Posts by Don

Quote from Cassius

Don do you not find that "Les Epicureans" has less information in it that would help you determine how much confidence to put in the translation? I am thinking i remember that it's not heavily footnoted or referenced, so it's hard to know how much is reconstruction and how firm it is. Am I misremembering that?

Oh, it is heavily footnoted and appears conservative in the translations with all the lacunae and fragments marked. I have no hesitation in seeing the translations as authoritative. Pages 1079-1469 are nothing but footnotes and commentary.

That is a great visual metaphor, Joshua !! It also alleviates the problem of which is more important or which comes first. All three are needed for the structure. I like it, too, for the idea that the arch can be seen as a portal to the Garden. Too bad the Greeks didn't have the arch. Lintel/post construction isn't as elegant as a metaphor. Maybe that's our visual representation of the philosophy. Better to have an arch necklace than an execution device around one's neck (Yeah, looking at you, Christians.)

I can see I'll have to read through these, compare the French and the machine-translated English, and correct some punctuation and obvious errors. I can also see that some sections are going to be difficult because of the fragmentary nature of the papyri. Lots of holes! That's the [lac. ...] in the texts: lacuna. Frg. = Fragment numbers. One bonus with these is that it gives the P.Herc. numbers, so I hope to *eventually* link to images of the papyri.

This project also reinforces how much we've lost! The tantalizing fragments start an idea, then it breaks off. An argument being made cuts off before its end. It's like Epicurus is giving a lecture over Zoom and the connection keeps freezing and dropping out.

I'm not going to do this for everything, but I wanted to give everyone another taste of what I'm running up against. Here is Book 11 of Epicurus's On Nature discussing the nature of the cosmos and how the Earth stays at the center and how the Sun rises and sets. This is after one initial pass trying to correct the translation and transcription errors. It'll need a few more passes.

It *appears* Epicurus is making the argument for why and how the Earth is a sphere and why it is immobile in the cosmos:

BOOK XI

[PHerc. 1042, supplemented by PHerc. 154: (26) Arrighetti]

[Frg. 3, 2: (26.17)]...would be encompassed¹ because of the density or scarcity of what envelops it, so as to give²...

[Column of location uncertain: (26.18)] possible to secure...firmly. For the current question, regarding exactly this thing, which is whether it is possible or completely impossible for it to happen…

86

Epicurus

Frg 1, 1: (26.19). and receive a swerve because of infinity, if at that [lac 1 mot] thousand times [lac. 25 lines approximately] (4 (26.20) to make visible the [lac. 1 word] of this one and also of this one, either sooner or later; so that the [lac. 1 word] corresponding to infinity at all…

Frg 6, 10 (26.21)] [whether infinite number of atoms] meet them, or else [atoms] of a non-infinite number. That non-infinite number of atoms meet them would be [lac. 1 word ], just like the fact that [infinite number of atoms] meet them, so that like substances possess [infinity] [lac. 2 columns approximately) (4:(26.22)] that one. But that Earth's gravity should not be feared as opposing its staying in the air, when [lac. 2 words] rare substance...

(Frg. 7, 1: (26.23)] things in our environment that have some ability to float on air and stay aloft and [lac. 30 lines or so] [2: (26.24)].. .[not this species] of angularity, but that which could belong to the primary substances [lac. 25 lines approximately] [3: (26.26)]...exerting a kind of flotation, but, as I have said before, as if the bounds and inviolable [lac. I words] provided them with some kind of protection [lac. 8 lines] drum...

[Frg. 8, 2: (26.27)] be such as to preserve what has formed as the drum section. Because some have conceived [the limits of the sky] as walls encircling the Earth, with a whirlpool like this [lac. 4 lines] movement of the stars above the head (lac. 3 lines] circular [lac. 10 lines] (3+ PHerc. 154, frg. 3, 1: (26.28)] [lac. I line] placing for this reason of all sides the circumferences before our eyes, as being analogical indices of the same [lac. I line] of the world [lac. 7 lines] and assuming that the Earth is in the middle of the [all] [lac. 15 lines] place [lac. 1 line] feet [lac. 2 lines] above the head [lac. 2 lines] say above lac. 20 lines] [4+ PHerc. 154, frg. 3.3 (26.30 -31)] in transferences, let's say, upwards; [and] what he recently had above his head, we would have, by virtue of the transference, [the impression of seeing him below] [ lac. y lines] of the Sun and the Moon] [lac. 2 lines] above [lac. 1 word] interval [lac. 25 lines] above the head [lac. 1 word] below the feet [lac. 20 ( + PHer, 154, fig. 3, 4 (26.32)] appearing to him below [under the] feet, he will not think that what he came to have, when he ascended above, to have under his feet, he had previously had above his head when he descended below. Thus, I say, because of the location of the Earth in the middle of the [lac. 1] center line [lac. 3 lines] protections [lat. 2 lines] cause the world to become round with the Earth in the middle, like (lac 2 words] the arrangement of the limbs [lac. 2 lines] do not reach [lac. 1 line] aporia [lac. 1 line] below (lat. 2 lines]. [6: (2633)] Arranging the walls in a circle in order to protect us against the whirlpool, in the belief that the whirlpool is in a position to whirl outside, they circularly rotate the stars above the heads of all men [lac. To lines] the causes...

[Frg. 9, 1: (26.34)] a firm perception concerning objective things could be acquired, when [lac. 1 line] such and such species of movement upwards or downwards [lac. 1 line] infinity [lac. 1 line] name [lac. 20 lines approximately] [2: (26.35)] of the Sun (lac. 2 words] transmitted visually becomes [lac. 25 lines] [2: (26.36)] [lac. I line] things [lac. 2 words] down [lac. 1 line] up [lac. 1 line] from the sphere we see [lac. 20 lines approximately] [3: (26.37)] lac. line] If we walk towards the place from which the Sun seemed to us] to rise, heading higher in continental zone, it seems to us to lie down where we had passed before, sometimes even when we have only moved a short distance in all. And, this time, we cannot blame it on the oblique movements. Why, after all, should you treat the estimate of the distance from here, or from there, or this from here, as a more reliable estimate of the distance from sunrises or sunsets? As a result, [Lac. 8 to 10 lines] [4 (26.38)] [they cannot hope to] form a (mental) model, nor deduce any solution on these matters.

For it seems to me that when they spend their time making a few of them - I mean their instruments and whirling themselves inside some other of those instruments. it is not surprising, considering not only the slavery which their doctrines impose on them, but also (as far as the appearances of the Sun are concerned) because of the indeterminates of its risings and its setting, that 'they cannot form a adequate mental model by means of their instruments, which produce no regularity. But their instruments are [lac. 8 to 10 lines)] [5 : (26.39) All that is left to them is pretense and forced argument, according to which the indications given by the instrument create an analogy which corresponds to what we see in the celestial regions. For someone who is in his right mind must, it seems to me, make a prior distinction: when he argues about the world and about what appears to us in the world, he is arguing about a certain image which comes from certain accidental properties of things, properties transmitted, through the medium of vision, to a process of thought or a process of memory permanently preserved by the soul itself, [communicating to it certain] quantities, qualities, [etc.] [lac. few lines] [6+ PHerc. 154, Fig. 25, 2: (26.40)] [So when, as I see, he happens to look at the thing objective and fails to distinguish between an utterance based on the object and another based on what is co perceived through the object, and that the objective thing does not give rise to multiple representations [of the world] in miniature, and even less of the world (itself), it is not surprising that he is embarrassed by the sunrises and sunsets, of which I have already spoken in connection with the Sun. For hoping, presumably, that each of the appearances [lac. about 10 lines]. [If] we do not want to attach to them the image of an inverted rising and setting, an image invented from the objective thing, we must form a mental conception of a movement of the Sun and the Moon. towards their rising and setting, and we must not say of the movement which always takes place in this way, nor of anything which moves in this way, that it occurs in the opposite direction according to the intrinsic nature of the something objective, and that, from some point of view other than our own, these things are ordered according to various different patterns. This, then, is the distinction we must make with regard to this subject.

(Frg 10, 1 + PHerc. 114, fg 21.3(26.41)] As for the props that support the Earth below, of which we say that the rare substance (lac. 4 lines] [2 + PHerc. 154 , Fig. 25, 4: (26.42) being limited by some interval, for thus the mind will understand the stability of the Earth more surely and more in harmony with sensible appearances.

89

As for the density it has below, it must be conceived in its continuity with that which it has above, so that these densities, which are good for providing a counter-support, maintain the appropriate analogical model for immobility. of the earth. For, on this account, we shall in no way be bothered by the rotation of the Sun, provided we bear in mind in how many ways each of these phenomena can be realized, and that in some cases their very equalities are the causes of the fact that they do not share [lac. 2 words] Earth [lake. 2 words] [+ PHerc. 154, fig. 26, 1: (26.43)] will need. For, being equidistant on all sides, they will not be able to weigh down in any direction. In fact, what belongs to it by virtue of the nature of the air, namely that, because it receives a similar pressure from all sides, it is on all sides equidistant from the circle which limits the world], as if he said that, being such, it rests at the center of the world (and it is not impossible either that it is such) - it is that, and not what produces that, which is the of its stability. For the pressure of the air, which is alike on all sides, has ensured equality as the strongest of the means by which, in assuring the [lac. I word] of the circle, [it caused] stable immobility [of the Earth under equal pressure... [4 + PHerc. 154, frg. 26, 2: (26.44]. it was more [convincing to say that this, namely equality, is causally responsible, rather than to say that it is the very fact of the immobility of the Earth at the center of the world which is the cause of [lac. 2 lines] being immobile; and they are sometimes in agreement with this, since they created the aerial stays because of the [lac. 2 words 307. These people there, even if by chance they have come to the correct conclusion, we should not consider them better than men who are in many matters, and in many matters completely, totally, many times better, and in some of them immeasurably ...

(Frg, 11, 1: (26.45)] For [these theories] have all perished, having been posited on the basis of their eccentric mode of connection [lac. a few lines].

ing the subject proposed at the beginning is enough for us. In what follows, in this book, therefore, what we have said concerning we will continue by providing some additional clarifications on these celestial phenomena.

Quote from Cassius

(I should have known Don was going to to straight for the "images" material!)

Just taking On Nature books in order.

I do find it interesting that Epicurus was covering images so early in his masterwork. He must have either seen it as important (like the gods being first in Menoikeus and the PDs) or fundamental to his physics.

I'm just ecstatic that the translation app worked as well as it did! Some clean up needed but overall

So, it appears Book 2 addressed the production of simulacra/images/eidolon.

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.