Posts by Don

Quote from DavidN

universalism

Mea culpa. I apologize for my ignorance. Could you define "universalism" here?

Quote from Bryan

"value for a person does not depend on sentience or existence" or "facts thus might be good or bad even for those who are dead and no longer exist" I feel these statements are too absurd to need a counterargument..

WTF?! "does not depend on sentience or existence."??? So, by that we can talk about the "value for" fictional, non-existent characters in books or mythology?? Absurd is one word I'd use for that position!

Serendipitous discovery this morning:

https://www.npr.org/2024/01/24/1226371734/religious-nones-are-now-the-largest-single-group-in-the-u-s

Quote from Cassius

Quote from Don

'I know this and want this and think this.'"
'τοῦτ' οιδα καὶ τοῦτο βούλομαι καὶ τοῦτ' οἴ

Don is that what you are referring to in English and Greek? Agreed that is very interesting.

Yes

This is of great benefit! Thanks for your work! I especially like:

"this is what I believe to be the work of prudence, to dispel the vain turmoil caused by dreams and signs."

"simply to remove those things which disturb without reason, which cannot be done without having examined and known that the things causing the disturbance are false"

"Always, but only to care for health; for if one is healthy, they will not be troubled by any of those things which now cause them distress. 'For indeed,' you will say, 'I know this and want this and think this.'"
'τοῦτ' οιδα καὶ τοῦτο βούλομαι καὶ τοῦτ' οἴ'

(That last line is almost as good a motto or slogan or aphorism as the Tetrapharmakos in my opinion)

"Only through correctly engaging in the study of nature about all these matters is it possible to grasp the truth. "

τὸν ἐλεύθερον βίον "a free life" ton eleutheron bion - I like that description of the Epicurean path!

And I'm only up to page 19! You've given me something to dig into! Thanks for the work and the inspiration!!

To add to DavidN 's post (not that I'm advocating one direction or another, just providing references):

"Churches" Defined | Internal Revenue Service

www.irs.gov

Religious Nonprofit Organizations and Churches

Understanding differences between the terms “churches” and “religious organizations” is important for religious groups seeking 501(c) (3) tax-exempt status.

www.score.org

So, 501(c)(3) is the broad category of tax-exempt charitable organizations. And it's relativly easy to start your own tax -exempt "church", as John Oliver demonstrated:

It's Surprisingly Easy To Start Your Own Church

If you're hoping to start your own IRS-approved religious organization, look no further than the guidelines below.

www.huffpost.com

John Oliver Exposes Televangelism, Then Forms His Own Tax-Exempt Church

Call 1-800-THIS-IS-LEGAL for a special message from a "megareverend."

www.huffpost.com

Note: I want to add that I understand that Nate and others (and myself in some ways) are not using "religion" in relation to Epicureanism in a satirical or flippant way like the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or John Oliver's "church." I respect the "taking back the word idea" but these links show how broad and ill -defined the word is from a legal and secular perspective.

Quote from Nate

- Anderson: "We should welcome praise from others if it comes unsought, but we should also be engaged in improving ourselves."

Thanks for sharing those!! I like Anderson a lot (for the most part). I'd switch "accept" for "welcome." And I do like "improving ourselves" better than "healing."

I attended tonights Wednesday night VS Study Group and the VS under discussion was 64... with varying translations! It was great. Then I realized we didn't have the source text from the manuscript. So... here we are.

Saint-Andre gives the Greek as:

ἀκολουθεῖν δεῖ τὸν παρὰ τῶν ἄλλων ἔπαινον αὐτόματον, ἡμᾶς δὲ γενέσθαι περὶ τὴν ἡμῶν ἰατρείαν.

Which looks correct to me from the manuscript.

He gives the translation of: The esteem of others is outside our control; we must attend instead to healing ourselves.

Bailey gives: Praise from others must come unasked: we must concern ourselves with the healing of our own lives.

Epicurus Wiki gives: The [praise] by others [ought to follow] automatically while [we] (ought) to concern ourselves with own (own) healing.

I would paraphrase this as: One must accept the spontaneous praise from others; but we are the ones who heal ourselves. Which means to me that we should accept praise or approval from others if it is automatic. We shouldn't trust the flatterer, but if someone spontaneously tells us we did a nice thing, take the compliment! But we need not rely on that. We know ourselves better than anyone else. If we give ourselves praise, then we know we truly deserve it!

Want to see the sausage making process? Let's break this down word by word (relying somewhat on the good ol' Wiktionary)

δεῖ = It is necessary to... One must...

ἀκολουθεῖν = to follow one in a thing, let oneself be led by [+dative or rarely accusative = someone or something] ... LSJ also has metaphorically, follow, be guided by;

So, what's the accusative or dative someone or something?

τὸν παρὰ τῶν ἄλλων ἔπαινον αὐτόματον = (accusative) This has an embedded phrase...

παρὰ τῶν ἄλλων = παρα is governed by the genitive, accusative, and dative and has different meanings with each! τῶν ἄλλων is genitive, so the genitive implies "from" or "because of" LSJ gives: "WITH GEN. prop. denoting motion from the side of, from beside, from" So, παρὰ τῶν ἄλλων would be, it appears, something "from others"

ἔπαινον = acc.sing. of "approval, praise" or "an expression of praise; a speech praising someone."

αὐτόματον = unbidden, spontaneous, "without external cause."

So, ἀκολουθεῖν δεῖ τὸν παρὰ τῶν ἄλλων ἔπαινον αὐτόματον = It is necessary (It behooves one) to follow the spontaneous praise of others; ...

ἡμᾶς δὲ γενέσθαι περὶ τὴν ἡμῶν ἰατρείαν. = but we produce/bring into being the ἰατρείαν for ourselves.

ἰατρείαν = medical treatment; curing, correcting (brings in that whole medical analogy that Epicurus uses in other locations!)

Quote from Nate

We have historical evidence of doctrinal disputes between geographically isolated Gardens, and those disputes seem to be resolved by the Athenian Scholarch,

Do you have the references for that? I'd be curious to follow-up one those!

I've seen bumper stickers like "Kindness is my religion" and that sort of thing, too.

Eikadistes : I think the title sounds cool and I was unaware of the Apostolicon and the other history, but my pop culture mind went straight to Necronomicon when I saw your title the first time

That Wikipedia entry offers a better translation of superstitiō is "religiosity" as opposed to "superstition." Keeping this in mind helps.

And translation of religio is "religious scruple" instead of just "religion."

Those Latin spellings can imply meanings of English words that are not actually present, regardless of the similar spelling.

PS. On further thought, "superstition" could be an acceptable translation of religio since religio is concerned with the outward performance of the correct rituals in hope of a favorable benefit from the gods. It's akin to someone now carrying a rabbits foot for good luck or crossing your fingers or knocking on wood, etc.

Quote from Cassius

The "super" is probably very clear - I wonder what the "stitio" refers to?

It's from superstō + -tiō < super + stō

"To stand upon or over"

Quote from Nate

Where does that leave the word "Superstitio" in relation to "Pietas" and "Religio"?

And, as a further point, why did Lucretius not use "Superstitio"?

This helps...

Glossary of ancient Roman religion - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

superstitio
Superstitio was excessive devotion and enthusiasm in religious observance, in the sense of "doing or believing more than was necessary", or "irregular" religious practice that conflicted with Roman custom. ...Before the Christian era, superstitio was seen as a vice of individuals.

Lucretius' opposition to religio in favor of pietas conveys to me possibly the difference between outward "proper" performance of rituals expected of one versus the inward reason for performing those rites and rituals. Epicurus took part in the rites, festivals, and rituals of his city BUT with the proper inward piety.

Thank you for all you do to keep our little virtual Garden up and running! It is sincerely appreciated.

Quote from sanantoniogarden

I suppose one of the main difficulties initially, is how we can reconcile Epicurus' physics with modern physics?

My take has been to concentrate on what Epicurus's big takeaway was in his physics: We live in a material universe, governed by natural, physical laws with no supernatural or divine intervention. The rest are details. Prescient details for the most part, but I'm not worried by the details. Plus, ancient Greek atoms (ΑΤΟΜΟΙ) are not the atoms of modern physics, the name not withstanding. But Epicurus did get the general idea of small particles coming together to make a whole different than their individual characteristics. I do not, in any way, feel an obligation to adhere to the pre-scientific physics of 2,300 years ago to think of myself as an Epicurean. That said, I do think Epicurus was on the right track at least on a lot of his physics.

I hope that helps.

Welcome aboard, sanantoniogarden !! It's good that you've perused material presented here before. That should give you a good idea of where we're coming from.

I am curious when you mentioned:

Quote from sanantoniogarden

Epicureanism, despite its difficulties...

I would be interested to hear what you see as difficulties. I would bet that some of us have had the same thoughts, and it sounds like it might be a good discussion thread

Quote from Don

Welcome aboard, aragen. Thank you for the introductry post on how you ended up here. I highly recommend Emily Austin's book Living for Pleasure as a wonderful, approachable, conversational, modern introduction to the philosophy.

I look forward to your questions and contributions to the forum.

Excellent summary of the historical context! Thanks for posting.

Welcome aboard, aragen. Thank you for the introductry post on how you ended up here. I highly recommend Emily Austin's book Living for Pleasure as a wonderful, approachable, conversational, modern introduction to the philosophy.

I like forward to your questions and contributions to the forum.