The body cries out to not be hungry, not be thirsty, not be cold. Anyone who has these things, and who is confident of continuing to have them, can rival the gods for happiness. (Saint-Andre)
Saint-Andre transcription: σαρκὸς φωνὴ τὸ μὴ πεινῆν, τὸ μὴ διψῆν, τὸ μὴ ῥιγοῦν· ταῦτα γὰρ ἔχων τις καὶ ἐλπίζων ἕξειν κἂν <διὶ> ὑπὲρ εὐδαιμονίας μαχέσαιτο.
Bailey transcription:
Note that VS32 starts at the red omicron, to end of line, then starts at the start of the following line.
Saint-Andre transcription: ὁ τοῦ σοφοῦ σεβασμὸς ἀγαθὸν μέγα τῷ σεβομένῳ ἐστί.
Bailey:
Bailey appears to be more faithful to the manuscript.
Ah, ChatGPT... Maybe I'm glass half full, but it could have been worse 
Here are some specific problems I see...
4. Practice Mindfulness: Be present and mindful in your daily life. Savor the sensory experiences of the moment, whether it's enjoying a good meal, a beautiful sunset, or a conversation with a friend. (NOTE: While I agree that Epicurus calls us to "savor the sensory experienced of the moment," the use of the jargony "mindfulness" brings some baggage. Again, I'm not saying I disagree with the sentiment ChatGPT came up with for no. 4, but it could imply advocacy for specific forms of mindfulness meditation, etc.)
5. Seek Intellectual Pleasures: Pursue intellectual pleasures by engaging in lifelong learning, reading, and philosophical exploration. Epicurus believed that the highest form of pleasure is intellectual, so feed your mind with knowledge and meaningful ideas. (NOTE: We're back to Epicurus saying "the highest formm of pleasure is intellectual..." I can certainly see where ChatGPT is getting that from its large language model since that's a predominant position out there on the internet.)
9. Live in Harmony with Nature: Epicurus believed that living in harmony with nature was essential for happiness. This can mean respecting the environment, spending time in nature, and aligning your lifestyle with natural rhythms. (NOTE: Again, I'm not saying I disagree with the overall sentiment; however, as the saying goes, the devil is in the details.)
11. Practice Philanthropy and Altruism: Helping others and contributing to your community can be a source of happiness. Acts of kindness and philanthropy can create a sense of purpose and fulfillment. (NOTE: This one's a little more problematic. While, acts of kindness and philanthropy can bring pleasure, i have real problems with the whole "sense of purpose" direction no. 11 is going.)
So, overall - for a mindless algorithm pulling from a large language model of sources of text - I'd grade this answer to the question a C or eve B- maybe. I don't think it's a Fail or D grade. A lot of the nuance is lost in the answer, and I can see where ChatGPT's algorithm picked up some of this response it pulled together from disparate sources. I could easily see this posted on someone's website or on Wikipedia and passing it off as legitimate. I am VERY curious to see others' reactions to this.
That said, it should serve as inspiration for posting our own answer to that question!
Thanks for posting, Eoghan Gardiner !
I know Cassius linked these elsewhere, but for ease of access:
(cover and front matter)
Well done, Cassius and Onenski !!! And thanks to Dr. Boeri!!
The conversation was very enjoyable to listen to but also serves as a good enticement to read the book. He did indeed confirm that the common interpretation of "live unknown" is a misinterpretation.
Personally, I did like that Dr. Boeri used the word "stable" to describe ataraxia and aponia. 
I still think the emotional circumplex is helpful in these discussions:
Pleasant affect = what Epicurus calls pleasure
Unpleasant= what Epicurus calls pain
Activation & Deactivation equals the level of "excitement"
There's really no 0,0 point .
Jo. raises good points and some interesting ideas.
One important thing to remember is that Epicurus wasn't opposed to education in the broad sense. He often uses words like study or meditate on and the like. The word he uses for what he opposed was παιδεία (paideia), as in:
Fragment 117: μακαρίζω σε, ᾧ Ἀπελλῆ, ὅτι καθαρὸς πάσης παιδείας ἐπὶ φιλοσοφίαν ὥρμησας.
I pronounce you blessed, O Apelles! You rush to the study of wisdom pure of all indoctrination (enculturation).
Fragment 163: παιδείαν δὲ πᾶσαν, μακάριε, φεῦγε τἀκάτιον ἀράμενος.
Flee from all indoctrination (enculturation), O blessed one, and hoist the sail of your own little boat.
(My literal translations)
VS45. The study of what is natural produces not braggarts nor windbags nor those who show off the culture that most people fight about, but those who are fearless and self-reliant and who value their own good qualities rather than the good things that have come to them from external circumstances.
οὐ κομποὺς οὐδὲ φωνῆς ἐργαστικοὺς οὐδὲ τὴν περιμάχητον παρὰ τοῖς πολλοῖς παιδείαν ἐνδεικνυμένους φυσιολογία παρασκευάζει, ἀλλὰ σοβαροὺς καὶ αὐτάρκεις καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀγαθοῖς, οὐκ ἐπὶ τοῖς τῶν πραγμάτων μέγα φρονοῦντες.
(Saint-Andre translation)
Paideia was meant to instill aristocratic virtues in the young citizen men who were trained in this way. An ideal man within the polis would be well-rounded, refined in intellect, morals, and physicality, so training of both the body and mind was important. Both practical, subject-based schooling as well as a focus upon the socialization of individuals within the aristocratic order of the polis were a part of this training.
PS. ἐπὶ φιλοσοφίαν ὥρμησας (epi philosophian ōrmēsas) from Fr.117: I *really* like the connotation of this phrase! Philosophy is obvious, so however you want to translate that. ὥρμησας conveys a sense of rushing headlong toward something. I get the image in my head of a young kid in a foot race, running with everything they have, toward the goal. Keep that in mind when you read rush or, worse, hasten in some translations. So, maybe: I call you blessed, Apelles! You rush headlong with all you have toward the study of wisdom, free and clear of all cultural indoctrination.
Nicely done. The only line I'd amend is:
--Don't teach Epicurean philosophy publically
Don't teach Epicurean philosophy publically (unless invited)
Rather than harp on "I don't like static" here are some alternatives riffing off LSJ:
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, καθίστημι
Restore to balance
Stable
Become quiet or calm
Settled
And so on.
I think this line is good:
Pleasure, that is, consists not in mere lack of pain, but in perceiving in a painless way. When it comes to the specifically mental supreme pleasure, freedom from anxiety, then, its attainment will lie, not in the mere absence of worry, but in perceiving the world with an entirely tranquil and worry-free frame of mind.
As I've mentioned elsewhere, I still intensely dislike the word "static" for καταστήματικος katastematic and even Sedley uses stable at the end of this section:
We need be in no doubt that this godlike pleasure is a ‘static pleasure’, in the technical Epicurean sense of hēdonē katastēmatikē. Epicurus himself, if he enjoyed his voyage of discovery as we must assume he did, will have been enjoying a mental kinetic pleasure, the process of freeing himself from his previously painful fear and incomprehension about what the universe might threaten. Lucretius is silent about that kinetic pleasure of discovery, and sticks instead to a single Epicurean tenet: it is not the kinetic thrill of eliminating pain, but the resultant stable pleasure of peace of mind, that can make our own state fully equal to that of the gods.
I also like this:
Epicurus’ excellent point, that a tranquil life depends on the absence of anxiety around the clock, whether awake or asleep, is one that Lucretius takes to heart.
In the end, this paper seems to me to have a narrow (and somewhat disjointed) focus; but there are some good points.
Finally listened to the episode.
Well done!! ΚΥΔΟΣ kudos to everyone!
Well done, Cassius ! I still need to read the paper, but I like Sedleys general point that "in Epicurean doctrine pleasures are divided into two kinds, the bodily and the mental; and within each of those two domains there are short-term “kinetic” pleasures, and static (or “katastematic”) pleasures,"
I'm not sure, however, whether it should be that way or the other way. The way Epicurus states it is there are kinetic and katastematic pleasures, then gives examples. So, I think Sedley has it backwards. In the end, it might be semantic, but, using your (better) rephrasing, I might suggest:
In Epicurean doctrine pleasures are divided into two kinds, short-term “kinetic” pleasures, which lie primarily in processes of stimulation such as eating or learning, and longer-term (or “katastematic”) pleasures which lie primarily in the stable operation of the organism not involving short-term stimulation, such as regular healthy operation of body or mind. In each category, there are both bodily and mental pleasures. (and so on as you stated...)
Could VS11 possibly have any relevance in this discussion? If it does, it's certainly not explicit. It's set up as contrasting to something, but the question is what it's contrasting to. I've typically thought of it in terms of discussing people's actions, but what if it's about k/k pleasures. Admittedly, I'm probably reaching pretty far....
VS11: For most people, to be quiet is to be numb and to be active is to be frenzied.
Here's my take on VS11 that I've shared before;
Translation: For the majority of people, to be at rest is to be bored stiff; but to be active is to be raving like a rabid dog.
Comment: To me it seems to be saying there needs to be a balance of rest and activity, or that stillness is important and that most people don't recognize this. Plus those who don't understand are just running around to appear important or just simply to do something, they can't be alone with their own thoughts… they're not self-reliant.
Plus, again we have active and rest: κινούμενον kinoumenon and ἡσυχάζον hēsykhazon, respectively. The first word is directly related to "kinetic", the second is a new one but means to be still, keep quiet, be at rest. I find it interesting that the "numb" is ναρκᾷ narka, numbness, deadness, from which we get "narcotic."
I think VS11 is a good catch, Godfrey !
Look at that, I'm up to post 53. The rest will have to wait until tomorrow. 
"Normal speed of mind operation" and "standard state of good health and operation of the senses" seem to me as very good descriptive attempts at the act of living. And this is close to my understanding of katastematic pleasure.
I REALLY like and also agree with the rest of your post, too, TauPhi!
When your mind is not being excited, but is operating at its normal speed and doing its normal things, is that something that can be well conveyed in English using the word "static"?
No. I dislike that translation immensely. A better single word would be stable. Static sounds dead. Stable conveys to me something that is humming along, chugging away, working like it's supposed to. They are only "static" in the sense of being associated with a "state" of being.
their standard state of good health and operation
... Like that.
Healthy operation of body and healthy operation of mind are not *that* hard to designate clearly, and we need to find better ways to do so.
How about just that: "Healthy operation of body and healthy operation of mind."
Due to the fact that I seem to be unable to not have an opinion on this thread and that y'all have added a lot of interesting and in depth content, I'm going to simply work my way through chronologically starting at Cassius 's post 46. So, I apologize if something got superceded in the interim. I'm looking forward to this! Here we go!
***
"Rest" implies sitting around doing nothing.
To me, "rest" implies relaxation and rejuvenation. It implies taking a break to regroup. Saying it implies "Doing nothing" to me smacks of the Protestant maxim of "idle hands are the Devil's plaything."
"kinetic" is going to evoke frenzy in English-speaking minds, "katastematic" is never going to evoke anything but "woo" or being "comatose" at best.
I have no problem not using the jargon, especially if you're thinking of how to evangelize. Kinetic and katastematic are in-house designations. But it behooves us to keep them in mind since the ancients evidently found them to be useful and important ways to define what they meant by pleasure, on several sides of the issue.
why - if on a particular day we should reach 100% pleasure) we should want to live any longer.
That is a really unfortunate way of stating that question. A better way of looking at it is Fragment 490:
He who needs tomorrow least, most gladly greets the coming day.
It's not that someone doesn't *want* to live any longer; it has to do with gratitude for what you have. Being self-sufficient in yourself. Having the realization that "if this is it, I've lived well and taken pleasure in my life." Then, when the new day comes, being grateful that you have more life to experience. Not clinging to life with worry and anxiety about how long you have. Having more life is good, because life is good, but acknowledging the fullness of pleasure with the health of the body and the tranquility of the mind can be satisfying. Many times we run around, frenzied, trying to fill our day with activities. We need to slow down, rest, breathe, take a break, tune in to what our bodies are telling us.
So then, the wise one neither begs nor craves for living nor fears not living: Neither to set oneself against living, nor to imagine that it is evil to not live. 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.
That's like asking why, if we climb to the top of Mount Everest, we should want to continue to live at all. No one but a Stoic or other warped personality would conclude that meeting a goal like that "once" is "good enough for a lifetime."
It's not anything like that. Climbing to the top of Everest is a discrete goal, one activity. As you say, it's meeting a goal..once. Maybe it's a lifetime goal to be done once. Then on to the next thing.
If I ever fully eradicate my fears and anxieties (I'm getting there... Slowly!), if I can really have health of the body and the tranquility of the mind, that kind of perspective will change my outlook on my life as a whole. If I truly learn to savor the moment - to really pluck the pleasure from each breath - to internalize and really feel a deep gratitude for my life but not cling to it, grasp, fret when it's going to end, I will no longer be enjoying it. Experience pleasure now. Experience pleasure tomorrow if it comes. That paradigm shift that comes with studying Epicurean philosophy is a powerful antidote to the Fear of Missing Out FOMO and endless rat race hustle mentality pedalled by modern society (and even similar to what Cicero was advocating)
And, in conclusion on commenting on post 46, I fully agree that Philebus no doubt had an outsized influence on any debate about pleasure in the ancient world. Have I read it yet? No I have not. Am I slightly embarrassed admitting that? Yes, yes I am. On the ever growing reading list... And now I have to read that new Sedley article Kalosyni found! Thanks for that one!!
Thus ends random thoughts on post 46 above. Sorry, I appear to be more verbose than I anticipated!
By Zeus! Y'all have been busy! It's gonna take me awhile to work through the posts and listen to the episode... But I promise I'll have thoughts
I return to this section of Diogenes Laertius (10.136) over and over again when this topic comes up:
(Quote)
[136] He (Epicurus) differs from the Cyrenaics with regard to pleasure (περὶ τῆς ἡδονῆς). They do not include under the term the pleasure which is a state of rest (τὴν καταστηματικὴν - tes katastematiken), but only that which consists in motion (ἐν κινήσει - en kinesei). Epicurus admits both (i.e., katastematiken and en kinesei); also pleasure of mind as well as of body (ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος),
as he (Epicurus) states:
The words of Epicurus in his work On Choice (and Avoidance) are: "Peace of mind (ἀταραξία - ataraxia) and freedom from pain (ἀπονία - aponia) are pleasures which imply a state of rest (καταστηματικαί - katastematikai); joy (χαρὰ khara) and delight (εὐφροσύνη euphrosyne) are seen to consist in motion and activity (κατὰ κίνησιν ἐνεργείᾳ - kata kinesin energeia)."
(End of Quote)
Considering "rest " vs "motion" might be fruitful somehow. I know I'm sneaking in kinetic and katastematic again, but evidently, per Diogenes, Epicurus talked about this distinction in at least four different works. And hammered home that it was a primary difference between his philosophy and the Cyrenaics.
I'd really like to get away from words like basic, normal, non-stimulating, etc. Cassius's bringing up "health" above is a good path, too.
I am not sure exactly what the 'this' refers to there
pleasure coming from outside ourselves and pleasure coming from internal (mental) sources...
... does not equate one to one to kinetic and katastematic.
Maybe "stir" is another word to add to the pot:
Pun intended, I hope
Does anyone not agree that Epicurus is including "all normal non-painful experiences of life" within "pleasure?"
Fully agree!! The experience of life itself, when running smoothly "in the background," is pleasure, too.
That said, words like "normal" to refer to this state still rub me the wrong way, as if "exciting" pleasure is "abnormal."
I would say there is no "feeling" labelled "zero" nor is this likely to be a perfectly-matched "zero" sum of pleasures and pains. The latter might be possible, but still that would not be a third alternative beyond pleasure and pain.
This is the position of psychological research. There is no zero state. If you're zero, you're dead.
