I'm finding it difficult to swipe between Kalosyni 's responses and my first post, so for easier reference, here are the two closer to each other.
- Epicurus advocates strengthening a quiet, calm, anxiety-free mind.
- Not completely correct -- "strengthening" implies you do all sorts of things. But we only see that this is some kind of result that happens to correspond to removing fear of death and the gods (an after affect).
- Equanimity/tranquility/ataraxia is available at all times, even under duress and trying circumstances.
- Not correct - impossible to do and where is this in Epicurean philosophy?
- IF we can cultivate ataraxia, we have a much better chance of making a good choice to remove, move around, or avoid the "obstacle to pleasure" than we would if we get anxious, feel "psychological unrest" or get agitated or fearful.
- Not correct - we cultivate prudence so that we don't choose pleasures with cause much worse pains
- Tranquility / ataraxia are not the "goal of life" but Epicurus stresses over and over the importance of freedom from disturbance in the mind and "pain in the body" (I have a problem with this kind of translation of aponia, but we'll leave that for another time.) (Still not that time btw )
- Not completely correct - "Epicurus stresses over and over" -- this is an exaggeration, perhaps we should count when and where this is stated in the texts (how many times?)
- PLEASURE is the goal, and tranquility is pleasure, freedom from anxiety is pleasure, but it is pleasure that is always available to us which is why Epicurus places such importance on it - NOT exclusionary importance as the ONLY pleasure we should pursue but of significant and paramount importance to give us the possibility of the best pleasurable life possible in addition to all the other pleasures we can experience.
- Correct.
- My metaphor of what is meant by ataraxia / tranquility / calm is the picture of a musk ox, facing into the howling winter wind, legs braces, ice forming on its hair and face, knowing the disturbance will eventually pass ("Pain is short...") and it can then go on and paw the snow for luscious plants to eat. (Note: just a metaphor btw. Not saying musk oxen are Epicureans.)
- Don't agree -- sounds Stoic - if that ox was smart he would find some bushes and other oxes to hunker down with instead of standing out in the wind -- luckily we aren't oxes.
- Don NOTE: See post 11 above for more context on this.
- My reading of katastematic pleasures, including ataraxia, are those that arise from within ourselves and that these are the only pleasures in life that we can be confident of at all times.
- Too vague -- if you are talking about being confident in your bodily health, and enjoying feeling healthy in the body, then I will agree
- The kinetic pleasures arise from our interaction with external stimuli and phenomena.
- What about sitting out in the sunshine and the feeling that comes with enjoying that? (And this strengthens the feeling of "health in the body")
- Metrodorus stresses the importance of both kinds of pleasures, but he also wrote a book entitled "On the Source of Happiness in Ourselves being greater than that which arises from Objects."
- In my opinion what Metrodorus wrote doesn't take into consideration how the environment that you live in (which contains physical objects) affects your physical and mental well being. We are animals which require certain basic conditions for our physical and mental well being.
- Cassius raises the point that the following is a new assertion to him and he is not "aware of textual citations to support it": my reading of katastematic pleasures, including ataraxia, are those that arise from within ourselves and that these are the only pleasures in life that we can be confident of at all times.
- This seems not completely correct -- I am confident that my next meal with bring pleasure -- is that something which arises only in myself?
- Cassius countered with citing Diogenes Laertius quote about the wise man will "cry out and lament" when on the rack.
I countered his quotation with the quote just prior to that with "even if the wise man be put on the rack, he is happy (eudaimonia)."
- I don't agree with this "happy on the rack" -- I personally think this "happiness in all circumstances" doesn't make sense to me.
So, that'll be a little easier to refer to. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with Kalosyni's points at this point, but I do think they move the conversation forward. Thanks!