Posts by Don

So, here's my preliminary Google translation unedited of Epicurus's On Nature, Book 2:

BOOK II

[PHerc. 1010 [P1] and 1149 [P2]/993 [P3]: (24) Arrighetti]

[P3,62,2,3,5 (24.19-22)] [that the] cohesion of the outermost layer is of this kind also, while the internal layers, trapped inside, ...... so that, without them colliding, or if they have not done so anymore, of only recently, their return to the places opposite to those towards which they had initially transported [could not result] ... [t) ... (such) was the cause / of their rapid journey over great distances that, I affirm, as far as the simulacra are concerned , it is necessary that they have such a [velocity]...

(P3, 3,1: (24-23)... as I have said it. For why could not a type of form having this character be invented+...?

(P2, c. 16, 4-3 = (24.36-37)] We are now going to talk about the speed of movement that belongs to them. First of all, their finesse, which far exceeds the finesse revealed by the meaning, is an index of the unsurpassable speed of movement that belongs to simulacra... [This finesse makes them] excessively light, and if they are excessively light, it is clear that they are also excessively fast in their movements. if the atoms are perfectly equal in speed, and if it is possible to say

[P2, 17, J: (24-41)] position and arrangement, but only after approaching those whose anterior interval (lac. 1 word], and as if from the opposite [lac. 1 word the body [lac. 1 word] to split by nature, even when they have not yet struck the solid body [P3, 3,3]... in no way prevented, as by the gap which separates [from its surface [P2, c. 18, 13 (24.42)] against attestation from phenomena. have a speed of for unsurpassable displacements. And in a way of this type too, it will be possible to propose a kind of proof about the speed of simulacra. Because, since not only is fast what [has] the lightness (P3, 3, 4] quickly, to simulacra also belongs this power. In ... crossing effect, if the solid body alone had the power to move (Pr, c. 12, 1-2: (24-43 )] by evictions, and if the simulacrum did not have it, according to the mode of expulsion the solid bodies would be the only ones able to have high speeds, then solid bodies that the simulacra would not have this power, at least according to the mode of expulsion, while having it with regard to what is immediately surrounded by an accessible void, thanks to their tendency to sink into a space of emptiness, finesse and smallness. Pr, 12, 2 But, since it is possible for many bodies to expel the simulacrum and the lines for any/ solid body to do this, how could one not have to consider, since they possess precisely the mode of rapidity, that this mode of expulsion also belongs to them?

P1, 12, 3 (24-44))... the [mode] of expulsion, being transported before all bodies (lac. 10 lines imperceptible displacements [P3, 3, 6]. making displacement easy to accomplish for them", but not easy to accomplish for solid bodies [Pr, c. 14, 1-2: (24.45)) ... and among the types of simulacra, there are some which are related portion with the solid bodies llac. 4 lines] by virtue of [a] movement of expulsion, in which lac. 5 lines] embracing a great length (P3,.37] in their movements of expulsion, and unable, in either mode, to collide with the types [of compound bodies] which are solid.[PI, 14, 2-3: (24.46) Hence, in all the modes we are in the process of examining, we can easily see that the velocities which belong to all bodies are also velocities at which the simulations, too, can rapidly cover long distances [lac. 3 lines] by each pass, a issue through which the simulacra can escape, [lac. 1 word] not unreasonably ...

(P2, c. 19, 2: (24-47-48)]... to solid bodies, and which has the same intervals in depth, except that it is not because it was made up of many bodies in depth, but because it has the same internal vacuum interval, dare they say somewhat irrationally, "that [lac. 6 lines] [P3, c. 4,1] pass through the walls and the other compounds (P2, c. 19, 3] solid. And this the senses themselves attest. by its nature to something which does not contain much emptiness", passing through the walls, to preserve in their succession the position [which they had] in comparison with the solid [from which they come]" lake. 2 lines] of those which do not have a certain unique morphological configuration by nature, but in comparison with the lakes, 2 lines] [P3, c.4, 2] I mean, as if it were precisely the wind and s [modes] like this. Because the latter, [P2, c. 20, 1: (24-49-10)), owing to the fineness of their parts, are in a different mode from that in which substances which have cohesion outwardly, but contain much emptiness inwardly, are capable of ensure their passage through solid substances. What I am saying is that surely those who consider this precise question in the case of simulations are trying to form an unfavorable opinion of our doctrine) because of the ambiguity [P1, 17, 2) of the word of "fineness", without also considering the difference which separates the two cases [lac. a few words] [P3, c. 4, 31 it turns out that it is more possible for these things ¹8 to [pass] through solid substances than for resistant compounds [P2, 20, 2] to pass through these (substances/-there, to unless someone shows us that the mode of penetration of which we have spoken may belong to them. We must therefore, as I said, also examine the model which we have constructed" for the purpose of this section 20. For c is a llac. 1 succinct met to recognize....

[P3, 4,4 (24.51)] Thus, we have proved2¹ that there are simulacra; that it turns out that their generation happens at the speed of thought; and also that they possess movements of unsurpassable speed. In what comes next, we will set forth the subjects which it is appropriate to treat directly after these.

[Final title in P2]

Epicurus On nature book II23

BOOKS III-IX [Missing]

I was able to get the French book Les Epicuriens through interlibrary loan. It looks to be a treasure trove including Arrighetti's work on the Herculaneum Papyri of Epicurus's On Nature volumes!!! I've also just discovered that I can use my phone to translate the French into English.... Page by page. It's a laborious process to translate on my phone then copy and paste each page on my phone to a Google doc on my phone. But it works!!

There's material here that isn't readily available anywhere in English.

I'll keep y'all updated on progress. I have the book until May 16.

Gotta admit, kind of excited here

Quote from Don

καὶ κτήσεως προνοήσεσθαι καὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος

This could potentially/arguably be translated as something like:

[The wise one] takes precautions for their property for the benefit of himself and he who is to come.

That's clunky, but something like that.

The question remains "how far into the future?"

Is the one who comes future generations or the future self of the wise one during their life?

Epicurus was doing this both for himself and his friends after he died.

As for "duty" like anything else, I think it should be understood as instrumental to a pleasurable life and not an absolute end in itself.

Good catch, Nate.

Quote from Nate

"The wise man will take care of his property, and provide for the future." (Epicurus, Wise Man Saying 21)

καὶ κτήσεως προνοήσεσθαι καὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος.

That και...και... should be something like "both x and also y"

κτήσεως is "property, possessions"

That προνοησεσθαι seems particularly relevant to these discussions: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l…r=1&i=1#lexicon

think of or plan beforehand, provide for

be on one's guard, take precautions

μέλλοντος had some interesting connotations:

Greek Word Study Tool

Strong's gives translations of the specific phrase here: του μέλλοντος:

Greek Concordance: μέλλοντος (mellontos) -- 6 Occurrences

so it does appear this saying about the wise of both present and future directed. But SimonC might ask "How far into the future?"

Here are some of my thoughts off the top of my head:

Planning for the future of his school and the security of the children of his friends (and the contemplation of that future) gave pleasure to Epicurus in his here and now. I have no doubt that he knew some of his plans wouldn't go as planned; however, he did what he reasonably could to assure, as best he could, that those plans would come to fruition. This alleviated some or all of the pain he might have felt in thinking about what might happen after he died. He knew he wouldn't see future events, would have no control of them, and so did what he could to affect them... And took pleasure now in the planning and in imagining those plans coming to fruition.

I think "responsibility" isn't the right word. The saying goes that some indigenous peoples think seven generations ahead in their stewardship of the land and resources. But that thinking also has ramifications in how the land and resources are managed now, making the present more sustainable and livable. We can really only affect change here and now. Epicurus wrote his will and made plans in his present. We can "reduce, reuse, recycle" in the present. We can hope for future benefits, but our actions take place now.

I have the same anxieties and may one day have descendants. But we have to keep perspective. As individuals, our individual actions will have a negligible effect on climate change. It's the same for many global problems. That doesn't mean I shouldn't do what I can. And, for some people, making their life's work living among the poor, taking direct action, etc. must give them pleasure (whether they'd say it that way or not) or they wouldn't do it. We've had similar threads on this before. If our pain at thinking about future events or of large scale crises gives us pain, we need to ask ourselves: What will alleviate this pain? We can ourselves become despondent at our helplessness or insignificance in combating these issues. And I've intentionally worded it that way, because I don't think *that* is an Epicurean perspective. We have to be clear-eye and practical and honest about "What can I *really* do, here and now in my life, to alleviate my mental pain about these huge issues?" Epicurus doesn't give us easy answers or cookie cutter solutions. That can be unfortunate, scary, or liberating, depending on one's perspective... and maybe a little bit of all three?

Thanks for starting this thread. It could lead to some good discussion.

Quote from Kalosyni

Quote from Don

That's how I'm thinking "setting before the eyes" goes except in reverse: "Here's what the video camera would see."

So it is like practicing something in your mind, beforehand?

Well, I don't think so exactly. The technique, as I understand it, is used by the teacher to correct behavior in the student. "You keep up this behavior, this is what's going to happen to you." Then the teacher proceeds to paint a vivid word picture (see my previous post of excerpts from On Anger), making the student "see" what's in store for them. Also, as I understand it, it wasn't meant to be used beforehand, but after some behavior had been admitted to by the student. "I've been experiencing a lot of anger." Or the teacher or another student notices the person acting in an angry way. Then a frank criticism session is engaged in with the student, incorporating "setting before the eyes" to depict the consequences of the behavior. And I'm using anger simply because that's the topic of the surviving text.

Quote from Kalosyni

the first step uses vivid exact description of exactly what happened or what was said...and they say: "describe what the video camera would see" as a way to be very objective.

That's how I'm thinking "setting before the eyes" goes except in reverse: "Here's what the video camera would see."

Perseus Search Results

I noticed that the link just shows as "search results." It's every occurrence of the word oculus in De Rerum Natura. It wouldn't take the phrase ante oculus.

Quote from Cassius

I need a good text version of Lucretius in latin somewhere -- I think there is or was a latinlibrary.com ?

Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, Liber Primus, line 1

Cassius , thanks for all that food for thought! That's a lot of material in those last few posts, and, I'll admit, I haven't waded through it all yet. Remembering that I'm still also wading through On Anger (both Philodemus's text and the translators' commentary in that book) and the articles I linked to, let me summarize where I'm at:

I'm intrigued by Cassius idea about possible links among the therapeutic technique of "setting before the eyes" in Philodemus, the use of the phrase "ante oculus" in Lucretius, and the sensory perception of images/eidolon in Epicurus. I have not seen that brought up anywhere else. I'm not saying I agree there's a link yet, but I'm intrigued.

That being said, my take is that "setting before the eyes" is - for the most part - just a part of the instruction/correction of fellow Epicureans. Philodemus talks about it in On Anger in relation to ridding oneself of harmful behaviors. It's also mentioned by name in On Frank Criticism. Granted, since we've lost SO many texts, there could have been many more detailed explanations of the technique and its place in the "therapy" sessions.

I originally thought Hiram may have been making more of it than was warranted. Now, Cassius might be imbuing it with more depth than is warranted. Maybe.

That being said, it was obviously specific enough for Philodemus to consistently use the phrase to refer to an integral part of the sessions of frank criticism engaged in by the school.

There is definitely an element of imagination involved. I do not think there is any evidence of an actual "seeing" from a visual perception perspective. The technique appears to have involved confronting the student/patient with vivid descriptions describing in detail the problem behavior and its consequences. But I seem to remember it wasn't meant to be preventative. It was employed after the behavior had been engaged in during a session of frank criticism to *correct* the behavior moving forward.

So, that's why I'm not convinced that the images/eidolon are involved... Although I'm still unclear of those connections. It does appear that memory habituated the mind to receiving images, but that's all a little murky, too.

This is interesting from a "what was actually going on inside the Epicurean community in ancient times" perspective, but also "how can we resurrect or re-use or re-interpret ancient practices for modern times" perspective. That's one reason why it's important to dig into this.

And I double-checked. ΑΙΡΕΣΕΩΣ is the "genitive singular form of αἵρεσῐς" so "of choice"

Yeah, the fact that it goes from meaning "choice" to "heresy" is so sad.

Quote from Cassius

So I am not asking you (Don) to do it since we are all covered with work, and I don't have the time right now to offer to do it myself, but that would be a good goal for us at some point to pull together at least some preliminary English version of those cites for this project.

My posts 16 and 27 are directly from On Anger, not Tsouna's book. The translators appear very conservative, not trying to fill in. They're very clear where the papyrus is missing. But the papyrus is intact over long sections.

Quote from Don

one: On the Nine Books of Metrodorus's Against the Sophists

Note that Diogenes Laertius mentions "Against the Sophists, in nine books" too. That vocabulary list got εννέα wrong. It's 9 not 7. Seven is ἑπτά (hepta).

I'm intrigued by your suggestion, Cassius . Hmm. You could be on to something... Just not sure what yet.

It may be instructive to look at what's covered under dying for a φίλος (philos). The people covered under philia φιλιά, according to the unimpeachable source of Wikipedia are:

Philia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"young lovers (1156b2), lifelong friends (1156b12), cities with one another (1157a26), political or business contacts (1158a28), parents and children (1158b20), fellow-voyagers and fellow-soldiers (1159b28), members of the same religious society (1160a19), or of the same tribe (1161b14), a cobbler and the person who buys from him. (1163b35)"

This is from Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics but gives an idea of the range of who a philos may be. It goes beyond what we would necessarily call a "friend" in modern English.

Quote from Joshua

Perhaps Don can help with these.

Let's try these. I'll admit, I'm intrigued... And I'm sure they're all lost to history :

Those things pertaining to the philosophy of Epicurus

On Eudaimonia and a Blessed Life According to Epicurus

two: On Diminished Pleasure According to Epicurus: That which produces pleasure defectively according to Epicurus

one: On the Pleasure of Choice:

If the Inquiry into Natural Causes (is) Useful in Regard to Moral Philosophy

one: On the Nine Books of Metrodorus's Against the Sophists:

Letter Against Celsius the Epicurean

Letter of Poudentianus the Epicurean

I neglected to look at the vocabulary you provided, Joshua . I was making it harder than it needed to be! I'll try and provide a more thorough translation tonight (unless Elli stops by here )

Quote from Joshua

Perhaps Don can help with these.

Yay! A translation exercise! Wheee! Νice work on the transliteration, Joshua .

I should be able to puzzle through this unless someone with more fluent knowledge of ancient Greek comes along. I'll make this a priority tonight. Let me see if I can add anything with yours as a jumping off point:

XVI. On the things belonging to the philosophy of Epicurus

On Epicurus' Eudaimonia and the Happiness of Life (Trivia: That 2nd to last word is makariou - the word used in the first PD1)

two: On the Weakening/Obscuring(?) Pleasure according to Epicurus: That the produced things(?) of Greek pleasure said by Epicurus

one (ἕν hen "one"; evidently referring to the number of books?)

On Choosing Pleasure: (Good job!! I'll dig in if there's something else going on with the grammar there, too)

ἐννεα = "nine"

That's all I can do right now (off to work), but I'll dig back in tonight!

I'm thinking maybe (at least) a Google map of relevant locations, color coded by century or other criteria?

Quote from Cassius

Logic in the sense of parsing definitions and categories. It's largely a word game until you connect back to emotions / pain / pleasure.

But that too begs the question between whether there is any "natural" connection between words and perceptions, and for that we might have to call in Godfrey and Don on visualization issues

There's some discussion of definitions and the Epicurean aversion to them in Philodemus's On Anger. Still digging through it, but it's been interesting. Not ready to report back in yet.