Posts by Don

Quote from Cassius

frustrating that this is so hard to do:

LOL! It's actually impossible. I'm surprised two reconstructed calendars can be as close as a day or so. There is no calendar that started in ancient time and remained as a time keeping device to current times.

There's confusion in genealogy research from when the US in the 1700s went from Old Style to New Style dating. It's almost impossible to line up dates that happened over 2,300 years ago.

Just celebrate Epicurus's birthday around this weekend and be done with it. That's as "exact" as we're ever going to get.

Happy birthday, master-builder of human happiness!

Quote from Cassius

Epicurus must have had a reason for everything he did, especially in writing the Principal Doctrines the way they are.

Do we know if Epicurus actually wrote the PDs or is this a summary that grew up within the Epicurean community?

Quote from Cassius

And why Epicurus himself did not state the goal of life as "reasoned pursuit of pleasure."

The goal of life is pleasure; one of the tools we use to get to that goal is practical wisdom using reason to make our choices and rejections.

Quote from Cassius

In thinking about that wording the question has not occurred to me:. Does "hedonism" as a term consider pain?

That's why I don't like to use the term because I don't think there is any "authority" that can answer that question as to what "hedonism" means.

Epicurus doesn't seem to have used a term like that so I suspect we should stay away from it too.

hedonist | Etymology, origin and meaning of hedonist by etymonline

HEDONIST Meaning: "pleasure, delight, enjoyment; a pleasure, a delight," which is related to hēdys "sweet" and cognate… See definitions of hedonist.

www.etymonline.com

Appears to have started as a term in the 1800s?

Quote from Cassius

So maybe the proper term would be "unrestrained calculus of pleasure"

I would offer the "rational calculus of pleasure" or "wise calculus of pleasure" i.e., phronēsis in the pursuit of pleasure.

Quote from Cassius

"unrestrained hedonism" analysis that so many fear (but which Epicurus embraces with so much fearlessness in defining the greatest good as simply pleasure)

You're not saying that Epicurus embraced "unrestrained hedonism", are you? Because from all my reading:

Quote

Therefore, whenever we say repeatedly that "pleasure is the τέλος," we do not say the pleasure of those who are prodigal like those who are ignorant, those who don't agree with us, or those who believe wrongly; but we mean that which neither pains the body nor troubles the mind. [132] For it is not an endless string of drinking parties and festivals, and not taking advantage of slaves and women, nor does an extravagant table of fish and other things bring forth a sweet life but self-controlled reasoning and examining the cause of every choice and rejection and driving out the greatest number of opinions that take hold of the mind and bring confusion and trouble.

I think we need to look at alternative translations, too (Thanks to Eikadistes 

“If every pleasure were condensed, if one may so say, and if each lasted long, anda ffected the whole body, or the essential parts of it, then there would be no differenceb etween one pleasure and another.” Yonge (1853)

“If all pleasure had been capable of accumulation, if this had gone on not only in time,but all over the frame or, at any rate, the principal parts of man's nature, there would not have been any difference between one pleasure and another as, in fact, there nowis.” Hicks (1910)

“If all pleasure had been capable of accumulation,—if this had gone on not only by recurrence in time, but all over the frame or, at any rate, over the principal parts of man's nature, there would never have been any difference between one pleasure and another, as in fact there is.” Hicks (1925)

“If every pleasure could be intensifed so that it lasted and infuenced the whole organism or the most essential parts of our nature, pleasures would never differ from one another.” Bailey (1926)

“If every pleasure were alike condensed in duration and associated with the whole organism or the dominant parts of it, pleasures would never differ from one another." De Witt, Epicurus and His Philosophy 235 (1954)

“If every pleasure were cumulative, and if this were the case both in time and in regard to the whole or the most important parts of our nature, then pleasures would not differ from each other.” Geer (1964)

“If every pleasure were condensed in <location> and duration and distributed all over the structure or the dominant parts of our nature, pleasures would never differ from one another.” Long, The Hellenistic Philosophers 115 (1987)

“If every pleasure were condensed and existed for a long time throughout the entire organism or its most important parts, pleasures would never differ from one another.” O'Connor (1993)

“If every pleasure were condensed and were present, both in time and in the whole compound [body and soul] or in the most important parts of our nature, then pleasures would never differ from one another.” Inwood & Gerson (1994)

“If every pleasure could be prolonged to endure in both body or mind, pleasures would never differ from one another.” Anderson (2004)

“If all pleasures could be added together consecutively with respect to space and duration, and across the entire span over which they had all existed, or at least across the principal parts of human nature <which are naturally susceptible to pleasures:> then, pleasures would not be different from each other in any respect.” Makridis (2005)

“If every pleasure were condensed and were present at the same time and in the whole of one's nature or its primary parts, then the pleasures would never differ from one another.” Saint-Andre (2008)

Actually, my response was meant to be serious. Only the individual in the moment can answer what is "most pleasurable."

Quote from Cassius

How do you describe in words the attributes of one pleasure that make it more or less pleasant than another?

My perspective is "that which brings the greatest pleasure" *to you* in the present moment. There is no absolute comparative scale of pleasures.

The significance of καρπίζεται is also to pluck the greatest pleasure at the right time, when the time is ripe so to speak.

Quote from Cassius

Thank you. What I am asking you also is "What do you take 'most pleasant' to mean"?

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Could you give a few more details on the dilemma?

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

Quote from Cassius

Just to refresh my memory Don do you have a preferred interpretation of what is translated as "the greatest pleasure"?

126c. ὥσπερ δὲ σιτίον οὐ τὸ πλεῖον πάντως ἀλλὰ τὸν ἥδιστον αἱρεῖται,

τὸ ἥδιστον "the most pleasant"

αἱρεῖται "is chosen/choosing"

126d. οὕτω καὶ χρόνον οὐ τὸν μήκιστον ἀλλὰ τὸν ἥδιστον καρπίζεται.

126c and 126d exemplify again why it's important to look at the words Epicurus used and not just modern English translations. Take a look at the final phrases of each:

126c. ...ἀλλὰ τὸ ἥδιστον αἱρεῖται,

"choosing that which brings the greatest pleasure"

126d. …ἀλλὰ τὸν ἥδιστον καρπίζεται.

"enjoying the fruits of that which bring the greatest pleasure."

Both of these use the word ἥδιστον (hēdiston) which is the superlative of ἡδύς (hēdus) "pleasant, sweet" which is related to ηδονή (hēdonē) "pleasure". By variously translating these two occurrences of the same exact word as "most pleasing/brings the greatest joy," "most delicious/happiest," "nicest/most agreeable," or "most enjoyable" (for both), the fact that Epicurus used the same word is lost. Only Yonge uses "most pleasant" for both. Epicurus teaches that pleasure is the greatest good and by refusing to translate words like ἥδιστον more literally as "(that which) brings the most pleasure" it would appear that translators are consciously shying away from acknowledging that pleasure was Epicurus's North Star. When Epicurus says pleasure, he means pleasure. Translators should not equivocate or obfuscate. They should strive to illuminate and communicate.

For more, check out my translation of the Letter to Menoikeus Epicurus's Letter to Menoikeus - A New Translation with Commentary

Here's my translation of the excerpt from the letter (verse 126):

Quote

Just as the most food is not chosen but that which brings the greatest pleasure; choose as well not the longest time but that in which one enjoys the fruits of that which bring the greatest pleasure.

I find it significant that Epicurus's word is καρπίζεται (karpizetai) related to the Latin carpe as in Carpe diem "Pluck/Harvest the day."

Again, if you're getting that impression from DeWitt... I have issues with DeWitt's fabricating "historical fiction" on the barest (if not non-existent) evidence or citations.

Quote from Nate

There is a fundamental difference between painlessness due to maximizing the enjoyment of a natural life versus sedation due to an emotional withdrawal from the challenges of a natural existence. The "bliss machine" is a form of sedation

I like your phrasing there.

Quote from SimonC

. I asked her if a person who believe that they are in a happy marriage but in fact are being cheated on is happy or not, and she agreed that such a person would in fact be happy

The wife in that scenario can only work with the evidence she has at hand. If the evidence to which she has access to gives her the impression she is in a happy marriage, that's not really an argument for or against the machine from my perspective.

Quote from SimonC

if we accept that parameters of the thought experiment as given, that using the machine

The parameters don't seem so cut and dried. Here is Nozick's excerpt: https://rintintin.colorado.edu/~vancecd/phil3160/Nozick1.pdf

I haven't had a chance to read the paper yet but am putting it here for reference.

Quote from SimonC

hedonism.... is HEDONISM????

Tautologies are rarely a discussion-ending slam dunk. I have no doubt the Cyrenaics would jump at the chance to plug in. I'm still not convinced the Epicureans would. And they're both classified as hedonistic schools.

Quote from SimonC

They use the headsets because they like it and that is all the justification needed.

But it's not an all or nothing proposition with VR although it could easily lead to addictive behaviors like anything else. Using something that gives a pleasurable experience for a time, I got no problem with. There are numerous substances and experiences that provide pleasure from time to time.

If you're getting this impression from DeWitt, I'll be the first to admit I have problems with DeWitt. You'll notice some of my reviews of specific chapters of Epicurus and His Philosophers in this section. I have major issues with his Ranks and Titles section in chapter 5. I do not necessarily subscribe to a DeWittean interpretation in all things Epicurean.

That being said, I'd like to address a could specifics in your post/question.

Quote from smoothiekiwi

Epicurean society was a bit separated from the rest of the world- own classes, an own garden, own hierarchical structures

There was a school, but I wouldn't call it a society. Epicurus regularly participated in the life of his city, especially in the religious festivals and rites. This comes through loud and clear in Philodemus's On Piety.

The Garden was also not a commune or compound. Students were free to come and go and attend classes and celebratory meals. Property was not held in common. This is explicitly stated in Diogenes Laërtius's writing.

Plus the Garden wasn't secluded or remote. It was right near one of the main gates of Athens on a highly traveled road. It just so happened that Epicurus could afford a place for his school to meet. A refuge from the city life for a time.

All the schools held "classes" and lectures. Most of not all of Aristotle's existing works were compiled by a student from lecture notes they took. I don't think we have extant.

All the schools had leaders and teachers.

All the schools thought they taught the truth.

One of the things that attracted me to explore this philosophy in the first place was because it was the *only* ancient school to welcome every member of society including women and slaves. There are women who were respected members of the school and who wrote philosophical texts (none of which survive - big surprise) arguing against the leading teachers of other schools.

That's all for now, but I appreciate your starting this thread!

@smoothiekiwi , there's also this thread Would An Epicurean Hook Himself Up To An "Experience Machine" or a "Pleasure Machine" If Possible?

specifically on the experience machine hypothetical.

Is this it?

67. I do not think I could conceive of the good without the joys of taste, of sex, of hearing, and without the pleasing motions caused by the sight of bodies and forms.

οὐδὲ γὰρ ἔγωγε ἔχω τί νοήσω τἀγαθὸν ἀφαιρῶν μὲν τὰς διὰ χυλῶν ἡδονάς, ἀφαιρῶν δὲ τὰς διʼ ἀφροδισίων, ἀφαιρῶν δὲ τὰς διʼ ἀκροαμάτῶν, ἀφαιρῶν δὲ καὶ τὰς διὰ μορφῆς κατʼ ὄψιν [those by way of shapes and along with vision] ἡδείας κινήσεις [of pleasing motions].

LII. Friendship goes dancing round the world proclaiming to us all to awake to the praises of a happy life.

Quote from Joshua

Have you looked into the connection with "Apollo Epicurius", that is, Apollo the Helper?

And Apollo's epithet of Epicurius is the same word used in Epicurus's name:

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, ἐπίκουρ-ος

"helper, ally, protector, patron"

I don't know of any other gods with that specific epithet, so arguably Neocles and Chaerestrate could have been thinking of Apollo Epicurius when they named their son. Maybe Gamelion 7 is always a feast day of Apollo and, if Epicurus was born on that day, naming your son after the god dedicated to that day couldn't hurt. "Hey, we named him after you. Watch over him!"

Here's also an old post of mine that bring out the connection of Apollo with the 20th:

Post

Thoughts on DeWitt, Chapter 5

And so we arrive in Athens!

[…]

Footnote 4 cites Diogenes Laertius (DL) 10.5.:

[…]

It's interesting that in the last chapter, DeWitt wrote about Epicurus's adding mentions of the gods in his letters, using this exact example: Παιὰν ἄναξ Paian anax. DeWitt is consistent in his "Glory be" translation here. Paian anax is a reference to Apollo and DeWitt's translation removes us from the cultural context of Epicurus's world. I realize DeWitt is paraphrasing, but "Glory be" seems to miss the…

Don

May 20, 2020 at 6:31 PM