Posts by Don

Quote from Don

column 3

σι(*)ν, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ οὐκ ἐκείνας, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ οὐκ ἐ-

κείνας, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ ὦ Ζήνων καὶ Κλε-

ά̣νθ̣η̣, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ καὶ σὺ Χρύσιππε, ⁦ vac. 1⁩, καὶ (*)

ὅσοι τὴν αὐ̣τὴν ὑμεῖν ἄ-

5[γ]ο[υ]σιν, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ οὐκ ἐκείνας ἀπο(*)-

φ̣α̣ι̣νόμεθα τὰς ἡδονὰς

ὑπάρχειν τ[έ]λος τὰς τῶν

π̣ολ̣λ̣ῶν, ἀλλὰ ταύτας ἃσ

ἀρ̣τίω̣ς̣ εἰρήκαμεν, ⁦ vac. 2⁩ τέ̣-

10[λο]ς̣ ̣μ̣όνας. ⁦ vac. 1⁩ εἰ γὰρ ἀρέσ(*)-

κε̣ι̣ ̣γ̣'̣ὑ̣μεῖν τὸ τῆς φύσεως(*)

ἀγ̣α̣θ̣ὸ̣ν̣ κατά̣σ̣τ̣ημά τι καὶ(*)

[οἰκ]ε̣ῖ̣ο̣ν̣ τοῦτ̣'εἶναι τέ(*)-

λος κατὰ τὸν ἡμεῖν σύν -

Or this one:

column 4

φωνον λόγον, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ τὸ δὲ τ̣[ῆς ἡ-]

δονῆς ὄνομα μεισε[ῖτε,]

τί οὐ πάλαι ἡμεῖν ἐλέ̣[ξα-]

τε; -τὸ μὲν δόγμα ὑμῶ̣[ν ἀ-]

5ληθές, ἄνδρες, τῷ δὲ [τῆς]

ἡδονῆς ὀνόματι φα[ύλως]

κέχρησθε, ἵνα πρὸς [τοῦ-]

το ὑμεῖν εἴπαμεν· ⁦ vac. 1⁩ [και-]

νὸν μὲν οὐδαμῶς ν̣[ῦν]

10τάττομεν τόνδε τὸν [λό-]

γον κατὰ τοῦ προειρη[μέ-]

νου καταστήματος, [ἀλ-]

λ'ἄνωθεν ὡμειλη[μέ-]

νον πᾶσιν Ἕλλησιν [ ̣ ̣]

Display More

Ah! Now I see why there was no translation on the inscription website! These columns are from NF192 ("new fragment 192") first described in 2011 and then expanded on in this 2014 paper in JSTOR:

Diogenes of Oinoanda on the Meaning of 'Pleasure' (NF 192)

Author(s): Barnaby Taylor

Source: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik , 2014, Bd. 191 (2014), pp. 84-89

Published by: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43909587

Here are two selections:

"Diogenes begins thet hird column by drawing a distinction between two types of pleasure, the 'pleasures of the many' (III.6-8) and the 'aforementioned pleasures' (III.8-9). In a forcefully-expressed sentence3 addressed to Zeno, Cleanthes, Chrysippus and all their followers (III. 1-10), Diogenes states that only the 'aforementioned pleasures' constitute the moral end (ὑπάρχειν τ[έ]λος). As the editors suggest, Diogenes' 'pleasures of the many' must be equivalent to the 'pleasures of the profligate' listed by Epicurus at Men. 131-2: drinking, party-

ing, fish-eating, feasting, sexual enjoyment of boys and women.5 The 'aforementioned pleasures' are to be identified with the two forms of static pleasure adduced by Epicurus in the very same passage: freedom from bodily pain (aponia) and freedom from mental disturbance (ataraxia). The identification of static

pleasure with the moral end is standard Epicurean ethical theory: while all pleasures are good per se , any pleasure which is likely to be followed by pain, and thus threatens the stability of the state of painless tranquillity, ought to be avoided.6 As such, not all pleasures are to be included in the moral end."

" The final sentence of Diogenes NF 192 constitutes important new evidence in this regard. There, as we have seen, Diogenes justifies the Epicurean use of the term 'pleasure' to refer to the experience of the state of tranquillity that constitutes the moral end by stating that such usage is in line with the term's ordinary meaning. Crucially, however, he does not do so simply by appealing to contemporary ομιλία (as does Epicurus at Hdt. 67), but makes an explicitly historical claim, stating that the Epicurean use of the term 'pleasure', far from being a recent development, is in fact in line with what has been that term's ordinary meaning for all Greeks from the beginning. NF 192 thus provides uniquely valuable evidence concerning the Epicurean attitude to the value of ordinary language. Diogenes' defense of the Epicurean use of the term 'pleasure' to refer to tranquillity combines the issues of colloquialism and language history, connecting what he claims to be the contemporary colloquial usage of 'pleasure' with what he claims to have been the ordinary meaning of the same term from the beginning."

There's not a full complete translation of 3 & 4 in the paper, but there's enough I think for me to puzzle a literal one out later.

Have we brought up Fragment 68 yet?

68. To those who are able to reason it out, the highest and surest joy is found in the stable health of the body and a firm confidence in keeping it. (Saint-Andre)

τὸ γὰρ εὐσταθὲς σαρκὸς κατάστημα (katastēma) καὶ τὸ περὶ ταύτης πιστὸν ἔλπισμα τὴν ἀκροτάτην χαρὰν καὶ βεβαιοτάτην ἔχει τοῖς ἐπιλογίζεσθαι δυναμένοις.

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, κατάστημα

εὐσταθὲς = "well based, standing firm, stable (relatively unchanging)"

σαρκὸς (sarkos, genitive) = "of the material which covers the bones of a creature; of the flesh; of the body (as opposed to the mind/soul/spirit"

κατάστημα = "bodily or mental condition" So, Saint-Andre's "health" is a translation decision. The phrase at its most basic is "the stable condition of the body" which to me, again, implies homeostasis, a stable, well-balanced, body in good c working condition.

Saint-Andre notes VS33 as a complement:

33. The body cries out (σαρκὸς φωνὴ) to not be hungry, not be thirsty, not be cold. Anyone who has these things, and who is confident of continuing to have them, can rival the gods for happiness (εὐδαιμονίας eudaimonias).

σαρκὸς φωνὴ τὸ μὴ πεινῆν, τὸ μὴ διψῆν, τὸ μὴ ῥιγοῦν· ταῦτα γὰρ ἔχων τις καὶ ἐλπίζων ἕξειν κἂν <διὶ> ὑπὲρ εὐδαιμονίας μαχέσαιτο.

LSJ also gives some references to Diogenes of Oenoanda, so I dug those up for our discussion here:

DCLP/Trismegistos 865216 = LDAB 865216

The inscripion

And so the .......... [are] ....... If .................. [prudence.]

Let us now [investigate] how life is to be made pleasant for us both in states and in actions.

Let us first discuss states, keeping an eye on the point that, when the emotions which disturb the soul are removed, those which produce pleasure enter into it to take their place.

[- ca.7 -] εισαν τὰ φ̣ρόν[ιμα].

ἡμ[εῖς δὲ ζη]τ̣ῶ̣μεν ἤ̣δ̣η

πῶς ὁ βίος ἡμεῖν ἡδὺς

γένηται καὶ ἐν τοῖς κα-

τασ̣τήμασι καὶ ἐν ταῖς

πράξεσιν. περὶ δὲ τῶν

καταστημάτων πρῶ-

τον εἴπωμεν, ἐκεῖνο

τηροῦντες, τὸ δὴ ὅτι τῶν

10ὀχλούντων τὴν ψυχὴν

παθῶν ὑπεξαιρεθέν-

των τὰ ἥδοντα αὐτὴν

ἀντιπαρέρχεται. ⁦ vac. 1⁩

τὰ οὖν ὀχλοῦντα τίνα

Can't find a translation of this one:

column 3

σι(*)ν, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ οὐκ ἐκείνας, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ οὐκ ἐ-

κείνας, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ ὦ Ζήνων καὶ Κλε-

ά̣νθ̣η̣, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ καὶ σὺ Χρύσιππε, ⁦ vac. 1⁩, καὶ (*)

ὅσοι τὴν αὐ̣τὴν ὑμεῖν ἄ-

5[γ]ο[υ]σιν, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ οὐκ ἐκείνας ἀπο(*)-

φ̣α̣ι̣νόμεθα τὰς ἡδονὰς

ὑπάρχειν τ[έ]λος τὰς τῶν

π̣ολ̣λ̣ῶν, ἀλλὰ ταύτας ἃσ

ἀρ̣τίω̣ς̣ εἰρήκαμεν, ⁦ vac. 2⁩ τέ̣-

10[λο]ς̣ ̣μ̣όνας. ⁦ vac. 1⁩ εἰ γὰρ ἀρέσ(*)-

κε̣ι̣ ̣γ̣'̣ὑ̣μεῖν τὸ τῆς φύσεως(*)

ἀγ̣α̣θ̣ὸ̣ν̣ κατά̣σ̣τ̣ημά τι καὶ(*)

[οἰκ]ε̣ῖ̣ο̣ν̣ τοῦτ̣'εἶναι τέ(*)-

λος κατὰ τὸν ἡμεῖν σύν -

Or this one:

column 4

φωνον λόγον, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ τὸ δὲ τ̣[ῆς ἡ-]

δονῆς ὄνομα μεισε[ῖτε,]

τί οὐ πάλαι ἡμεῖν ἐλέ̣[ξα-]

τε; -τὸ μὲν δόγμα ὑμῶ̣[ν ἀ-]

5ληθές, ἄνδρες, τῷ δὲ [τῆς]

ἡδονῆς ὀνόματι φα[ύλως]

κέχρησθε, ἵνα πρὸς [τοῦ-]

το ὑμεῖν εἴπαμεν· ⁦ vac. 1⁩ [και-]

νὸν μὲν οὐδαμῶς ν̣[ῦν]

10τάττομεν τόνδε τὸν [λό-]

γον κατὰ τοῦ προειρη[μέ-]

νου καταστήματος, [ἀλ-]

λ'ἄνωθεν ὡμειλη[μέ-]

νον πᾶσιν Ἕλλησιν [ ̣ ̣]

Working on those last two, butt putting here for future reference. LSJ also cites Metrodorus, Fragment 5. Looking for that, too.

It seems to me that, just from observation, there are at least two types of pleasures that exist as states of being, as Epicurus points out, such as:

- being in a calm, tranquil state of mind (ataraxia)

- and feeling the the positive feeling of a body without pain in good working order (aponia)

We can work toward those states, and part of it is dispelling fears and anxiety and also taking care of our physical bodies. But once they are there, we don't "work at" feeling that pleasure. It just is (until our minds start to wander or we get distracted by that itch in our elbow...)

Then, on the other hand, there are pleasures that we derive from volitional actions in the moment, such as

- talking with friends

- remembering past pleasures

- taking a drink after a long hike

- eating your favorite food

So, right now, that's where I'm heading on "katastematic pleasures" and "pleasures of action". Whether there's any academic papers that back that up, I don't know.

Quote from Godfrey

This is a great example of the much documented issue of lack of documentation

Well put! Exactly.

Remember, too, that when you say...

Quote from Godfrey

Can any significance be derived from the fact that he wrote that peace of mind and freedom from pain imply a state of rest, whereas joy and delight are seen to consist in motion and activity?

That's not exactly what Epicurus said. That's an extrapolation and Interpretation of:

"ἡ μὲν γὰρ ἀταραξία καὶ ἀπονία καταστηματικαί εἰσιν ἡδοναί: ἡ δὲ χαρὰ καὶ ἡ εὐφροσύνη κατὰ κίνησιν ἐνεργείᾳ βλέπονται."

That whole "which imply a state of rest" is contained in καταστηματικαί. The only thing that we can be sure is that that first sentence reads:

"For ataraxia and aponia are 'katastēmatikai' pleasures..."

What did Epicurus mean by katastēmatikai pleasures?? That's the rub. LSJ says

καταστηματικός , ή, όν,

A.pertaining to a state or condition

as well as, in relation to musical instruments, "calming"

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, Κκ , κατάσσυ^τος , καταστηματικός

That's a LOT of commentary and Interpretation that gets thrown about from "scholars" and "experts " and a LOT of it gets filtered through a Platonic lens before it ever settles on Epicurus.

If this is a direct quote from Epicurus from his On Choices (and Rejections), then there's no doubt Epicurus had words to say about different kinds of pleasure. He says it right there:

ἀταραξία καὶ ἀπονία are this type of pleasures (ἡδοναί hēdonai); χαρὰ and ἡ εὐφροσύνη are ....

βλέπονται "seen" possibly "experienced? exist?"

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, βλέπω

κατὰ κίνησιν ἐνεργείᾳ (kata kinēsin "through/by way of motion" energeiai "activity, etc.")

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?do…ntry=e)ne/rgeia Note that LSJ has it defined as "the opposite of ἕξις" which is "a state or habit of mind" which seems exactly to me what the katastematic Pleasures point to: a state of being. So that dichotomy is reinforced using ἐνεργείᾳ...

Greek Word Study Tool

More by the same author:

"ΤΟ ΚΑΤ’ ΕΝΔΕΙΑΝ ΑΛΓΟΥΝ AND EPICUREAN KATASTEMATIC PLEASURES", ORGANON 48 (2016): 5-19

Abstr act. In this article I wish to emphasize the significance of τὸ κατ&#39; ἔνδειαν ἀλγοῦν, an expression appearing in our sources on Epicurean ethics which…

www.academia.edu

"Epicurus' Varietas and ἡ κινητικὴ ἡδονή", Mnemosyne 71 (2018) 777-798.

According to Epicurus’ view which locates the summit of pleasure in the absence of all pain, once pain has been removed pleasure cannot be increased, but it…

www.academia.edu

I found a paper that I just started reading, then did a search here and found it only mentioned by Cassius in 2019. For ease of access:

Here is Cassius 's 2019 response:

Post

Another Article Insisting On The Importance of the Kinetic / Katestematic Distinction, Despite Citing Nikolsky

Thanks to Hiram for pointing out today an article on the kinetic / katastematic issue. The article is ""Epicurus’ “Kinetic” and “Katastematic” Pleasures. A Reappraisal", Elenchos xxxvi (2015) fasc. 2: 271-296." I find the conclusion (which includes the assertion that kinetic pleasure is unnecessary) most unpersuasive:

epicureanfriends.com/wcf/attachment/2843/

On the other hand, the article I think helps bolster the argument that the entire katatesmetic / kinetic distinction is a dead end. …

Cassius

September 28, 2019 at 6:35 PM

And here is the direct link to the paper:

"Epicurus’ “Kinetic” and “Katastematic” Pleasures. A Reappraisal", Elenchos xxxvi (2015) fasc. 2: 271-296.

In this paper I shall offer new definitions for what seem to be the most dominant terms in Epicurus’ theory of pleasures – “kinetic” and “katastematic”. While…

www.academia.edu

I'm not sure I have the same reaction as Cassius , but hey it's early in the morning. I'll report back later, maybe after rereading Nikolsky, too.

Quote from Godfrey

quite a sarcastic and misleading description of that.

And "sarcastic and misleading" is exactly what I'd expect from our "dear friend" Cicero

Well, we've certainly strayed far from our delightful porcine mascot, haven't we?

Quote from Godfrey

background condition is one attempt, maybe underlayment is another.

That's my take, as of (looks at time on phone...). Katastematic, from its basic meaning of "a condition or state of health," means to me the proper, undisturbed functioning of our body and minds. Free from fear. Free from anxiety. Free from pain, for the most part. We are mortal beings after all. Mens sana in corpore sano, so to speak. From that ground/foundation, we can better make sound, practical choices and rejections and enjoy the day to day pleasures as they arise, including the occasional luxury that becomes available, but also be unperturbed if circumstances change and we have to deal with scarcity from time to time. The absolutely necessary pleasures are easily obtained.

Cicero:

nihil esse praestabilius otiosa vita, plena et conferta voluptatibus

"nothing is better than a life of ease, full of, and loaded with, all sorts of pleasures"

Charlton T. Lewis, Charles Short, A Latin Dictionary, ōtĭōsus

Charlton T. Lewis, Charles Short, A Latin Dictionary, plēnus

Charlton T. Lewis, An Elementary Latin Dictionary, cōnfertus

My question: Does this describe a life of katastematic pleasure as a foundation filled with kinetic pleasure?

[136] Διαφέρεται δὲ πρὸς τοὺς Κυρηναϊκοὺς περὶ τῆς ἡδονῆς: οἱ μὲν γὰρ τὴν καταστηματικὴν οὐκ ἐγκρίνουσι, μόνην δὲ τὴν ἐν κινήσει: ὁ δὲ ἀμφοτέραν : : ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος, ὥς φησιν ἐν τῷ Περὶ αἱρέσεως καὶ φυγῆς καὶ ἐν τῷ Περὶ τέλους καὶ ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ Περὶ βίων καὶ ἐν τῇ πρὸς τοὺς ἐν Μυτιλήνῃ φιλοσόφους ἐπιστολῇ. ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ Διογένης ἐν τῇ ἑπτακαιδεκάτῃ τῶν Ἐπιλέκτων καὶ Μητρόδωρος ἐν τῷ Τιμοκράτει λέγουσιν οὕτω: νοουμένης δὲ ἡδονῆς τῆς τε κατὰ κίνησιν καὶ τῆς καταστηματικῆς. ὁ δ᾽ Ἐπίκουρος ἐν τῷ Περὶ αἱρέσεων οὕτω λέγει: "ἡ μὲν γὰρ ἀταραξία καὶ ἀπονία καταστηματικαί εἰσιν ἡδοναί: ἡ δὲ χαρὰ καὶ ἡ εὐφροσύνη κατὰ κίνησιν ἐνεργείᾳ βλέπονται."

136] He differs from the Cyrenaics with regard to pleasure. They do not include under the term the pleasure which is a state of rest, but only that which consists in motion. Epicurus admits both ; also pleasure of mind as well as of body, as he states in his work On Choice and Avoidance and in that On the Ethical End, and in the first book of his work On Human Life and in the 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 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."

This is the section in Diogenes Laertius referencing katastematic pleasures (underlined).

The quote from Epicurus at the end of Fragment 2.

Thanks, Cassius !! All good points and sources. Some random thoughts:

• So, we're setting up a David v Goliath scenario.
• The majority isn't always correct (ex, geocentrism anyone?)
• We got some Wikipedia editing to do, backed up with sources.
• The fact that that author reads all of Epicurus through the Philebus lens is problematic and frustrating.
• "Epicurus does not think there are any positive pleasures". By Zeus, What an ignorant statement!.. None except for sex and pleasing sights and joy and....

That's enough for now.

Quote from Cassius

IF katastematic pleasure can indeed be "felt" under the authorities that talked about these issues

By "authorities," are you referring to ancient texts or current academics?

Quote from Cassius

whether {katastematic pleasure} can be felt

Isn't all pleasure a sensation by Epicurean definition? Πάθη is something that happens to you, something that is experienced. LSJ: "what is done or happens to a person or thing, opp. πρᾶξις"

Quote from Cassius

clearly delineating it from any other type of mental pleasure

That's my position in defining it as the two components of homeostasis: mental and physical. It can be maintained over time while "kinetic" pleasure is momentary and provides variety, with "katastematic pleasure" providing a ground or background or foundation so to speak.

Quote from Cassius

wrestling with the "experts" who have a lot more firepower in their citations is something else

Bah! "Experts" can cherry pick just like anyone else. It's building a case using the texts that counts. We shouldn't wrestle in their ring. We should return to the texts and build our own. Always return to the books, to paraphrase Philodemus.

PS. That doesn't mean we can't use academics who've done some leg work. It is notoriously hard to access some of the ancient texts for numerous reasons. But leaning on translations is one thing. Accepting their commentary is another.

Quote from Cassius

That's why for me it's a lot easier to take a position in what it is "not" (some special "higher" type of pleasure that is the "true goal" of life) than what it "is."

The easy (painless) easy isn't always to be chosen, to paraphrase a certain ancient philosopher.

I think I agree with you, Godfrey . My position is that katastematic pleasures - namely aponia and ataraxia - are what we feel in homeostasis when the body and mind are in proper working order and our minds are not troubled (especially by those existential fears of "the gods" and death). Then we can more readily experience other pleasures that give us variety of pleasure.

I need to go back and review Nikolsky et al.

Had this been shared before?

Epicurean Happiness: A Pig's Life?

Epicurean Happiness: A Pig's Life?

www.academia.edu

About the Piglet | The Herculaneum Society

Quote from Cassius

Thank you Don - I noticed you were scarce yesterday so I am glad you came back around for this one.

It's nice to be missed...

I realize I’m late to the game here, but…

The idea that Epicurus was an ascetic and ordered an ascetic lifestyle for his students seems to stem from two primary sources: the idea of the “necessary and natural” desires, and the mention of “bread and water” in the Letter to Menoikeus.

As for the latter, I’ve stated in other places (including my translation of the letter), I am convinced that Epicurus was using “maza and water” because that was the everyday meal of the regular ancient Greeks. Epicurus is referencing the meal you have every day and don’t even pay attention to and contrasting that with the extravagant table laden with fish and other delicacies. He’s urging us to pay attention to the meal that’s in front of us. We don’t have to shun luxuries should they come up every once in a while, but we have all we need right here in front of us if we pay attention to it.

The natural and necessary desires are never singled out as the ONLY desires to pursue or fulfill, although he says that’s all we *need* should that befall us. We aren’t commanded to only pursue those… and there is some question in my mind what those “necessary and natural’ ones are since he’s a little circumspect in the letter to Menoikeus 127-128 (see below). Most of these, to me, encourage us to pay attention to our needs and desires; not necessarily what to choose. Everyone has to make those decisions for themselves.

VS63 is a good one to bring up. Bailey’s commentary on that one is LXIII is interesting as showing that Epicurus did not wish to push his idea of the simple life to excess: the ascetic will suffer bodily distress like the glutton and so fail to attain aponia.

Menoikeus 127-128:

Furthermore, on the one hand, there are the natural desires; on the other, the 'empty, fruitless, or vain ones.' And of the natural ones, on the one hand, are the necessary ones; on the other, the ones which are only natural; then, of the necessary ones: on the one hand, those necessary for eudaimonia; then, those necessary for the freedom from disturbance for the body; then those necessary for life itself. [128] The steady contemplation of these things equips one to know how to decide all choice and rejection for the health of the body and for the tranquility of the mind, that is for our physical and our mental existence, since this is the goal of a blessed life.

PD29 Among desires, some are natural and necessary, some are natural and unnecessary, and some are unnatural and unnecessary (arising instead from groundless opinion). (Scholion on PD29: Epicurus regards as natural and necessary desires which bring relief from pain, as e.g. drink when we are thirsty ; while by natural and not necessary he means those which merely diversify the pleasure without removing the pain, as e.g. costly viands ; by the neither natural nor necessary he means desires for crowns and the erection of statues in one's honour.)

Seneca, Letter 9.20 (quoting Epicurus): “Si cui," inquit, "sua non videntur amplissima, licet totius mundi dominus sit, tamen miser est." "He says: "Whoever does not regard what he has as most ample wealth, is unhappy, though he be master of the whole world."

Seneca, Letter 14: Now you are stretching forth your hand for the daily gift. Golden indeed will be the gift with which I shall load you; and, inasmuch as we have mentioned gold, let me tell you how its use and enjoyment may bring you greater pleasure. “He who needs riches least, enjoys riches most.” “Author’s name, please!” you say. Now, to show you how generous I am, it is my intent to praise the dicta of other schools. The phrase belongs to Epicurus, or Metrodorus, or some one of that particular thinking-shop.