Posts by Eikadistes

Quote from Little Rocker

Yeah, I've wondered about the same thing. I seem to remember that concern showing up in the objections section of a paper I read on Epicurean gratitude by Ben Rider (attached in its pre-published form)

This is precisely what I needed. Thanks!

"VII. Gratitude is weakness?

I argue that, for Epicureans, gratitude is necessary for a happy human life. But some passages seem to say that gratitude is actually a sign of weakness. In particular, this claim appears as a premise in Epicurus’ argument that we have no reason to anticipate rewards and punishments from the gods:

What is blessed and indestructible has no troubles itself, nor does it give trouble to anyone else, so that it is not affected by feelings of anger or gratitude. For all such things are a sign of weakness. (KD I; compare Letter to Herodotus 76-77, Cicero, On the Nature of the Gods 1.45 = IG I-16)

The gods exist, but because they are ‘blessed and indestructible’ they need not feel gratitude. Gratitude indicates weakness and is relevant only for those who have deficiencies and thus need others to help or benefit them. That humans feel anger or gratitude reveals our limitations and dependency. So, if wisdom enables a human to ‘live as a god among men’ (Ep. Men. 135), would not a wise and virtuous person also have no need for gratitude?

The answer, it seems to me, must be ‘no.’ The fact that gods feel no gratitude does not mean that we should not; though Epicureans seek to emulate the gods’ tranquility and happiness, no human can attain their invulnerability or immortality, and any desire to do so would be unnatural and empty.

It is important to remember, in this context, that for Epicureans all virtues—like moderation and justice—are defined not absolutely, by an independent objective standard. They are instrumentally valuable because they contribute to a pleasurable life, and so what counts as virtuous in a case depends on what in fact produces happiness (Ep. Men. 132). We see this most clearly in Epicurus’ analysis of justice: Justice exists because of ‘a pledge of reciprocal usefulness’ (KD 31), a ‘pact about neither harming another nor being harmed’ (KD 33). Justice is ‘in general outline’ the same for all humans, but what counts as just may vary depending on circumstances—’the peculiarities of a region,’ for instance (KD 36)—and when circumstances change, it could happen that a law that was originally useful and just ‘no longer possesses the nature of justice’ (KD 37; also KD 38). We should not become fixated on abstract notions but instead ‘simply look to the facts’ (KD 37).

In the same way, then, it is unsurprising that, for indestructible and perfectly self-sufficient gods, gratitude is not a value, while for vulnerable and deficient humans, it is. No matter how wise we become, we cannot eliminate these facts about what we are. Gratitude is part of how we achieve what limited and imperfect self-sufficiency we can obtain."

This seems to be consistent with the position that has thus far been enumerated.

I have been trying to find more fragments to flesh-out Epicurean religiosity, largely through Philodemus. It seems to me that he (and apparently Hermarchus, based on fragmentary attestation I'm still trying to organize) had concerns about the status of the gods' social lives and their speech patterns; that, combined with the analysis of gratitude, which is a seemingly human-unique, conscious behavioral practice (there are better words for that) Not to suddenly follow a distracting tangent, but this lends a lot of credence to the "Realist interpretation" of the Epicurean deities.

I am leaning away from the "Idealist interpretation" because it seems to rob the god(s) of blessedness.

I am also approaching this inquiry with an assumption: I personally have assumed that the gods were once not gods. My conception of a deity is a being who, through choice and personal development, has mastered the natural ethical path to achieve a perfect, animal life; this carries an additional assumption that they must exist, because, if such beings do not exist in an infinite universe, than choice if futile and ethics is an exercise in futility.

I think that KD1 seems incompatible with the "Idealist interpretation" if we rob the god(s) of their blessed ability to make perfect choices, having created (through development) a supportive circle of excellent companions; if gods are just inspiring thought-forms generated by cosmic particles that have intermingled through the void, they aren't much different that inspiring shapes in the clouds or any other experience that can be explained as an optical illusion.

As a side-note, perhaps Lucretius is assuming too much of a poetic license in describing Epicurus as a god if Epicurus (and, as it seems, Philodemus) had such specific preconceptions of the forms of deities.

I've been mulling over the concept of "gratitude" with respect to KD1:

KHARISI - ΧAΡΙΣΙ - χάρισι - /'kʰa.riːsi/ - the dative plural inflection of χάρις (kháris) from χαίρω (khaîrō, “rejoice”, “take pleasure in”, “delight”) meaning “gratitude”, “favour”, “partiality”, “partisanship”, “indebtedness”, “benevolence”, “care”.

Kuria Doxa I indicates that ΧAΡΙΣΙ (or kharisi, variously translated as "gratitude", "favour", "partiality", "partisanship", "indebtendess", "benevolence", and "care") is a form of weakness. Epicurus identifies "gratitude" (kharisi) as being incompatible with the character of an animal living their best life. Kuria Doxa I seems emphatic that ΧAΡΙΣΙ (kharisi) is to be discouraged.

In nearly every other extant document, "gratitude" (expressed using forms of kharis) is encouraged as an indispensable moral practice:

In his Epistle To Menoikeus, Epicurus encourages the old to practice gratitude "so that although old [they] may stay young in good things owing to gratitude [kharin] for what has occurred." He repeats this point in Vatican Saying 17: "the old man [...] has secured the goods about which he was previously not confident by means of his secure sense of gratitude [khariti]."

In Vatican Saying 55, Epicurus seems to encourage the practice of gratitude as a remedy against depression and regret: "Misfortunes must be cured by a sense of gratitude [khariti] for what has been and the knowledge that what is past cannot be undone". Gratitude seems to be encouraged through the practice of Remembrance, exemplified by Epicurus in his final Epistle To Idomeneus as a means of managing pain.

In Vatican Saying 69, Epicurus identifies the "ingratitude [akhariston] of the soul" makes animals "greedy for unlimited variation in its lifestyle". This seems to be a consequence of failing to abide by Nature, exemplified by the failure to recognize the fact that the greatest pleasures are the most abundant, whereas the most rare luxuries always seem to instigate unnecessary stress.

In a fragment, Epicurus reinforces the aforementioned prioritization of desire. He is recorded as having said "I am grateful [kharis] to blessed Nature, because she made what is necessary easy to acquire and what is hard to acquire unnecessary" (U469).

At numerous points in De Rerum Natura, Lucertius encourages gratitude (grata) and rejects thanklessness (ingrata), echoing Epicurus' recommendations in his Epistles (found in at least Book III.931-42, III.955-60, III.1003-1010).

... given all of this, I am wondering: what is unique about the employment of kharisi in KD1 that contradicts these other usages?

I run into "happiness" most often as a translation of EYΔAIMONIA, whereas "blessedness" tends to be reserved for MAKAPION. However, they are intrinsically related Epicurean philosophy and both can imply the goal of pleasure.

Quote from Nate

Bailey's Fragment 10 alludes to Epicurus having declared HΔONH ("pleasure") to be TAΓAΘON or “the good”.

The Tetrapharmakos also indicates that TAΓAΘON ("the good") is HΔONH ("pleasure").

Athanaeus seems to record Epicurus as identifying TAΓAΘON ("the good") with HΔONH ("pleasure") in Deipnosophists (U67). Diogenes Laërtius also documents this attestation in Lives of Eminent Philosophers.

Seneca records Epicurus as having written HIC SVMMVM BONVM VOLVPTAS EST, “here our highest good is pleasure” (Letters To Lucilius 21.10). Lucretius also employs the phrase BONVM SVMMVM in De Rerum Natura, Book VI.

In his Epistle to Menoikeus, Epicurus declares HΔONH ("pleasure") to be the ΠPOTON AΓAΘON the "first good". Interestingly, he later declares TO MEΓIΣTON AΓAΘON ΦPONHΣIΣ, that "the greatest” or “highest good” is “prudence” (or “practical wisdom”). Epicurus also describes ΦPONHΣIΣ ("prudence") as being the APXH, the "beginning" or "foundation". Incidentally, he also identifies HΔONH ("pleasure") as both the APXHN ("beginning") and TEΛOΣ ("end").

In KD7, Epicurus refers to AΣΦAΛEIAN (“security”) as a ΦΥΣEΩΣ AΓAΘΟΝ (“natural good”). Similarly, in KD6 (among a variety of translations), he describes any means by which to acquire ΘAPPEIN (“confidence” or “the assurance of safety”) from or between people as being a ΦΥΣΙΝ […] AΓAΘΟΝ (also translated as a “natural good”).

Philodemus contrasts the general ideas of TΩN AΓAΘΩN with TΩN KAKΩN or “the good” with “ill” (U38); of interest, later, Usener translates Philodemus’ phrase TON XPHΣTON (tón khrēstón) as “the good” (U180).

Display More

I just read Philodemus' treatise "On Death" and found an instance of the phrase TO MEΓIΣTON AΓAΘON (19.1). Throughout the treatise, he alludes to the pursuit and enjoyment of TOY KPATIΣTON BIOY, or "the best life" (38.14).

It seems anachronistic to re-contextualize Vatican Saying 41 in a Roman context. I have always taken this pronouncement to be directed toward Epicurus' correspondents who were logistically unable to relocate into the Garden. Unlike Noah's Ark, which apparently functioned like Mary Poppins' carpet bag (finite geometric dimensions with infinite volume), the Garden had limited space. Surely, "his friends who were so numerous that they could not be contained in whole cities" could not all cohabitate with the Hegemon. The author's commentary seems to parrot the criticism that it is impossible to live according to Epicurus' teachings.

Regarding open-source solutions, I am a big fan of https://sketch.io/sketchpad/.

Sketchpad is the tool I regularly use. I used it to make the Epicurean Communities of the Ancient World map: Epicurean Communities of the Ancient World

Quote from Joshua

Looks like Eikadistes has come across it though.

It's a great image! (I made it)

Quote from Cassius

Quote from Nate

Symmetresis" is the word I prefer to use in the place of "hedonic calculus."

That post cries out for explanation, Nate!

ΣYMMETPHΣIΣ – συμμέτρησις – symmétrēsis – Epicurus uses the word as συμμετρήσει (symmetrēsei) when describing “measuring things side by side and looking at both the advantages and disadvantages” (Ep. Men.)

In Epicurus’ Epistle To Herodotus, he uses several inflections of the word to refer to the process of arriving at correct judgments about sensation: σύμμετρον (47, 50), σύμμετροι (54), συμμετρότερον; and then several more times in his Epistle To Pythocles: (91), συμμετρίας (107), συμμέτρως (110), συμμέτρως (111), συμμετρήσει (130).

συμμέτρησις is the word I prefer to use in the place of "hedonic calculus."

Quote from Cassius

Seems to me you're right. In the distant past I read some into the Essenes in regard to the Dead Sea scrolls and so forth. I don't recall whether the Essenes were into life after death or against it (was that the Sadducees?) but that would seem to be another potential point of crossover influence.

Pro-death. The Essenes were mystics.

I am curious if their social structure resembled Gardens, because they are opposed, ideologically.

Quote from Cassius

I am sure that others ( Eikadistes ? ) have better ideas for illustrating this, but it seems to me that there can never be too many ways of arguing and showing that the undisturbed pursuit of pleasure is ultimately why we seek to avoid pain, not the other way around.

I like anything to do with Star Trek.

I am flirting with the idea that Epicurus stumbled over the concept of spacetime without realizing it.

Lucretius :“Epicurus […] he who outshone the human race in genius and obscured the luster of all as the rising of the sun extinguishes the stars.” (III:1043-45)

“For if we are to speak as the majesty of his revelations demand, a god he was, a god […] who first discovered that principle of life which is now identified with wisdom, and who by his genius saved life from such mighty waves and such deep darkness and moored it in such calm water and so brilliant light. […] so we have the more justification for deifying the author of the sweet consolations of life that, disseminated throughout might nations, even now are soothing people’s minds.” (V:7-12, 19-21)

“And will not the man who, using words instead of weapons, subdued all these monsters and banished them from the mind rightly be considered worthy of a place among the gods? Especially since it was his wont to present many precepts in a good and godlike manner about the immortal gods themselves, and to reveal the whole nature of things in his discourse.” (V:49-54)

“[…] a man endowed with such genius, whose lips once gave utterance to true pronouncements on every subject. And even now, though his life’s light is extinguished, the godlike nature of his discoveries ensures that his fame, spread far and wide long ago, is raised to the skies.” (VI:4-8)

Diogenes Laertius: “There are plenty of witnesses of the unsurpassable kindness of [Epicurus] to everybody; both his own country which honored him with brazen statues, and his friends who were so numerous that they could not be contained in whole cities; and all his acquaintances who were bound to him by nothing but the charms of his doctrine.”

Just linking my "Epicurean Verses When You're Feeling..." post/file to this thread:

Post

RE: Epicurean Verse For When You're Feeling...

Yes I agree that is a good test. I would say that any saying which might arguably be interpreted as leaning in a flat "commandment" direction (and I am not sure there are really any at all) would appear to do so (if they do) only by virtue of lacking context from the original setting.

For example "live unknown" as a flat statement would appear to be a flat "commandment" that on its face would override any other consideration. However we know both (1) from the wider view of the philosophy that…

Cassius

March 9, 2023 at 1:48 PM

File

Epicurean Verses For When You're Feeling...

The intention of this document is to be used as a functional instrument toward reinforcing the health of one's soul.

Eikadistes

March 6, 2023 at 9:17 AM

Quote from Kalosyni

Quote from Nate

His sweetest quote on pain management is useful to me in acknowledging the power of remembrance,

it could be a very individualized process. Perhaps everyone should make their own collection of what they find helpful, as an exercise and to assist in learning.

Everyone is definitely welcome to do so (I recommend it), and, as mentioned, if anyone has any peer feedback with specific, constructive suggestions to improve my work, I am openly asking for it.

Quote from Kalosyni

Quote from Nate

His sweetest quote on pain management is useful to me in acknowledging the power of remembrance,

As for myself...there is now so much on the internet. And all I have to do is type in whatever problem I am encountering and then lots of practical advice comes up for me on various websites.

As an Epicurean, I recommend taking Epicurus' advice over Wikipedia's.

I do not have immediate access to On Anger in its entirety. If anyone has a link, or else, meaningful quotations they may have documented, I would appreciate if you could share. (I am still looking, myself).

Quote from Kalosyni

Eikadistes, as I look over it some more:

1. my concern continues to be that these will end up dealing with "symptoms" and not "causes" of feelings and emotions. Also, you'll want to have your sense of anger working correctly, so it is there for you when you need it, and you should not be trying to tamp it down. So a truly emotionally healthy person will feel a rainbow of feelings and emotions, but they will not be perplexed, overwhelmed by, or stuck in their feelings/emotions. There will be a healthy flow. And healthy anger when it does arise won't be a big blowout, but a recognition of bodily feelings. And so...We need not the appearance of health but actual true health (VS54)

2. Verses taken out of context: -- the first listing under "persecuted" from Letter to Menoeceus; -- VS62 under "anger" is specifically between parents and children (perhaps there are others).

3. Some of words you use as "feelings" are in actuality evaluations/judgements and not feelings/emotions -- insecure, rejected, persecuted, injured, poor, weak.

Thanks for that – what I'm reading is that (1.) I should probably include more quotes from Philodemus' On Anger to better flesh out the nuances of anger, and not to frame it as something negative, merely something worth caution; (2.) While I did intentionally removed some of the items from their context for a purpose (the quote is still meaningful and more available to people without children in their lives) it is a good note to reflect that the context of some of these might be really important; (3.) That is a good point that not all of the items in the list are actually emotions, some are just conditions. I am open to replacing those conditional words with emotional words.

Still, it is important to me to keep some context. When I say "poor" I mean, "feeling dejected due to economic circumstances", economic safety being an instrument to happiness, as opposed to the general feeling of "jealousy", which might be vain (desire for fame). There are some nuances in terms of prescriptions that Epicurus provides to deal with conditions, and, I will just add, all of those quotes, thus far, strike me, within those labels, as being emotionally impactful, so if it isn't striking you, I am wondering where you might move the quote, or just get rid of it.

His sweetest quote on pain management is useful to me in acknowledging the power of remembrance, not a "How To Deal With Kidney Stones: For Men" guide. Likewise, the quote on dealing with childish anger is useful as a non-parent. At the same time, the quotes dealing with "hurtful-feelings caused by economic marginalization" is a nuance that I do not want to abstract to mere "jealousy" ... I think it could be re-organized under "hopelessness", or, better yet, I could add "frustrated". Immediately, that strikes me as the better option.

Kalosyni I think you brought up a great point that the condition feeling-ish words I used would be better address with nuances, if you have some suggestions. I think "frustrated" might be a better replacement for "poor", and so on.

Greetings, friends. As I mentioned in another post, Hiram inspired me a while ago to begin working on an Epicurean equivalent to the "Verses when you're feeling..." section found at the end of selected copies of the Christian New Testament.

The intention of this document is to be used as a functional instrument toward reinforcing the health of one's soul.

I am looking for feedback (ask yourself, if this were re-arranged differently, what changes could be help my own, personal needs?). I am looking for suggestions to (a) rename emotions I have selected, (b) merge sections, for example, "Guilty" and "Regretful" are similar and there is an argument in my head to be made that they can be merged; still, I chose to keep them separate; you will notice others that are similar, (c) Omitting misleading or inappropriate quotations, (d) moving quotations beneath a different emotional category, (e) general formatting notes, bookmarks, hyperlinks, margins, etc.

This is just a First Draft and I hope to continue sculpting it into something that can be shared.

You can find the file here: Epicurean Verses For When You're Feeling...

This thread can be used as a place to share recommendations for improving this document.

Riffing off of Don's observations, I'd like to re-designate the Stoics as "the Stoop Kids", the Peripatetics as "Ramblers", the Academics as "Gold-Diggers", the Cynics as "Growlers", and ... I suppose the Skeptics would still, appropriately be called "Pyrrhonists" as followers of Pyrrho. And while we could refer to ourselves as "Gardeners", I much prefer the designation that Athenaeus provides in Deipnosophistae (5:3), that we are ΠPOΦHTAΣ ATOMΩN, or, "Atom Prophets".