Posts by Godfrey

Quote from Cassius

...there is nothing more important, or even in the neighborhood, of being clear about the nature of the soul being mortal and not subject to supernatural creation or control (the issue really may be "supernatural relation" rather than "supernatural control").

This is actually what prompted me to ask the question. Once someone has reached this conclusion it doesn't necessarily lead to the same ethical conclusions as Epicurus, but since he mentioned him by name I'm curious where Ehrman's thinking led him.

Don would you consider Ehrman some sort of Epicurean? Maybe of the Gassendi variety? He seems to have adopted Epicurus' physics to some extent, but I'm curious what his ethical ideas are like.... He does sound quite interesting.

A teaser quote from wikipedia:

Cooper was described by Thomas Jefferson as "one of the ablest men in America" and by John Adams as "a learned ingenious scientific and talented madcap.

[Admin Note: I am going to hijack Godfrey's post (which was originally here) and start a new thread from it on the topic of Thomas Cooper MD, materialist and friend of Thomas Jefferson]:

I would very much like to move Thomas Cooper into the "avowed Epicurean" category, but unfortunately I have not been able to find any references to Epicurus or Lucretius in Cooper's surviving writing which would allow me to do that. Hopefully at some point in the future someone can help me marshal the evidence that would justify the reclassification. To my knowledge at the moment here are some of the most important links on Cooper:

http://ThomasCooperMD.com

Wikipedia Entry

Bio of Thomas Cooper at Dickinson College, where he taught from 1811-1815 before he apparently resigned under pressure due to religious controversies. It appears that Cooper's memory is now being downplayed at Dickinson due to Cooper's later positions on slavery. The material formerly online at Encyclopedia Dicksonia (this links to the Archive.org version) no longer seems to appear at the Dickinson college website.

PDF of Cooper's The Scripture Doctrine of Materialism

Appendix on the Clergy

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

What follows is Godfrey's post:

_____________

Cassius thanks for the link to Cooper. This is all new to me and quite surprising. Except for the link to Plato

From today's paper, an op-ed about how Christians came to believe in an immortal soul, from a professor of religious studies. (Spoiler alert: it has roots in Plato's deception and trickery....) Personally, I was unaware of how late it came about.

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/…eaven-hell-soul

https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6L…_cD0xMDE2?ep=14

The attached article has some food for thought regarding Epicurean outreach and the symbolism behind Epicurus' portrait. I just gave it a quick read; not sure that I agree with all of it and I'm unfamiliar with many of the other authors referred to. Having said that, however, I did find that it touched on several topics of discussion in the forums, particularly regarding some ways to think about art for outreach.

First, I think that it's important to be clear that the natural/unnatural, necessary/unnecessary distinctions refer to desires, not pleasures. All pleasures are good, but some lead to more pain than pleasure.

With that in mind, I see natural desires as those that will bring me a balance of pleasure when I successfully pursue them. Unnatural desires are those that bring me more overall pain than pleasure.

Dialing in tighter to necessary and unnecessary desires, all desires that I consider unnatural for me I also think of as unnecessary. I only occasionally consider whether a natural desire is also necessary although I typically find it quite useful when I do. This consideration can take into account my personal interests as well as finances, health and energy, time commitment, family situation and how it impacts other desires of mine.

Notably, all these considerations can change over time due to life stages or changing short term circumstances.

I haven't read Hermotimus so I can't compare them. I'm about halfway through Zen &c. I think Joshua described it as steeped in Plato and I agree with that. It's basically three interwoven threads: a father-son motorcycle trip, ruminations on the virtues of understanding technology, and a "Chautauqua" attempting to tie together and advance the academic development of philosophy (minus Epicurus, of course). That, and the first person narrator is piecing together the life of Phaedrus, who is himself teaching rhetoric before he went insane and had electroshock therapy. Plenty to chew on!

Plato's Phaedrus deals with love as far as I can tell. I've just scanned the first few pages, which discuss how the "non-lover" is better than the "lover." Presumably Epicurus and then Lucretius were reacting to this work in some way....

To take it a little further, the major theme of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance is about an academic who literally drove himself insane doing the work of answering abstract questions. No mention in the book of Epicurus, who could have saved him a lot of grief. There is a little in the book about the pressures and "standards" of academia which very much agrees with the idea that Epicurus' philosophy is way too simple for the "pros."

Quote from Cassius

Maybe he's saying the Roman would be looking for information to use for better farming or the like, but if there is one thing the poem is devoid of it's "practical" application like mechanics or hydraulics.

I think that's what he's saying, that Lucretius is pushing atomism even though it doesn't seem practical to the typical Roman of his time. But he seems to be missing or ignoring how the understanding of atomism can free people from religious oppression. I read into this the idea of a spoonful of honey to help the wormwood go down but I don't see him saying this.

Interesting find!

I never would have guessed that's by Turner! He's definitely considered one of the greats. Here's a little blurb on the picture and the artist with some other examples of his work:

https://www.artsy.net/artwork/j-m-w-…s-the-epicurean

Carpe somnum!

From the Melville translation of Lucretius, line 907:

"Next, in what way sleep* floods the limbs with peace..."

The asterisk links to this footnote:

"sleep: sleep is a puzzling phenomenon, much discussed by ancient (and modern) scientists and philosophers: see especially the treatise On Sleep and Waking included in the so-called ‘Parva Naturalia’ of Aristotle (453b ff.). For the Epicurean view, compare the comment preserved in Letter to Herodotus66 (fr. 311), and fr. 325, with Diogenes of Oenoanda fr. 9."

From the Inwood and Gerson translation of the letter to Herodotus there is this footnote to paragraph 66:

"Scholion: 'Elsewhere he says that it is also composed of very smooth and very round atoms, differing quite a bit from those of fire. And that part of it is irrational, and is distributed throughout the rest of the body, while the rational part is in the chest, as is evident from [feelings of] fear and joy. And that sleep occurs when the parts of the soul which are distributed through the whole compound are fixed in place or spread apart and then collide because of the impacts. And semen comes from the entire body.' ”

Unfortunately I can't tell if/where Herodotus66 falls in the exerpt above in post #7. Also, I'm guessing that Diogenes of Oenoanda fr. 9 is what Charles read in the podcast.

That seems to sum it up pretty well. I guess he's just a historical curiosity from an Epicurean perspective.

Has anyone here heard of the philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce? The attached article showed up in my inbox and explores how Peirce studied Epicurus and used the idea of the swerve in some of his thinking. It would seem that his acceptance of Epicurus' ideas was very limited, but it was a pleasant surprise to come across a new name relating to Epicurus!

Here's an article from this morning's paper about reddit; something of a cautionary tale:

https://www.latimes.com/business/techn…s-a-mixed-story

Also....

Duty vs pleasure: I find that I do many things out of a sense of duty, even if they don't bring me pleasure. Duty and pleasure aren't mutually exclusive, but duty is subservient to pleasure. As a thought experiment you can examine what it would involve to go minimalist and pursue only the most natural and necessary pleasures: subsistence food, shelter and clothing. This can provide a baseline for a minimum income you would need from a job. But since EP isn't about minimalism, ponder from here what it would take to live an enjoyable life now that you have an idea of how little you could get by with.

Both Philodemus' On Property Mangaement and the Buddhist tenet of right livelihood offer a framework for thinking about work. Philodemus I believe addresses proper ways for the philosopher to deal with money (broadly speaking), while Buddhist right livelihood might be a bit "idealist" for a proper Epicurean. However they both can provide food for thought.

Isychos one thing that strikes me from your post is your statement that you've worked at various jobs in various industries. This has two implications from my perspective: you've got a range of experience that you can draw from and build on, and you're not pinned down to one career path which you may have come to dislike. So there seems to be a great degree of freedom available to you in how you choose to "earn a living." If so, take advantage of that and think creatively from the big picture down to the details regarding in what ways you might fashion the most enjoyable life for yourself.

Also keep in mind that if indeed you do have a great degree of choice, that can be an obstacle by itself in that it can be overwhelming. So approach your working life (and overall life) as a process: using the Canon and a healthy amount of reasoning, decide on what you wish to pursue and give it your all. But treat that as a starting point and keep evaluating as you go along so you can "course correct" as necessary. You don't necessarily have to make epic changes; sometimes pleasure is found in the details. Part of living as an Epicurean and following the Canon is always being aware of our sensations, preconceptions and feelings and responding appropriately to what is presented to us. To stop doing this and become attached to a fixed idea of your life is to stop being an Epicurean, even to stop living in some ways.

I spent many years on a career path that eventually became oppressive. I ended up leaving a job that I'd been at for nine years to dive into the great unknown. Not too long after, an opportunity came along which led to a fresh outlook and turned into an enjoyable new career. I never would have the opportunity if I hadn't previously addressed my fears and left my job. It was possibly the hardest thing that I've ever done, but well worth it. At the time I didn't know about Epicurus, but in retrospect what I did was put aside my fixed opinions and follow the Canon. Who knew?