Posts by Don

Quote from DaveT

Comments please.

I've come across the following post questioning the attribution of VS 47 to Epicurus himself: VS 47" I have anticipated thee, Fortune, and entrenched myself against all thy secret attacks. And we will not give ourselves up as captives to thee or to any other circumstance; but when it is time for us to go, spitting contempt on life and on those who here vainly cling to it, we will leave life crying aloud in a glorious triumph-song that we have lived well."

SOURCE: https://www.epicurism.info/etexts/VS.html#**

Right. It's attributed to Metrodorus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrodoru…%29?wprov=sfla1

Quote from Kalosyni

I am wondering if it literally says "spitting contempt on life" or what exactly it said?

Yes. I believe προσπτυσαντες conveys literally spitting upon.

Another curiosity of this VS is that it's Metrodorus writing and not Epicurus.

Fwiw...

136] [Epicurus] differs from the Cyrenaics with regard to pleasure. They do not include under the term the pleasure which is a state of rest (καταστηματικὴν katastematiken), but only that which consists in motion (ἐν κινήσει en kinesei). Epicurus admits both ; also pleasure of mind as well as of body (ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος), as [Epicurus] states:

• in [Epicurus'] work On Choice and Avoidance
• and in [Epicurus'] On the Ethical End,
• and in [Epicurus'] first book of his work On Human Life
• and in [Epicurus'] epistle to his philosopher friends in Mytilene.
• So also Diogenes in the seventeenth book of his Epilecta,
• and Metrodorus in his Timocrates, whose actual words are : "Thus pleasure being conceived both as that species which consists in motion and that which is a state of rest."
• The words of Epicurus in his work On Choice [and Avoidance] are : "Peace of mind and freedom from pain are pleasures which imply a state of rest ; joy and delight are seen to consist in motion and activity."

Quote from Cassius

why a basic formulation such as "...we call pleasure the beginning and end of the happy life) might occur in the letter to Menoeceus

From my Menoikeus paper:

A short digression is now in order to examine that phrase ἀρχὴν καὶ τέλος "the foundation and fulfillment, the beginning and end." Often, this is simply translated as "the beginning and the end" as if there's a starting line and a finish line. This is much deeper than that, although the running of a race could be one metaphor that could used. Let's first look at the word ἀρχὴν (accusative of ἀρχή).

ἀρχή (arkhē)

English archeology "study of beginnings/origins" but also the -archy in monarchy, patriarchy, etc.

ᾰ̓ρχή carries the meaning of beginning, origin, foundation, the farthest point. It even took on the meaning of "the corners of a sheet" by the time the New Testament was being written (Acts 10:11). It also had the connotation of the "beginning of power" residing in a ruler, the "most important person" in a kingdom. It carries the idea of a foundational element or first principle. The alpha (first letter of the Greek alphabet) to τέλος's omega (the last letter of the Greek alphabet) which is how Hicks translated them.

τέλος (telos) carries the meaning of endings, the goal, completion, maturity, result, fulfillment, consummation. Where αρχή is the foundation, τέλος is the highest point. The definition of τέλος in LSJ is extensive!

Αρχή is not quite as long but gives the nuance we're working with.

Therefore, to translate ἀρχὴν καὶ τέλος as "beginning and end" (every other translation I've seen except Hicks) misses a lot of deeper meaning. This phrase is one that I highly recommend giving more attention to in one's personal translation or at least being aware of when reading. We miss so much by not examining Epicurus's words. Always go back to the texts!

Thanks for the thoughtful opening post. Welcome aboard!

If you're interested in a deep dive into the letter to Menoikeus (my transliteration of his Greek name), I'll offer my translation and commentary available here: Epicurus's Letter to Menoikeus - A New Translation with Commentary

Quote from Martin quoting Bryan

"Invisible atoms and their wakes" sounds more like Heraclitus' flux than Epicurus' atomism.

Bryan : Are you referring to dark matter?

As far as "seeing" atoms, it depends on your definition of "see":

See the Highest-Resolution Atomic Image Ever Captured

Scientists achieved a record level of visual detail with an imaging technique that could help develop future electronics and better batteries

www.scientificamerican.com

And

Photographing a Single Atom | David Nadlinger

But

Quote from Quote from second article

Before getting into the details of the science behind all this, one particular misconception that has cropped up in the search for sensationalist headlines should be addressed:

Is this an advance in science? Have single atoms been photographed before?
In short: Not in the least; and yes, probably even before I was born.

No argument there! Plenty of rabbit holes.

Welcome aboard and thank you for the fascinating initial post!

Quote from Kalosyni

I looked at Brene Brown's "87 Emotions & Experiences" chart, and found it to be overly complicated, and would personally use different labels for things, and would classify things differently. But everyone finds things that resonate depending on their own framing.

I personally would recommend sticking with a smaller number of words and focusing on levels of intensity rather than trying to find fancy words for things.

Just for the record I'm not a Brene Brown groupie or fan; however, I did find her idea (well, not her idea but the one she talked about) of emotional granularity interesting. This is another chart for honing in on emotional granularity - I would characterize it as identifying more precisely what one is feeling:

I certainly see where you're coming from with "sticking with a smaller number of words and focusing on levels of intensity," but I can see how having a word for a specific feeling could be helpful. It sounds like you would advocate for maybe the 10 categories at the top of those boxes and then decide how intense they're being felt which would then lead to more focused appropriate reactions to those feelings. Anything that gets us to be more aware of what our feelings are (starting, of course, with pleasure and pain) can't be a bad thing in the end.

Dr. Lisa Feldman Barrett's work on "constructed emotion" may be applicable to bring up here as well:

The theory of constructed emotion: an active inference account of interoception and categorization - PMC

How Emotions Are Made | Lisa Feldman Barrett

The groundbreaking book that has revolutionized our understanding of the human mind. Why do emotions feel automatic and uncontrollable? Does rational thought…

lisafeldmanbarrett.com

FWIW Brene Brown's Atlas of the Heart provides a look at emotional granularity:

Atlas of the Heart Read-Along Resources

As you read along with Atlas of the Heart, these companion resources are intended to help build your emotional vocabularies.

brenebrown.com

Quote

Our ability to accurately recognize and label emotions is often referred to as emotional granularity. In the words of Harvard psychologist Susan David, “Learning to label emotions with a more nuanced vocabulary can be absolutely transformative.”

Remember, it's specifically stated in the letter to Herodotus by Epicurus:

"To begin with, nothing comes into being out of what is non-existent." πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι οὐδὲν γίνεται ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος

Whether it's atoms or quantum fields, those are still existent things. Things don't spring up out nothing by the will of the gods.

Quote from Rolf

Quote from Bryan

The current dominant interpretation in theoretical physics is far closer to Heraclitus’ flux

Fascinating! Does this mean that we as Epicureans would be wise to align ourselves with modern scientific understanding, adopt this view as the most probable explanation, and ditch the Epicurean view on static atoms and void?

Both are true. Neither don't necessarily adequately fully describe our lived experience.

There certainly appear to be such things as atoms and subatomic particles.

There certainly appear to be such things as quantum fluctuations in quantum fields.

My take on the "Epicurean perspective" has always been simply: We live in a physical, natural, material universe governed by knowable laws (well, eventually knowable!) that needs no supernatural intervention to come into being or to function.

Whether one focuses on the quantum level or the atomic level or the biochemical level, the Epicurean perspective holds.

FWIW

https://www.sparknotes.com/poetry/do-not-go-gentle/overview/

And here's a dramatic performance of the poem from Thomas' fellow Welshman, Michael Sheen

Dylan Thomas' poem is not that long, so here it is in its entirety:

Do not go gentle into that good night,

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,

Because their words had forked no lightning they

Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright

Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,

And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,

Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight

Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,

Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.

Do not go gentle into that good night.

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Quote from Cassius

we are establishing that drinking unmixed wine was known thought to be very dangerous

Fixed it.

Quote from Cassius

Epicurus would have known at the least that it might be fatal.

I'm not willing to agree to that.

Quote from Cassius

At present I am mainly willing to say that there can come a time (mostly cases of clinically certain terminal highly painful disease combined with advanced age) when it can be a rational assessment to conclude that future pleasure is not worth the cost in pain.

I'm not arguing against that, but that's exactly what I'm trying to get across. My primary position is against taking "extraordinary" measures to preserve life "at all costs" when death is imminent or there is no viable way to ameliorate constant, severe pain. I see a difference in actively taking one's life and not prolonging one's life. I don't believe VS47 nor the episode with Epicurus' drinking unmixed wine and taking a bath are talking about suicide.

(PLEASE NOTE: I am NOT making any moral argument against suicide or those who take their lives. This is an extremely complicated topic, including people dealing with deep mental health issues, including celebrities like Robin Williams and Anthony Bourdain. This is not a topic to be taken lightly or flippantly, and I don't want anyone to take this discussion that way.

I would say Epicurus' and the school's general advocacy of cultivating gratitude comes close to a modern idea of positivity.

However, don't be lured into the trap of toxic positivity either:

Toxic positivity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org