Posts by Godfrey

I would begin with natural or unnatural, and eliminate the unnatural desires. Then I would reason out whether the resultant pleasures are likely to outweigh any pains involved. This goes along with my thinking that the natural and unnecessary desires are the sweet spot of day to day choices and avoidances. I examine these in terms of both the desires and the potential pleasures/pains, in no particular order.

Quote from Eikadistes

We define virtue as a good used to achieve the goal of pleasure, and we recognize virtuous behavior as acting "practically, properly, and peaceably" (KD5). Practicing these virtues requires choice and avoidance, like avoiding things that lead to guilt, so avoiding guilt is definitely virtuous because it is a choice made to reduce pain and maximize pleasure, which is the goal of life.

The underlined part of this quote is, for me, the key point. Guilt is experienced as pain. In evaluating the pleasures v the pains in any particular activity, if there is the potential for feeling guilt we would need to include that in our analysis.

VS71: Ask this question of every desire: what will happen to me if the object of desire is achieved, and what if not?

And for you as well Pacatus!

Quote from Matteng

A strict rule based decision making I find difficult, we need always sober reasoning/prudence to judge/feel the consequences and the context to make good choices/avoidances.

This is well said and definitely bears repeating.

Quote from Don

there's a whole genre of sci-fi where lab-grown humanoids and cyborgs create issues. For a humorous take, see the Murderbot Diaries.

That show was quite amusing! There's also a movie, The Island, which grapples with the subject, though not with a lot of intellectual depth. I only mention it because of the fun fact that the wombs which the clones were grown in were literally designed as scaled up breast implants.

I'm in agreement with Don on this issue as far as I can tell. His post above points out what I have considered the basic problem, which is that the uploading idea, as far as I know, is typically presented as "a brain in a box", which is to me obviously untenable.

The more "realistic" approach would be to re-create a fully functioning brain in a fully functioning body, in a real world environment. This would seemingly increase the complexity of the problem exponentially, but might make the idea of reproducing consciousness captivating for those who take pleasure in pondering hypotheticals.

As for me, I'm off to the gym to work off my Thanksgiving feast. Bottoms up!

Can't say why that brings this to mind...

Happy 20th, all!

Personally, I kind of like "corrosive": these desires eat away at our well-being. But I would look at this similarly to the way that I look at the Tetrapharmakon, which is as a mnemonic for people who are already comfortable of the ideas of natural, unnatural, necessary, unnecessary. In this case, "corrosive" just adds a little oomph to the concept.

Lately I've become interested in Dia de los Muertos as something compatible with EP. At least as far as remembering and celebrating our deceased loved ones. It probably has a supernatural element that isn't compatible but, at least for me that's easily ignored.

Here in southern California the decorations abound and it seems to be widely celebrated, so it's kind of a natural fit. Probably not so much in the Southern states....

Quote from Cassius

I would think that it would probably be a generality that a physicist would likely consider discovery as generically more pleasurable than many other pleasures, or else one would not choose to be a physicist

True, but this choice would then be tested by actual experience once the choice has been made. As another example, consider somebody who chooses the law as a profession. Many who make that choice continue in a long and pleasurable career, while others quickly burn out and find something less painful to pursue. And for the ones who remain in the profession, often a process ensues of navigating their way to the most enjoyable way to practice, which may prove to be far different than the practice they initially envisioned.

Digressing to a physicist, or anyone making a creative discovery or innovation....

The desire for fame is what I would consider a prime example of an unnatural desire, so I'll ignore that. Even so, often a creative discovery is the result of "scratching an itch," or problem solving to remove a pain. Additionally, the creative process itself is often pleasurable yet often tortuous. All to say that the predominance of pleasure over pain might be quantifiable in retrospect for a very specific instance, but that it's ridiculous to try to make a generic statement ranking the pleasure of making a discovery as higher or lower than any other specific pleasure.

By which I'm agreeing with the posts above that emphasize that understanding the guidance of one's personal pleasures and pains is the proper emphasis for living an Epicurean lifestyle.

This discussion touches on a way in which hedonism often harbors an awareness of the well-being of others, even those beyond our immediate loved ones. For some, such as myself, the thought of the harm to, say, society in this case, brings personal pain which may outweigh any pleasure that I would experience from the technology in question. One could call that being a Luddite, or you could think of it as listening to one's feelings to better assess how to respond to a situation.

A key to listening to one's feelings is understanding that feelings change over time, and one needs to be open to continually assessing their feelings over time. This is the process.

Anyway, back to the discussion....

Say farewell to AI bubble, prepare for the crash:

Say farewell to AI bubble, prepare for the crash

A sidebar on grief, and its many layers...

One aspect to consider, which I think can only follow after the wailing war widow phase, is to parse out what exactly you are grieving. Is it for your loved one's experience of being no more? Are you grieving for yourself, as you live in loneliness? Is it the fear of moving on, and in doing so losing your memories of your loved one? Is it grief for what the deceased will never have a chance to do?

Then there's the practical aspect of moving forward and continuing to pursue your most fulfilling life. You're in a place that you never expected to be. You might be older and more vulnerable than in the past, realizing that you need to be open to life and new possibilities, and that you have to learn new ways of doing so.

Obviously there's much more. But Epicurus has provided a framework, if not a path, to continue to pursue your best life. His opponents, in their glib talk of manliness and strength. Have completely missed the point.

This reminds me of the hymn "Onward Christian Soldiers".... marching as to war, with the cross of Jesus going on before (that's from memory, I may have misquoted).

Regarding Grok: [Grok chatbot studies Musk’s views before answering](https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=caba25fa-1924-426f-b152-620ea173d406&v=sdk)

That Meno certainly was a cheeky bugger! At any rate, I seem to have completely missed this, and to my detriment. Thanks!

Cassius would you refresh my memory on the particular paradox of Meno that you're referring to?

Quote from Kalosyni

Now...what happens if it is a tie?

This is why I don't like the term "hedonic calculus"!

Are we aware of any extent Epicurean texts on the subject of grief?

Quote

But he makes the alleviation of grief depend on two things, a ceasing to think on evil, and a turning to the contemplation of pleasure. For he thinks that the mind may possibly be under the power of reason, and follow her directions; he forbids us, therefore, to mind trouble, and calls us off from sorrowful reflections: he throws a mist over our eyes to hinder us from the contemplation of misery.

Except for the last phrase, this makes sense if you think of it in terms of focusing on pleasant memories of the subject of grief, and not dwelling on the unpleasant memories. As he continues beyond this quote, though, he seems to be describing bad Stoic advice to distract from grief by thinking about unrelated things to drive grief from your mind. To my understanding, this technique generally doesn't end well as it just represses the Feelings.

PD40 comes to mind: All those who have the power to obtain the greatest confidence from their neighbors also live with each other most enjoyably in the most steadfast trust; and experiencing the strongest fellowship they do not lament as pitiful the untimely end of those who pass away. Which seems to me to say that in the context of both you and the departed having lived good Epicurean lives, there's really no reason for excessive grieving. As stand-alone advice it becomes muddled, as do so many ideas when presented by Cicero.

Comparing this to the wise man on the rack: the initial pain can't be avoided, but having a solid foundation in the philosophy, remembering the good feelings you've had (and shared, in the case of grief) can balance and/or overcome that pain.