Posts by Charles

On a more serious note, and something I suspect that even the Epicureans of the Garden in Athens had to deal with was the balance of free and open admission and that of secure, closed circles of members. The problem with the Discord was that its population was majority Stoic by an overwhelming margin. Some were platonist, or Nietzscheans, or Christian, atheist, etc. yet the Stoics were by far the most populous, and it seems that they have flooded a good chunk of the public "intellectual avenues" online, to the point, that most of the server partnerships became inextricably linked with Stoic-aligned groups and servers.

While their mere presence alone was not perfect, the issue came with random users speaking to others in the open general chat. Those random users claimed to represent or claimed to be able to speak with some matter of authority or clarity on the matter of the philosophy. As such, the ad nauseum dichotomy between gluttonous hedonist and ascetic was constantly repeated, there were too few Epicureans to rebuff the constant claims.

Unlike the forums here there were no set tiers and no confidentiality beyond myself and my staff members, as everything would be sent via private messages on Discord itself. Meaning that, even if there were a significant number of Epicureans on the Epicurean Discord (a crazy idea it seems), there was hardly the infrastructure to maintain and keep them in close communication.

So, my advice is to keep well protected safeguards around your community.

Lessons to be learned from my old Discord server: don't let 95% of your Epicurean community consist of non-Epicureans.

Welcome @Faunus!

Welcome warjuning!

Welcome @TaasEart!

I can make it tonight starting from 7pm EST.

Welcome Little Rocker!

Writing this at work so consider this my rough draft.

It is safe to say that a good chunk of us on the forums are introverts. Any diverse group or community will have them; however, I'm intending this thread for those who consider themselves hermits, recluses, or extreme introverts, especially the unregistered lurkers on here. I'm also writing from personal experience, as aside from a tiny, select handful, such as immediate family and my romantic partner, I do not feel the need to speak to anyone else unless it's for the sake of my pleasure. My own absences from the community here can be explained by this behavior.

Epicurean Philosophy is simultaneously well-disposed towards both extroverts and introverts. To the regulars that is no surprise, but more often than not casual explication of the philosophy emphasizes emotional, social conduct if not from Epicurus' Garden, then the Principal Doctrines that talk of friendship. Meanwhile what little is mentioned of a solitary life, is typically on the ascetic side: why engage in the public hustle if removing pain and becoming tranquil is you goal? Why not sit alone with your bread and water? As is usual, the popular and public approach is a gross oversimplification of the options an Epicurean has for themselves.

In his Biography of Epicurus, Diogenes Laertius references Epicurus as writing to Pythocles: "Hoist all sail, my dear boy, and steer clear of all culture." This is the same Pythocles that Laertius copies the letter to near the end of Book 10, and the contents of said letter imply that the two had numerous or frequent correspondence with each other. The letter's intent is not only didactic, but it seemed that Epicurus would hope that it would be shared and spread, so it remains a useful piece of advice, particularly to new learners. To me, this is one of the key sources and examples of "living unknown". In terms of Epicurean ethics, living unknown is just as crucial as the desires and their value to pleasure, because it ties into other aspects of the philosophy, namely the epistemology and some of its politics (See: PD's31-40) into consideration and accommodation. Of course, the ethics of the philosophy is perhaps the most important aspect of Epicureanism, it is first and foremost a philosophy of hedonism, justified and integrated through its physics and epistemology.

But what exactly does "live unknown" mean?

Quite simply it means to remove yourself from the vagaries of public life: whether that be government and the political system, the military, prevailing educational institutions, the church and its associated traditions, including religion as a whole, and even the gossip and collective opinion of the general public (ie the mob), or anything of a similar nature involving society at large. To become obsessed and completely engrossed in these fields will do little to stymie fears about life and death, and more often than not bring more pain and stress to the point of perhaps overwhelming any sense of achievement. These institutions are dependent on the current thoughts and mindset of the collective at large.

Just as in Epicurus' time, it is all too regrettable that pleasure is shunned and quickly equated with gluttony and depraved license. Epicurus himself had personally experienced the animosity towards his ideas, causing him to travel to different islands before ultimately settling in Athens, but it was an issue that has persisted across all of history and even today. In a better world, we could hope for the general public to be Epicurean or at least hedonistic. They would then have little reason to judge us and provoke the necessity for living unknown.

Quote from Vatican Saying 29 & 58

For I would certainly prefer, as I study Nature, to announce frankly what is beneficial to all people, even if none agrees with me, rather than to compromise with common opinions, and thus reap the frequent praise of the many.

We must free ourselves from the prison of public education and politics.

Quote from Maxims of Epicurus (Usener 187, attributed to Epicurus)

“I never desired to please the rabble. What pleased them, I did not learn; and what I knew was far removed from their understanding.”

In short, in order to live pleasantly, particularly if you wish to be Epicurean, you must not heap attention onto yourself in the eyes of the public whilst still believing in that death is nothing, pleasure is the highest good, there is no divine will, etc. However, there is additional nuance that is quietly and subtly acknowledged by Epicureans but is otherwise glossed over by popular interpretations and readings of Epicurus if not outright rejected. The most common of which is the abstention from political activity and education. Yet there are numerous sources from Epicurus' own life and the wise man sayings by Laertius. I'll cross post a comment I made on the nature of isolation versus being aware of your surroundings to quickly dispel this objection again.

Quote from me on the Austin thread

An Epicurean society is political in the sense of caring for the well-being and health of their country. Its citizens would not be ignorant or secluded from the world around them, on the contrary, they would have knowledge of the various figures and events around them. Epicurus was well read on Plato and his contemporaries; he could not have rejected them and devised the system of the garden had he chosen to completely and utterly withdraw into isolation.

Had Epicurus completely and utterly withdrawn from all public life, he would not have taken to teaching his ideas in Lampsacus, Mytilene, or Athens. He would've been content to live his life and die either taking his ideas with him or leaving them dedicated in a single source such as books he had secretly written, in the manner of the obscure and only posthumously notable Enlightenment thinker Jean Meslier, a priest whose lifetime work was a grand book dedicated to atheism and materialism, the very things his occupation of over 35 years opposed. If Epicurus had taken a similar approach to Meslier, it is not hard to imagine that his ideas would not have survived let alone become so influential. No, Epicurus followed his advice and never strayed from his beliefs. It is much more reasonable to see that, to each person to each their own desires. So too, are the circumstances that necessitate our active involvement with the general public.

Quote from Biography of Epicurus (Wise man sayings)

Moreover, the wise man will marry and have children, as Epicurus says in the Problems and in the work On Nature. But he will marry according to the circumstances of his life

[...]

He will engage in lawsuits and will leave writings behind him, but will not deliver speeches on public occasions. [...] He will be careful of his reputation in so far as to prevent himself from being despised. He will erect statues of others, but whether he had one himself or not, he would be indifferent. [...] He will pay court to a king, if occasion demands. He will rejoice at another’s misfortunes, but only for his correction. And he will gather together a school, but never so as to become a popular leader. He will give lectures in public, but never unless asked...

Simply withdrawing from public life may work well, but it is more nuanced than that. To truly "live unknown" is to abandon the ensnaring culture and conventions of public life and cultural institutions. For Epicureans, their replacement is either their own solitude perhaps paired by staunch individuality or more commonly the structure of the Garden, be it in person or an online format such as this forum. The garden is nor ever was a commune of common property. Members never pooled their resources or gave up their possessions by coercive tradition, some even lived far across the country, keeping in touch by letters, not by the appearance of their person.

To get back onto the topic of the thread, it is more than possible for an introverted, anti-social Epicurean to live pleasantly and be happy. It would always be prudent to keep a few friends within your network as a safety net and for the occasional impulse of wanting to socialize, no matter how rarely. Yet it is not necessary to engage with the public, as even studying and observing the world around you will suffice. Indeed, even engaging with your fellow Epicureans is by no means required. The garden is a resource, open to all but welcoming to who are sympathetic to pleasure.

Here's the engraver, Guernier, named after his father, another engraver.

Louis Du Guernier - Wikipedia

An interesting, unrelated sidenote, I read the referenced book by George Vertu on the state of painting and engraving in England in the 18th century, and one of the entries was of Claude de Bosc (mentioned in Guernier's page above). One of his works was a "Cartoon" for other printsellers. Vertu cites this entry at the bottom of a page with:

* One Epiciere and Baron assisted him.

The word Epiciere is interesting, it seems to be from the french épicier which means grocer. épicier itself is derived from the french word épice meaning spice, hence grocer = spice - er. There are various other forms of french words that come from the late latin word speciēs, and while this might seem very off-topic for the thread, and I might move it should this prove a credible finding, I cannot help but notice the similarity between these french words and "Epicure". Perhaps that's another link in the connotation between Epicurus and food, and where the modern culinary definition of Epicurean is derived from.

épicer - Wiktionary

Edit: Just saw the post you made in the original 1743 thread last month about Guernier. In the meantime, I've just been going down the rabbit hole of the various Creech editions. The 1712 edition of Creech, published by Jacob Tonson, however, is the source of most of the illustrations and engravings of the Browne edition.

Generally speaking, when looking for information on Epicurus and the philosophy, stick to good secondary sources like Greenblatt, Austin, DeWitt, and especially study the various translations like Bailey or Brown. There are far too many eclectics or sympathetic hellenistics who pick and choose small bites from Epicurus' letters and present them as indicative of the philosophy as a whole.

It's a good rule of thumb to take everything from those quote websites with a major grain of salt. People often make or spread small posts with some Greek bust, attach a name and quote and call it a day. We see it all the time with pictures of Epicurus attributed to quotes of Epictetus (one time it was even on a tattoo.)

Quote from Kalosyni

And also: we need to set up some Zoom meetings for new members to meet one another, maybe once a month.

This is a pretty good idea. The 20th calls and the Lucretius/DeWitt calls are seemingly imposing for a newcomer, and the latter is quite frankly not the best place for someone so new.

Quote from Don

For example, Epicurus states that friendship is an immortal good. He obviously thinks friendship is necessary for a pleasurable life. That's objective to me.

Despite recognizing its importance friendship is far less important to me than many of the other things in the philosophy to the point of bordering into subjectivity. Though the specifics of how important desires and pleasures may be kept to personal outlines or to one's own self it's always interesting to hear discussion about the different levels of importance each Epicurean assigns to their values.

I've always maintained that the desires are subjective barring the most basic of essentials of survival. This is something that's often misguiding, and newer learners of the philosophy struggle with, both as a teaching method and for didactic self-application. In order to teach the desires and their categorization examples are given for each category, I think this might be a key culprit in this pattern.

What's necessary for some may not be necessary for others and what is unnatural may be natural to someone else whether by personal preference, health, or even culture.

Welcome Michal Handzel !

I used to use Vivaldi for years but stopped because the excess accessibility & customization quickly became bloated and ran as slow as Chrome did, despite still being a Chromium browser. I'll check this out.

I'm reminded of a section in the opening chorus in Handel's Acis & Galatea.

For us the zephyr blows,

For us distills the dew,

For us unfolds the rose,

And flow'rs display their hue.

For us the winters rain,

For us the summers shine,

Spring swells for us the grain,

And autumn bleeds the wine.

Quote from Cassius

I am gathering that is your point but I am not sure whether you are saying that she gives the wrong impression on what she does say, or just that she left out an important aspect?

I think she left out an important aspect, namely justice and moral relativity and how specific Epicurus' advice can be applied to his own time period versus their application to today's world. That's something she did bring up though with the fear of death and increased scientific understanding. But other than that, I can't really quite comment on what her thoughts may or may be aside from just the contents in the book which is a casual introductory into the philosophy. Maybe that'd be something to ask her.

Quote from Cassius

Does this seem like a ping pong game? It's a terrible idea to try to "translate" the ten commandments but at the same time it's a great exercise!

I do think both perspectives are true and this highlights how central "context" is to the Epicurean worldview. You've picked a particular context and within that context we can work toward something that's helpful, but at the same time we have to realize that out of its context it could actually be harmful.

I really do think this is why the PDs read as they do. They are sort of "principles" that don't necessarily lead TO a particular direction for a particular life, but they lead AWAY from major pitfalls that are pitfalls for everyone.

As much as I like the initiative of this thread, and the list is well-put together. I think it runs into the same issue of the Tetrapharmakos. The ten commandments are backed up by numerous stories, contextual lessons, and the entire framing of the bible itself. The same can be said about the four part cure to the numerous Epicurea fragments, contextual readings of the PD's, and the entire framing of the philosophy itself. See the similarities?

In fact, the commandments seem to be more of a self-didactic reminder. Teaching brunt simplicity reinforces uncritical acceptance.

Quote from Charles

My biggest issue though, are her chapter(s) concerning politics.

I forgot to elaborate on this. Her issue with politics in the philosophy is that she spends so much time focusing on ethics, specifically the categorization of desires and that section from Torquatus about reform being insufficient, rather than justice and the inherent individualism found within Epicureanism. If I remember correctly, she does briefly bring up the flexibility of the philosophy in the face of Athens facing sieges and blockades, but over the few years I've come to see some of the wisdom in Will Durant's criticism: "...it provides an excellent design for bachelorhood, but hardly for a society."

I feel déjà vu in saying an Epicurean Government may be an unfeasible concept. However, an Epicurean society is perhaps much easier to adopt, envision, or mold into than many other philosophies or ideologies. When we think of Epicurean morality, we (as in the forums here) tend to focus on the fact that there is no absolute pleasure. I think the desires are categorized because of this. What may be unnecessary for some is necessary for others. What is unnatural in one culture may be necessary in another to conform without risk of greater pains. Which leads us to the phrases "Live unknown" and "Escape all culture", of which we all know their meaning. Yet Epicurus himself approved of the religious festivities in Athens, and partook in them, while living outside the walls of the city. There are other examples of social conformity such as the advice of paying court to a king, if need be, fulfilling an obligatory military conscription, or engaging with the conventions and customs of marriage by providing dowry, etc.

An Epicurean society is political in the sense of caring for the well-being and health of their country. Its citizens would not be ignorant or secluded from the world around them, on the contrary, they would have knowledge of the various figures and events around them. Epicurus was well read on Plato and his contemporaries; he could not have rejected them and devised the system of the garden had he chosen to completely and utterly withdraw into isolation.

The same applies to civic government and culture. The only difference is that our activism is within the interest of the garden and the safeguarding of our pleasure, not partisan issues that ebb and flow with each week and month. I think focusing on the desires in the scope of a political society is a bit tunnel visioned. What matters more is the culture that surrounds an Epicurean, and whether their pursuance of pleasure is admonished, encouraged, or ignored. The doctrines concerning justice and no absolute pleasure are the remedy to this. That's the key to flexibility and ultimately the answer of politics within the philosophy.

Edit: I brought up the Will Durant quote to emphasize why the question of an Epicurean society is so hard to answer satisfactorily. It's a question that has been bothering me for years now. I think Austin struggled with it too in her scope of interpersonal ethics applied en masse.