We are now requiring that new registrants confirm their request for an account by email. Once you complete the "Sign Up" process to set up your user name and password, please send an email to the New Accounts Administator to obtain new account approval.
I have to stop now, but I haven't even addressed whether it is possible for such waves to exist above or beyond our spectrum of visible light.
I'm not sure what "waves" you're referring to. We do have telescopes that "see" infrared, ultraviolet, radio, microwave, and x-ray wavelengths in the electromagnetic spectrum. There's plenty we can see given the right instruments.
As far as the images of the gods in our minds, our brains aren't receivers... To the best of my understanding.
New summary article and podcast episode.
As always, I'd also suggest people take a look at Eikadistes 's compilation of translations.
Here's the Greek:
Ὁ θάνατος οὐδὲν πρὸς ἡμᾶς· τὸ γὰρ διαλυθὲν ἀναισθητεῖ· τὸ δ’ ἀναισθητοῦν οὐδὲν πρὸς ἡμᾶς.
Pertinent words for this discussion are:
ἀναισθητεῖ and ἀναισθητοῦν
Variants of the same word: ἀναισθητέω
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, ἀναισθ-ητέω
Also
That's a good quote.
For anyone curious, it's the opening lines of Dawkins' Unweaving the Rainbow.
That's an even better point, Joshua 
Thanks for that post!
That's an even better point, Joshua Thanks for that post!
Display MoreThe use of the word "idol" in 46 should not be construed to carry its religious connotations. Epicurus uses the Greek word εἴδωλον, eidolon, which is the root of the English word but means:
Noun Editεἴδωλον • (eídōlon) n (genitive εἰδώλου); second declension
1. phantom, ghost2. shape, figure, image
3. image of the mind: idea, fancy
4. representation, statue, idol
We appear to be dealing with some combination of definitions 2 and 3.
Agreed, but I do find it interesting to remember that the literal definition of the (English) word "idol" is a "representation" of a god and stems directly from ειδολών.
Display MoreThe use of the word "idol" in 46 should not be construed to carry its religious connotations. Epicurus uses the Greek word εἴδωλον, eidolon, which is the root of the English word but means:
Noun Editεἴδωλον • (eídōlon) n (genitive εἰδώλου); second declension
1. phantom, ghost2. shape, figure, image
3. image of the mind: idea, fancy
4. representation, statue, idol
We appear to be dealing with some combination of definitions 2 and 3.
Agreed, but I do find it interesting to remember that the literal definition of the (English) word "idol" is a "representation" of a god and stems directly from ειδολών.
That's one problem I have with the new book by Paul Bloom. He seems (I've not read the book but heard him on several podcasts talking about it) to see some problem in taking pleasure in things, even things that may have been difficult to achieve. His stress on "meaning vs pleasure" seems specious to me:
Now, one alternative to pleasure is meaning. This drive for meaning is every bit as important as the drive to have a good time, to enjoy ourselves, to be happy.
But from my perspective, that "meaning" he stresses gives one pleasure, so we're right back to an Epicurean square one. It's the hedonist = "a string of drinking parties and festivals" straw-man fallacy that is not what Epicurus advocated.
FYI Did not realize the word came from a comic strip:
Also the discussion of "down" comes up in [60]:
[60] "Further, we must not assert `up' or `down' of that which is unlimited, as if there were a zenith or nadir.92 As to the space overhead, however, if it be possible to draw93 a line to infinity from the point where we stand, we know that never will this space --or, for that matter, the space below the supposed standpoint if produced to infinity--appear to us to be at the same time `up' and `down' with reference to the same point ; for this is inconceivable. Hence it is possible to assume one direction of motion, which we conceive as extending upwards ad infinitum, and another downwards, even if it should happen ten thousand times that what moves from us to the spaces above our heads reaches the feet of those above us, or that which moves downwards from us the heads of those below us. None the less is it true that the whole of the motion in the respective cases is conceived as extending in opposite directions ad infinitum.
[61] "When they are travelling through the void and meet with no resistance, the atoms must move with equal speed. Neither will heavy atoms travel more quickly than small and light ones, so long as nothing meets them, nor will small atoms travel more quickly than large ones, provided they always find a passage suitable to their size, and provided also that they meet with no obstruction. Nor will their upward or their lateral motion, which is due to collisions, nor again their downward motion, due to weight, affect their velocity. As long as either motion obtains, it must continue, quick as the speed of thought, provided there is no obstruction, whether due to external collision or to the atoms' own weight counteracting the force of the blow.
FYI when you're agonizing over boundless vs infinite vs incomprehensible number in "verse" 42/43 seems kind of moot in that the word used in Greek that appears to be used in all places in the text is ἄπειρος "boundless," literally from ἀ- (a-, “not”) + πεῖραρ (peîrar), πέρας (péras, “end, limit”) :
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, ἄπειρος
The "not comprehensible" is simply οὐχ ἄπειροι "not apeiroi"
so philosophy is useless if it does not remove suffering from the soul.
, οὕτως οὐδὲ φιλοσοφίας, εἰ μὴ τὸ τῆς ψυχῆς ἐκβάλλει πάθος.
btw ἐκβάλλει is not merely "remove." It connotes cast away, hurl away, or throw from. "Remove" strikes me as a little milquetoast.
A philosopher's words are empty if they do not heal the suffering of mankind. For just as medicine is useless if it does not remove sickness from the body, so philosophy is useless if it does not remove suffering from the soul. κενὸς ἐκείνου φιλοσόφου λόγος, ὑφʼ οὗ μηδὲν πάθος ἀνθρώπου θεραπεύεται· ὥσπερ γὰρ ἰατρικῆς οὐδὲν ὄφελος μὴ τὰς νόσους τῶν σωμάτων ἐκβαλλούσης, οὕτως οὐδὲ φιλοσοφίας, εἰ μὴ τὸ τῆς ψυχῆς ἐκβάλλει πάθος.
I really want to write a book (in my spare time 
) entitled:
Pleasure is not a Four-Letter Word
The Garden Path to Well-Being
and lure people in under the guise of a "self-help" book but - surprise! - it's really an introduction to Epicurus's philosophy.
Ask and ye shall receive...
French: plaisir "pleasure"
Etymology
From Middle French plaisir, from Old French plaisir, from Latin placēre, present active infinitive of placeō. Compare Occitan plaser (“pleasure”), Catalan plaer (“pleasure”), Italian piacere (“pleasure”), Spanish placer (“pleasure”), Portuguese prazer (“pleasure”), Romanian plăcere (“pleasure”).
PLAISIR : Définition de PLAISIR
French:
Look up "enjoy" in Wiktionary and get:
French: (with a noun) profiter de, jouir de, (with a verb) apprécier, prendre plaisir (fr) "take pleasure"
Jouir.
Etymology
From Middle French jouir, jouïr, iouyr, from Old French joïr, from Vulgar Latin *gaudīre (*gaudiō), from Latin gaudēre, present active infinitive of gaudeō. Doublet of gaudir, which was a borrowing.
Doesn't Lucretius use gadeamus somewhere?
I'm personally getting tired of this parsing by English pontificators and writers and cultural "intellectuals" in dancing around "pleasure" as if it's a four-letter word. Enjoyment, happiness, etc = pleasure = voluptas = ηδονή
Dr. Voula Tsouna's The Ethics of Philodemus includes a look at anger.
Did I hear my name?
Just about every episode!
See, but this way, I get to swoop in at the end without the need to say, "That's a good question!" and get recorded looking up definitions and citations. Consider me your on-call librarian.
* Don, I seem to recall that aletheia (?) in Greek meant that which was unconcealed/unhidden -- or revealed?
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, ἀληθ-ής
Also from Wiktionary:
Etymology
In form it would be from ἀ- (a-, “un-”) + *ληθής, from λῆθος (lêthos, “*concealment, forgetfulness”) + -ής (-ḗs), thus "unconcealed", "unforgotten".
Ultimately from Proto-Indo-European *leh₂- (“to be concealed”) (whence λήθω (lḗthō), λανθάνω (lanthánō) and more)
Adjective
ᾰ̓ληθής • m or f (neuter ᾰ̓ληθές); third declension
(of things) true, real, genuine
(of people) truthful, honest
385 BCE – 380 BCE, Plato, Symposium 217e:
οἶνος […] ἦν ἀληθής
oînos […] ên alēthḗs
Wine is truthful. (in vino veritas)
PS: So, the etymology is something like "not concealed" or "not forgetful" but etymology doesn't always equal definition 1:1. As LSJ says for αληθής: "unconcealed, so true, real, opp. false" So, the opposite of αληθής is "false" ψευδής not "hidden."
Trivia: The River of Forgetfulness in the Underworld is named Λήθη Lethe.
