature of individual humans as source for variation in what are the most appropriate actions to take.

    Therefore, Hossenfelder makes typical mistakes of "logicians", e. g. he misinterprets Epicurus' philosophy as egoistic and ignores the emotional aspects of friendship. Once a friendship has been established, the bonding is actually much stronger and important than the equivalent of profitable trades between indifferent business partners.

    The table below lists some noteworthy details from the book.

    PageQuote in German originalEnglish translation by Google corrected by MartinMartin's Comments
    56D. h. es gibt einem sicheren Weg zur
    Glückseligkeit, der jedermann offensteht: Nimm Dir nur das vor, von dem gewiß ist, daß Du es auch bekommst.    		I. e. there is a sure path to happiness which is open to everybody: Take on only what is certain that you will get it.This seems to be adequate when "certainty" is clarified as "with high likelihood".
    56Epikur umschreibt den Zustand der
    Glückseligkeit, wie vor ihm schon der Skeptiker Pyrrhon, mit ataraxia, was wir gemeinhin mit "Seelenruhe" übersetzen. Die Stoiker gebrauchen den Ausdruck apatheia. Gemeint ist jedesmal dasselbe, nämlich das Freisein von jeglicher Erregung, die Ruhe und Ausgeglichenheit des Gemüts, der vollkommene innere Friede, vergleichbar der Meeresstille.    		Epicurus describes the state of bliss, like the skeptic Pyrrho before him, with ataraxia, which we commonly translate as "peace of mind" .The Stoics use the term apatheia.What is meant each time is the same, namely the freedom from any excitement, the calm and equilibrium of the mind, the perfect inner peace, comparable to the calm of the sea.Equating ataraxia with apatheia seems to be an oversimplification. Hossenfelder refers to his much bigger book on Hellenistic philosophy for details. For a proper understanding and possibly a refutation, that other book would have to be studied.
    56Bis hierher stimmen die Auffassungen aller hellenistischen Denker weitgehend überein. Es sei aber ausdrücklich darauf hingewiesen, daß sich die vorgetragenen Gedanken zur Grundlegung der Gesamtepoche zum großen Teil auf Rekonstruktion stützen und sie sich in dieser Form nicht mehr aus den
    überlieferten Quellen belegen lassen.    		Under the aspects presented here so far, the views of all Hellenistic thinkers are largely in agreement. It should be expressly pointed out, however, that the ideas presented on the foundation of the entire epoch are largely based on reconstruction and can no longer be substantiated in this form from the extant sources.Hossenfelder's formulation implies that he expects that if more sources had survived they would support his reconstruction. This is unlikely because that claimed agreement appears to contradict extant texts of Epicurus.
    63Epikur kommt somit auf ganz folgerichtige Weise zum Hedonismus:
    Höchstes Gut ist die Glückseligkeit des einzelnen, diese besteht in der Ataraxie, diese ist Lust, also ist das höchste Gut Lust.    		Epicurus thus came to hedonism in a very consistent way: The highest good is the happiness of the individual, this consists in ataraxia, this is pleasure, so the highest good is pleasure.This resembles Hegelian style false logic and appears to be a misleading oversimplification. Epicurus' philosophy is better characterized by the statement that peace of mind is required to experience maximum pleasure but is not equal to pleasure.
    122Wie die Art der Kanonik so erklärt sich auch die besondere Form der Epikureischen Naturphilosophie aus den Aufgaben, die ihr von der Ethik bestimmt werden.Like the type of canon, the special form of Epicurean natural philosophy is explained by the tasks that are determined for it by ethics.It rather appears that Epicurus' derives the ethics from his natural philosophy, or he might have developed both together. However, which view is correct can probably not be established from the extant texts.
    128Der andere Grund, die unendliche theoretische Teilbarkeit zu bestreiten, betrifft die Art der Bewegung der Atome. Die Ursache ihrer Bewegung ist ihre Schwere, die Richtung wird bestimmt entweder durch die Schwere oder durch den Zusammenstoß mit anderen Atomen. Die Schwere läßt sie nach unten fallen, wobei Epikur sich darüber im Klaren ist, daß es im unendlichen Raum kein absolutes Oben und Unten gibt. Er definiert deshalb auch die Atombewegung nicht durch unten und oben, sondern umgekehrt diese durch jene: "Unten" heißt die Richtung, in die sich die Atome vermöge ihrer natürlichen Schwere bewegen, "oben" die entgegengesetzte. Alle übrigen Bewegungsrichtungen resultieren aus den Zusammenstößen, durch die sich auch die sichtbaren Körper entstehen.The other reason to dispute the infinite theoretical divisibility concerns the nature of the motion of the atoms. The cause of their movement is their gravity, the direction is determined either by gravity or by collision with other atoms. Gravity lets them fall down, whereby Epicurus is aware that there is no absolute above and below in infinite space. He therefore does not define the atomic movement in terms of below and above, but, conversely, these by the former: "Below" is the direction in which the atoms move due to their natural gravity, "above" the opposite. All other directions of movement result from the collisions, which also create the visible bodies.Epicurus' related explanations in the Letter to Herodotus appear contradictory. The way Hossenfelder clears up the mess makes sense but of course this now consistent theory of gravity by Epicurus remains false in view of today's knowledge.
    133Ferner stützt der Gedanke an die Unberechenbarkeit der Tyche die Einsicht, daß ein solches Glück nur garantiert ist, wenn man seine Ziele nicht in die äußeren Dinge, sondern in sich selbst verlegt, daß es allein auf die innere Einstellung ankommt.Furthermore, the thought of the unpredictability of luck supports the insight that such happiness is only guaranteed if one places one's goals not in external things but in oneself, so that it depends only on the inner attitude.Hossenfelder ignores that the hedonic calculus takes into account that certainty can never be achieved and a high likelihood is sufficient as a base for peace of mind and that a minimum of external things must be obtained for pleasure. This is another aspect where Hossenfelder's identification of pleasure with peace of mind misleads.
    136Bemerkenswert ist, daß er bei der Entstehung der Arten in Fortführung Empedokleischer Gedanken zu einer Theorie gelangt, die schon der Darwinschen sehr nahekommt.It is noteworthy that with the emergence of the species, in continuation of Empedokles' ideas, he arrives at a theory that comes very close to Darwin's.Agreed.
    138
    139    		Denn anders als der neuzeitliche Mensch wollte der Helenist
    Epikur die Natur eben nicht beherrschen, sondern gleichgültig machen. Nach ihm ist es für das Heil des Menschen am besten, wenn er sich nicht weiter um die Natur kümmert. Sie ist ein blindes Geschehen, das nach festen Kausalgesetzen ohne Ziel abläuft und auf den Menschen keinnerlei Bezug hat. Dennoch ist durch die Evolution gesichert, daß er alles findet, was er wirklich braucht. Alles darüber hinausgehende Begehren beruht auf leerem Wahn. Dies einzusehen und daraus eine ruhige, gelassene Einstellung zur Natur zu gewinnen, ist die einzige Aufgabe, die der Mensch ihr gegenüber hat. Denn so allein schafft er die Voraussetzung seiner Glückseligkeit, die der höchste Zweck alles Daseins ist.    		Unlike modern man, the Hellenist
    Epicurus did not want to control nature but make it indifferent. According to him, it is best for man's peace of mind if he no longer cares about nature. It is a blind mechanism that runs according to fixed causal laws without a goal and has no relation whatsoever to humans. Nevertheless, evolution ensures that he will find everything he really needs. Any desire beyond that is based on empty delusion. To see this and to gain a calm, serene attitude towards nature from it, is the only task that humans have towards it. For in this way alone does he create the prerequisite for his happiness, which is the highest purpose of all existence.    		Under this aspect, the difference between 2300 years ago and now is rather gradual than discrete. The destruction of Mediterranean forests in ancient times demonstrates that the ancient humans conquered nature, too. Moreover, the idea of conquering nature is already present in the Old Testament, too.
    For peace of mind, natural philosophy is indeed not necessary beyond the assurance that there is a natural explanation for every phenomenon. However, for those who gain pleasure from the pursuit of science, it is a worthy subject to work on.
    In the statements of this paragraph, Hossenfelder is mislead by his already mentioned oversimplifications.

  • Propositional Logic, Truth Tables, and Epicurus' Objection to "Dialectic"

    Assuming that the Wikipedia section on Chryssipus' syllogistic correctly describes what he wrote, he certainly knew how to apply logic but he did not have a deep understanding of logic.

    His "indemonstrables" are very well demonstrable because they are well known theorems of logic, which can be proven e.g. by truth tables. There is no point in using them as axioms because they are proven theorems and therefore readily available for further proofs.

    His syllogistic seems to be a regression to times before Aristotle. It is not wrong but a detour in the history of philosophy and for the dust bin.

  • An Epicurean Understanding of Pleasure

    Intensity of pleasure is usually limited in time by control loops in our body (e.g. lack of ability to get aroused after an orgasm, getting used to the particular pleasure, exhaustion, overstimulation) or by the nature of the activity.

    In general, I attempt to feel the easy to get pleasure of low intensity for most of the time and intense pleasure only occasionally. If intense pleasure comes as as a surprise without having expected it and without the typically painful preparation for it, I of course try to enjoy the experience as much as possible.

    As pleasure depends heavily on the individual, here are some practical examples:

    One of the greatest pleasures I have experienced so far is flying along ziplines high up through spectacular scenery. A flight along one zipline usually takes much less than a minute, so the intense pleasure is naturally limited to a very short time. (I wish there were 10 km long ziplines). In terms of pain, zipline flying requires long travel to go to the respective place, it is expensive, the effort might be in vain because the operator might block me from the ziplines because of high blood pressure or bad weather, and pain in the form of anxiety of height might kill the pleasure. The risk of injury and death seems to be so low that it does not show up in my hedonic calculus but for others that might be relevant.

    The listed pains (in particular the waste of time for travel and the risks of travel) make me pursue the desire for zipline flights only rarely. However, the expectation of the intense pleasure makes me plan for more zipline flights in the future. So far, I have 2 new places on my bucket list, may add more as I find them near where I travel anyway and might go again to places where I have been already if other reasons for travel get me near them.

    I took the opportunity of floating in a vertical wind canal when business travel brought me in walking distance to one. It was a pleasure but not as great as I expected, apparently because it requires skill and experience. I expect the pleasure to increase greatly after gaining the skill and experience. In case there is a wind tunnel near a place where I happen to stay for an extended period and cost of access is moderate, I would probably do this often because of the expectation of great pleasure although the duration of the pleasure is always short by the nature of the activity.

    I never did skydiving with a parachute from a plane. I am not sure whether I would pursue an easy opportunity for skydiving. The reported pleasure of free fall is attractive but the pain in terms of fear of flight on a plane and possibly intense fear of heights is a deterrent.

    I would probably not pursue an opportunity for a zero gravity flight or a space flight because the result of the hedonic calculus is negative for me.

    Another one of the greatest pleasures I have experienced so far is falling asleep together with my wife (ex-wife since recently, sigh) while hugging each other. It is limited in time in 2 different ways:

    If I actually fall asleep within minutes, the onset of deep sleep terminates the conscious and memorable experience of the pleasure.

    If I stay fully awake for several minutes with no indication of falling asleep soon, boredom kicks in, and the increasing desire to do something converts the experience from pleasure to pain.

    Another great pleasure was indulging in chocolate mousse. Many years ago, a chain restaurant provided it in a big bowl as part of its buffet. It was the main motivation for me to eat at that restaurant. By going repeatedly to the bowl and filling a small plate with a moderate amount, I ended up with a meal with more than 50% chocolate mousse by volume, and as it was a buffet meal, the whole meal meant gross overeating way beyond feeling no more hungry and stopping just short of discomfort. At that time, I ignored the risk of accelerated onset of diabetes from excessive intake of sugar.

    Then, the restaurant changed to provide the chocolate mousse only in small cups. I felt too embarrassed to take many of these cups, so I ended up eating much less chocolate mousse, at most 3 cups.

    Eventually, I wanted to reduce the risk of diabetes by excluding most foods with substantial amounts of sugar. I gradually reduced the number of cups to just one and got accustomed to the shortened duration of the intense pleasure of eating chocolate mousse and to appreciate the less intense pleasure of eating other food. I changed my habit further from choosing the cup which was filled with the most amount of mousse to the one which had the least.

    After a while of strongly reduced sugar intake, I lost the craving for chocolate mousse and stopped eating it at that chain restaurant, to which I still go once a week when I stay near one.

  • Talking About Epicurus With Someone Who Is Secular Humanist / Atheist

    From my little bit of knowledge of psychology at amateur level, I expect that even sadists can apply Epicurus' philosophy because it provides both feelings and reason as input for making decisions on what action to take.

    Sadists who are not psychopaths may trust their feelings as guide because they have compassion, which stops them from excessively harming their masochistic partners. They need reason mainly to carry out sadistic techniques safely to prevent unintentional hazards.

    Sadists who are psychopaths need to rely much more on reason to prevent themselves from severely harming or killing people. A life-time prison sentence might not scare them at the level of feelings but reasoning about such consequences might stop them from excessive actions.

  • Propositional Logic, Truth Tables, and Epicurus' Objection to "Dialectic"

    That I sometimes say "aeh" was known to me but not that I did it that often during the presentation. It sounds terrible and must be annoying to listeners.

    Another blunder was that while explaining a truth table, I repeatedly said "column" instead of "row".

    I suggest to remove the following passages:

    7:58 - 11:02 (detour on quantum and fuzzy logic)

    25:26 - 25:38 (wrong statements about Slide 12)

    25:50 - 26:32 (my confusion about premise and conclusion)

    around 27:17 ("I mixed them up" because if 25:50 - 26:32 is removed, it does no more apply)

    28:53 - 28:58 (another reference to my confusion)

  • Propositional Logic, Truth Tables, and Epicurus' Objection to "Dialectic"

    Blunders during my presentation

    As mentioned and corrected in my additions and during the presentation, the truth table for OR on Slide 11 of the tutorial is wrong. While presenting, I wrongly mentioned that the examples on Slide 12 were wrong, too, but no, I merely got confused by the "ands" in the text. The examples for OR are correct.

    My second blunder was to wrongly identify q as a premise at the beginning of my explanation of Slide 13. I corrected it immediately but the confusion may have lead comments off track.

    The motivation for making the presentation was to show that a false premise in a syllogism does not necessarily mean that the conclusion is false, too. This mistake is easily made because often it is actually the case that the conclusion is false, too. That experience may misguide our intuition. Toward the end of my presentation, I made my third blunder by myself making that false inference to call a conclusion false upon finding a premise of an implication to be false but became aware of it only after the session. So, we need to make sure that my withdrawal of that statement accompanies the podcast.

  • Propositional Logic, Truth Tables, and Epicurus' Objection to "Dialectic"

    Quote

    Do you have any specific references on those two categories (1) timeless sentences (2) future events?

    Currently, my references are only in German:

    Carl Friedrich von Weizsaecker's German original "Aufbau der Physik" of "The Structure of Physics", English edition by Thomas Görnitz, Holger Lyre, Springer Science & Business Media, 2007, ISBN 1402052359, 9781402052354:

    https://books.google.co.th/books/about/The_Structure_of_Physics.html?id=DeexONN0zDgC&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y

    In that book, the book "Quantum logic" from P. Mittelstaedt is referenced. I still have the notes from attending his lectures at University of Cologne about 35 years ago.

    Some articles in "Physik Journal".

  • Propositional Logic, Truth Tables, and Epicurus' Objection to "Dialectic"

    A variable in the tutorial (or proposition as I denote it more specific in my additions) is a place holder for a sentence, whereby that sentence needs to be meaningful to the extent that it can be true or false.

    Epicurus knew and even Aristotle was aware of that binary logic might be applicable in full only to timeless sentences and those which refer to past events but not to events in the future. If everybody gets a good enough understanding on Monday and there is time left, we can expand the discussion into the pitfalls of applying logic to future events and how quantum logic avoids those pitfalls. It will still take several months until I finish a book from which I hope to gain a deeper understanding and more confidence in applying quantum logic. I know enough to say something about it but a complete stand-alone presentation on quantum logic will have to wait until 2022.

  • Munro Translation of Lucretius

    The ancient Greeks are of course excused because they did not yet have a sufficiently worked out theory of electromagnetism. They were the giants who started it, and on whose shoulders Maxwell and the likes stood when they worked it out. What I referred to was "(which has magnetic properties when rubbed or heated)", which appears to be an insertion of Richard McKirahan, who lives in our time and should have referred to electrostatics.

Finding Things At EpicureanFriends.com

Here is a list of suggested search strategies:

  • Website Overview page - clickable links arrranged by cards.
  • Forum Main Page - list of forums and subforums arranged by topic. Threads are posted according to relevant topics. The "Uncategorized subforum" contains threads which do not fall into any existing topic (also contains older "unfiled" threads which will soon be moved).
  • Search Tool - icon is located on the top right of every page. Note that the search box asks you what section of the forum you'd like to search. If you don't know, select "Everywhere."
  • Search By Key Tags - curated to show frequently-searched topics.
  • Full Tag List - an alphabetical list of all tags.