Posts by Don

I see they even have a work by La Mettrie.

Raphael Raul 's post above immediately brought to mind the mental state of flow described in positive psychology:

Flow (psychology) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Quote from Cassius

Thanks to Michele Pinto I see these two paintings of Epicurus by Agostino ScilliI have never before seen!

  

http://epicuro.org/gli-epicuro-di-agostino-scilla/

The blog post linked here tells about them. That blog post also mentions the Raphael School of Athens, and the representation that is ATTRIBUTED as being Epicurus, but which Elli has shown, is probably not, as there is another character who DOES look very much like Epicurus! As soon as I can find a good link I will post that discussion here in this thread too -- perhaps Elli already has a good link (?()

Display More

I'm bumping this up in this thread because I just came across the first image in an online article with a link to Wikimedia Commons. I had never seen this before and like the overall vibe.

It's also used in this article: https://antigonejournal.com/2024/02/epicurus-on-pleasure/

The older figure has RESPICE FINEM "Consider the final outcome."

Today, I came across this section of Diogenes of Oenoanda (emphasis added):

Quote

But, as I have said before, the majority of people suffer from a common disease, as in a plague, with their false notions about things, and their number is increasing (for in mutual emulation they catch the disease from one another, like sheep) moreover, [it is] right to help [also] generations to come (for they too belong to us, though they are still unborn) and, besides, love of humanity prompts us to aid also the foreigners who come here. Now, since the remedies of the inscription reach a larger number of people, I wished to use this stoa to advertise publicly the [medicines] that bring salvation. These medicines we have put [fully] to the test; for we have dispelled the fears [that grip] us without justification, and, as for pains, those that are groundless we have completely excised, while those that are natural we have reduced to an absolute minimum, making their magnitude minute.

And the last part in Greek, emphasis added...

Quote from Diogenes of O

column 6

ρίας προθεῖ̣ν̣[αι φάρμα-]
κα, ὧν δὴ φαρ̣μ[άκων]
πεῖραν ἡμε[ῖ]ς̣ ̣π̣[άντως]
εἰλήφαμεν. [τοὺς]
γὰρ ματαίως [κ]ατ[έχον-]
τας ἡμᾶς φόβους [ἀ-]
πελυσάμεθα, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ τῶν τε
λυπῶν τὰς μὲν κ̣εν̣ὰ̣ς
ἐξεκόψαμεν εἰς τέ-
λειον, ⁦ vac. 1⁩ τὰς δ̣ὲ φυσικὰς
εἰς μεικρὸν κομιδῇ
συνεστείλαμεν, ἐλα-
χιστιαῖον αὐτῶν τ̣[ὸ]
μέγεθος ποι̣ή̣σ̣α̣[ντες]

Display More

Diogenes specifically used φαρμακος (6.1 & 2) "[pharmakos] medicine." This medicine metaphor is in keeping with U221 and VS54. It's not a stretch for me to see this extrapolated to use in the Tetrapharmakos.

Diogenes' wording is also interesting in that I see it being a perfect encapsulation and summary of ataraxia and aponia:

These medicines we have put [fully] to the test; for we have dispelled the fears [that grip] us without justification ([τοὺς] γὰρ ματαίως [κ]ατ[έχον]τας ἡμᾶς φόβους [ἀ]πελυσάμεθα) and, as for pains (λυπῶν), those that are groundless (κ̣εν̣ὰ̣ς "empty") we have completely excised, while those that are natural we have reduced to an absolute minimum, making their magnitude minute.

The "fears [that grip] us without justification" are fears of the gods and death. Dispelling those fears that have no justification is what calms the troubles in the mind. That is, by definition and etymology, is ataraxia. These are also the first two lines of the tetrapharmakos.

Λυπων , genitive of λύπη (lupē) is grief, sadness; pain (of mind or body), suffering, affliction, distress.

These musings hit me this morning, so I'm placing them in this thread for thoughts and comments.

Quote from sanantoniogarden

It's really a fun time here, more focused on the joy of someones life, the memories they left and the lessons taught. Let alone the celebration of our still being alive.

That sounds like a perfect fit.

Welcome aboard, AthenianGarden !

If you haven't come across Emily Austin's Living for Pleasure yet, I highly recommend that as an intro to the philosophy: well researched, accessible, conversational. We also have interviews with her that served as podcast episodes.

Quote from DaveT

the goal of life is life while you have it.

This seems to me to set up a tautology. One of my biggest problems with "Life is the Greatest Good" direction is that it sets up a problem right from the beginning: The Greatest Good of Life is Life; The Goal of Life is Life.

The telos/Greatest Good/goal is defined as "that to which every action points" or "the reason for which every action is done." It is the final answer to the question "Why do you do that?" That's why answers like Pleasure and Virtue are argued about. If we say Life is the reason we do everything, that isn't a satisfactory answer to me. "So I can go on living" doesn't provide any additional information. How can we answer "Life" or even "Living" is the end to which all actions point. That's not really a "why" in my mind. On the other hand, "because it gives me pleasure" seems to be a better answer. If you ask questions, even of someone who answers it is because of Virtue that they do everything, if you press hard enough, they should admit that they pursue Virtue because it gives them pleasure to do so.

DaveT I fear we may be talking past each other, and I got caught up in historical precedents and citations.

Let me see if I can summarize your position, and you let me know where I misinterpret or get it right before I dive headlong into another lengthy post. As I understand, you feel that:

• The word "pleasure" is seen by the majority of people nowadays as conveying a negative activity or at the very least a self-indulgent - maybe even destructive - activity.
• Explaining Epicurus' expansive re-definition of "pleasure" (ΗΔΟΝΗ) distracts from the deeper meaning and potential application of his philosophy to modern life.
• Trying to get people to accept/understand that Epicurean re-definition in light of their modern sensitivities to the word "pleasure" is counterproductive.
• It would be more productive to explain Epicureanism to newcomers without resorting to using the word "pleasure" or using phrases like "The goal of life is pleasure."
• You would advocate for using terms more in line with "Life Itself is the Greatest Good" and avoiding using "pleasure" until, maybe, much further down the road when it is encountered in the ancient texts.

Would that be a fair summary?

Quote from DaveT

Well, what troubles me, is that quoting Epicurus, and his followers leaves the modern sensitivities at the mercy of modern language.

I find it interesting that this was exactly the same problem the ancient Epicureans were having. The ancient sensitivities were the reason that Cicero could rail against voluptas vs virtus (pleasure vs virtue). Ηδονή / voluptas / pleasure had the same negative connotations back then among segments of society as it does today. Plus çe change, and all that. And the "modern sensitivities" deriving (in my opinion) from Christian prejudices primarily, especially in the US, are directly in line with the Bible. Using Strong's Concordance for ἡδονή (The word doesn't appear too many times in the New Testament, and only twice in the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible)) I freely admit this digression is primarily for my amusement in looking up the citations :

2 Peter 2:13: And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;

Luke 8:13: And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection.

Titus 3:3: For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another.

James 4:3: When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.

Proverbs 17:1 seems to be the only positive use but that gets buried in translations:
κρείσσων ψωμὸς μεθ᾽ ἡδονῆς ἐν εἰρήνῃ ἢ οἶκος πλήρης πολλῶν ἀγαθῶν καὶ ἀδίκων θυμάτων μετὰ μάχης usually translated as "Better is a dry morsel with quiet than a house full of feasting with strife." (RSV) but more literally "Better is a morsel with pleasure in peace, than a house full of many good things and unjust sacrifices, with strife." (BES)

To paraphrase Horton (of Who-hearing fame): Epicurus meant what he said and said what he meant: Pleasure's the Good, 100%.

Epicurus had other words at his disposal, but he decided the feelings were cut into two parts: ηδονή ("pleasure") and ἀλγηδών/ἄλγος (he uses several words for "pain"). "Negative and positive feelings" doesn't have the same oomph. "Good and evil" without the context of pleasure and pain doesn't mean anything. There is no absolute ideal to point to. What is evil/bad? Epicurus says it is that which is painful. If you want modern neuroscience terminology, you have negative and positive affect with low and high activation: https://positivepsychology.com/positive-and-n…schedule-panas/ or the circumplex: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2367156/ but then you're going into the weeds in a different way.

I get the feeling Epicurus wanted to be provocative, to make people question their common wisdom, their acculturation, which is what using pleasure / ηδονη / voluptas obviously did.

Quote from Cassius

to accelerate their impending deaths

This is clearly a side issue for this thread, but I'm still not convinced the "leave the theatre" saying means "taking steps to accelerate." I much rather prefer to interpret that as not fighting against the inevitable, doing nothing to prolong life if the "end is in sight" so to speak and one is in pain. Life has a limit, and if one is in the throes of a terminal disease, one should take steps to be comfortable but avoid "extraordinary measures" to prolong suffering/pain. Granted, what we take as normal procedures (ex., CPR, vaccinations, organ transplant, etc.) would be seen as "extraordinary measures" in Ancient Greece so I am NOT, for example, advocating for foregoing CPR *unless* it is the clearly ellucidated wishes of the patient.

Quote from Patrikios

Could this use of KAPA be describing a whole-body-mind feeling of pleasure that occurs when a vivid mental recollection of a past significant joyous event, causes the mind to trigger the brain/body to release of the pleasure chemicals (endorphins)? Is this one of those nuances?

Sure. χαρα (khara) has a wide semantic spectrum it would appear from its LSJ entry: https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?do…057:entry=xara/

When you recollect something joyful from your past, you feel it throughout your body. I wouldn't get into the endorphins, etc., since that's anachronistic to Epicurus' time, but experiencing a remembered sunset or delicious meal gets "felt" throughout body and mind.

I found this citation interesting from Xenophon:

Quote from Xenophon

[25] οὕτω μέντοι, ἔφη ὁ Ἱέρων, καὶ τῶν σίτων ὁ μὲν ἔχων παντοδαπὰ ἀεὶ οὐδὲν μετὰ πόθου αὐτῶν λαμβάνει: ὁ δὲ σπανίσας τινός, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ μετὰ χαρᾶς πιμπλάμενος, ὅταν αὐτῷ προφανῇ τι.

“Quite so, and we may add that he who has all sorts of food at all times has no stomach for any sort. Offer a man a dish that he seldom tastes, and he eats a bellyful with gusto.”

Quote from DaveT

"well pleasure does not mean...."

Quote from Epicurus

Therefore, whenever we say repeatedly that "pleasure is the goal (τέλος)," we do not say the pleasure of those who are prodigal and those stuck in delighting in pleasures arising from circumstances outside of ourselves 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.

Quote from Eikadistes

XAPA or χαρὰ (kharà), the kinetic act of pleasuring the flesh, meaning “joy”. ↩︎

One interesting (to me) note is that ΧΑΡΑ does not seem to be exclusive to the body/flesh. Case in point:

"On this blissful day, which is also the last of my life, I write this to you. My continual sufferings from strangury and dysentery are so great that nothing could augment them ; but over against them all I set gladness of mind at the remembrance of our past conversations. But I would have you, as becomes your life-long attitude to me and to philosophy, watch over the children of Metrodorus."

"Τὴν μακαρίαν ἄγοντες καὶ ἅμα τελευταίαν ἡμέραν τοῦ βίου ἐγράφομεν ὑμῖν ταυτί. στραγγουρία τε παρηκολουθήκει καὶ δυσεντερικὰ πάθη ὑπερβολὴν οὐκ ἀπολείποντα τοῦ ἐν ἑαυτοῖς μεγέθους. ἀντιπαρετάττετο δὲ πᾶσι τούτοις τὸ κατὰ ψυχὴν χαῖρον ἐπὶ τῇ τῶν γεγονότων ἡμῖν διαλογισμῶν μνήμῃ. σὺ δ᾽ ἀξίως τῆς ἐκ μειρακίου παραστάσεως πρὸς ἐμὲ καὶ φιλοσοφίαν ἐπιμελοῦ τῶν παίδων Μητροδώρου."

***

gladness of mind

τὸ κατὰ ψυχὴν χαῖρον (to kata psykhe khairon), lit. "the rejoicing throughout (my) mind"

χαῖρον is related to the "kinesis/energeia" pleasure χαρα "joy"

To enjoy [+dative = something] = μνήμῃ (dative) "remembrance, memory"

So, τὸ κατὰ ψυχὴν χαῖρον ἐπὶ τῇ ... μνήμῃ "the enjoying throughout (my) mind... of the memory"

So I don't think we can make a firm body (flesh)/mind dichotomy with ΧΑΡΑ/ΕΥΦΡΟΣΥΝΗ. There seem to be more nuances going on, at least in Epicurus' use of the terms.

Quote from DaveT

Does Epicurus’ ancient Greek word have a singular meaning or multiple meanings within the context of mental vs physical?

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

Also...

FWIW Headwords for ἡδονή (hēdonē) "pleasure"

Woodhouse, S. C. (1910), English–Greek Dictionary: A Vocabulary of the Attic Language‎[1], London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Limited.

allurement idem, page 25.

amusement idem, page 28.

caprice idem, page 112.

cheer idem, page 128.

complacency idem, page 151.

dalliance idem, page 193.

delectation idem, page 207.

delight idem, page 208.

ecstasy idem, page 261.

elation idem, page 265.

enchantment idem, page 270.

enjoyment idem, page 275.

entrancement idem, page 278.

exhilaration idem, page 291.

fascination idem, page 308.

gaiety idem, page 351.

gladness idem, page 361.

glee idem, page 361.

gratification idem, page 370.

hilarity idem, page 400.

idiosyncrasy idem, page 413.

intoxication idem, page 454.

jollity idem, page 464.

joy idem, page 464.

light-heartedness idem, page 491.

merriment idem, page 526.

mirth idem, page 532.

pleasure idem, page 620.

rapture idem, page 672.

ravishment idem, page 674.

rejoicing idem, page 689.

satisfaction idem, page 734.

transport idem, page 889.

treat idem, page 892.

zest idem, page 997.

Quote from Cassius

While the voice still needs much improvement

Do you want some of us to provide human voices instead of AI? How many minutes is the segment to read?

Welcome aboard, MarkJW

Quote from MarkJW

I'm grateful for Emily Austin's fantastic book, Living for Pleasure

I, too, am a big fan of Dr. Austin's book. That book is my personal recommendation for the best, most accessible introduction to the philosophy currently available. She's a great person, too. If you liked the book, don't miss our podcast episode conversations with her!

Quote

I'm in Athens right now, heading off to the Dipylon Gate to walk towards Plato's Acedemy, hopefully passing by where the Garden was. Reading some books and excerpts from his writing

Very jealous but happy for you!

If you're interested:

File

Where was the Garden of Epicurus? The Evidence from the Ancient Sources and Archaeology

While we will probably never know the exact location of Epicurus’s Garden in ancient Athens, we can take a number of educated guesses.

Don

April 19, 2023 at 11:10 PM

I looked at that not that long ago and still stand by what I wrote there.

Quote from Cassius

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO KALOSYNI AND JOSHUA!

THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO!

Δίδωσι δ᾽ ἣ γενέθλιον δόσιν τῷ Ῐ̓ησοῖ και Καλοσύνῇ

Offering birthday gifts to Joshua and Kalosyni

(Best I can do quickly, based on a line from Aeschylus' Eumenides. And, yes, Joshua translates the same as "Jesus" in ancient Greek.)

I was under the impression that the gods were "incorruptible" and not "immortal." Are the gods athanatos in some texts? Here's my commentary to Menoikeus:

ἄφθαρτον

LSJ gives the definition of "incorruptible, eternal, immortal, uncorrupted, undecaying" and gives references to Epicurus, Philodemus, and Diogenes of Oenoanda. At its root, the word is α- "not" + φθαρτον "destructible, perishable." LSJ states φθαρτον is the opposite of ἀίδιος "everlasting, eternal" (related to ἀεί "ever, always") which poses an interesting question: Why did Epicurus choose to use ἄφθαρτον instead of ἀίδιος or ἀθάνατος? Φθαρτον is related to θνητός "liable to death, mortal, opposite: ἀθάνατος [athanatos]" (LSJ) Φθαρτον is also connected to the verb φθείρω "destroy, pass away, cease to be, perish." It seems that Epicurus didn't want to evoke that the gods (a god?) were simply immortal or eternal but that he wanted to impress upon us the sense that they would not pass away or cease to be. This is in contrast to everything else composed of atoms and void. Everything else is subject to be φθαρτον; only the gods are ἄφθαρτον! How can this be? Could it be that they are ἄφθαρτον precisely because they are mental concepts? That's one of the reasons I find Sedley's so-called "idealist" nature of the Epicurean gods intriguing.

I have also seen arguments that the stress should not be on the "eternal," as in everlasting in time, but rather the "incorruptible," as in the state of being. A "god" is "incorruptible" or "not able to be corrupted or to decay." They are unaffected by the vicissitudes of fortune, unaffected by anger or gratitude. To me, this is an intriguing perspective and gives a possible reason why Epicurus made the decision to use ἄφθαρτον and not an alternative that evokes the "eternal in time" connotation like ἀθάνατος. From my perspective, this argument is a strong one and deserves some study and thought.

Quote from Patrikios

Is this a correct understanding of how to interpret how Epicurus referred to 'god(s)'?

That's my understanding, but certainly not the universal understanding here in our little virtual Garden.