Posts by Bryan

I mentioned the difficulty with the translation of Oxyrhynchus 215. I wanted to show a bit about what I was talking about: Early on, we have the word Chapiésteros, Χαπιέστε[ρο]ς. This is not a word I have been able to find anything about. This may be the only preserved instance of the word, a Hapax legomenon. This, of course, makes figuring out the meaning difficult.

^{[col. 1, line 1-11]} ...nor whenever, by god, it is spoken again like this by the common people "I fear all the gods whom I revere and to them I wish to sacrifice all things and to dedicate to them." ^{[line 11-16]} Indeed, such a person possibly at times is Chapiésteros than other laymen -- but still, not in this way at all does the firmness of piety exist.

^{[col. 1, line 11-16]} Χαπιέστε[ρο]ς μὲν γὰρ ἴσως ποτὲ [ὁ τ]οιοῦτος ἄλλων ἰδιω[τῶ]ν ἐστιν, ὅμως δὲ οὐ[δὲ] ταύτῃ πω τὸ βέβαιον [εὐ]σεβείας ὑπάρχει.

¹⁰[τ]αθύειν καὶ τούτοις
[ἀν]ατιθέναι”. χαπιέστε-
[ρο]ς μὲν γὰρ ἴσως ποτὲ
[ὁ τ]οιοῦτος ἄλλων ἰδιω-
[τῶ]ν ἐστιν,

Quote from Cassius

Velleius: For with what eyes of the mind was your Plato able to see that workhouse of such stupendous toil, in which he makes the world to be modeled and built by God?

The "eyes of the mind" seems to correspond to criterion #4: "the image-based focus of the mind."

D.L. 10.31: Therefore, in The Canon, Epicurus affirms that the criteria of truth are [1] the sensations and [2] the preconceptions and [3] the feelings, and the Epicureans (also affirm) [4] the image-based focus of the mind.

I'll throw the full quote in here as well:

D.L. 10.31: Therefore, in The Canon, Epicurus affirms that the criteria of truth are [1] the sensations and [2] the preconceptions and [3] the feelings, and the Epicureans (also affirm) [4] the image-based focus of the mind.

Ἐν τοίνυν τῷ Κανόνι, λέγων ἐστὶν ὁ Ἐπίκουρος κριτήρια τῆς ἀληθείας εἶναι [1] τὰς αἰσθήσεις καὶ [2] προλήψεις καὶ [3] τὰ πάθη, οἱ δ᾽ Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ [4] τὰς φανταστικὰς ἐπιβολὰς τῆς διανοίας.

Great conversation all around! I may be misunderstanding your point, waterholic -- but per Epicurus the atoms are colorless and perception of color is relative.

Scholion on Epicurus, Letter to Hēródotos, D.L. 10.44: He says, moreover, that there is no quality at all for the atoms except for shape (τὸ σχῆμα), dimension (τὸ μέγεθος), and weight (τὸ βάρος) – that color varies with the position of the atoms, he states in his Twelve Elementary Principles.

Plutarch, Against Kōlṓtēs, 1110B: Epicurus himself in the second book of his Reply to Theóphrastos, says that "colors are not intrinsic to bodies – but a result of certain arrangements and positions relative to the eye."

Yes, I agree. Although we will not be experiencing any pain after we are dead, and this is good news, this is not the focus -- instead, the "good news" of Epicurus is pointing out how much of life is actually already and easily pain-free -- which helps us be grateful for what we have and make the most of our lives.

Wow, that is very cool TauPhi! That works well! I have never seen a version like this before that selects some of the text. Thank you for sharing.

I wanted to throw these in here as well, from D.L. 10.118. I feel as though there is room for a more "positive" interpretation of agapeton.

Usener Text: Συνουσίη ὤνησε μὲν οὐδέποτε – ἀγαπητὸν δ' εἰ μὴ ἔβλαψε.

"Intimacy never benefited – but one must be content if it has not harmed."

Henderson Text: Συνουσίαν δέ φασιν ὀνῆσαι μὲν οὐδέποτε – ἀγαπητὸν δὲ εἰ μὴ καὶ ἔβλαψε.

"They say that intimacy never benefited – but one must be content if it has not also harmed."

Plato seems to say (in his poetic way) that the wavelength of blue exists inherently outside of the objects that create the wavelength you see as blue. The problem from a physical perspective is that 2 + 2 = 4 only exists when there are four things to be added (even if only in our physical minds) — there is nothing transcendent about the mathematical equation itself that makes it exist on its own — just like blue wavelengths can be described mathematically but there must be a specific physical basis for wavelengths to actually exist at any point.

One of the tricks of "modern thought/education" is to make the student think they are coming up with the ideas themselves individually (and therefore hold those ideas more deeply) when in reality they really end up only believing and repeating what they have been told.

I believe that having new thoughts is very rare -- people are considered smart when they can repeat what they hear -- and most people have to struggle for years to even be able to repeat what they hear!

Widely accepted, promoted, and permitted modern ideas are mostly just re-packaged judeo-christianty -- everybody is the same, non-physical forces exist, the universe has a beginning, etc, etc... Given this, I like admit to myself that I am only a follower. But I am proud that I choose to follow someone who is an honest leader and not someone cynically manipulating the thought of the public in the same old and absurd ways.

My view is not that Diogenes Laertius is misleading but, as Don and Kalosyni have stated recently, that eudaimonia is not "happiness" but instead "(an enduring sense of) mental well-being."

"happy on the rack" is hard to accept as a simple premise. Perhaps Raimondi had this basic idea in mind.

But "having an enduring sense of mental well-being while in great pain" is possible and realistic -- of course Epicurus himself provided an example of this at the end of his life. I also saw it in my grandfather.

Very interesting letter, thank you for the reading Cassius!

According to the Cambridge edition of Diogenes Laertius, the "nor" or "not" in translations such as "[Nor will] he groan and howl when he is put to the torture" comes from a corruptela (corruption) in the text, which they give in daggers:

μόνον τε χάριν ἔξειν τὸν σοφόν, καὶ ἐπὶ φίλοις καὶ παροῦσι καὶ ἀποῦσιν ὁμοίως διά τε †οδουχ† ὅτε μέντοι στρεβλοῦται, ἔνθα καὶ μύζει καὶ οἰώζει.

The manuscripts all do different weird things at that point, so most of the writers of the surviving manuscripts also scratched their heads here and made their best guess. I think it can be ignored.

Quote from Godfrey

Aristotle conceived of eudaimonia as requiring activity.

Yes Aristotle digs a deep hole for himself when he insists that "Pleasure does not occur except in action!" Eudḗmeian Ethics, 8.1249a: οὐ γίνεται δὲ ἡδονὴ μὴ ἐν πράξει). I cannot imagine reality (or Epicurus) agreeing with Aristotle on this point!

Quote from Godfrey

Perhaps eudaimonia requires action, but blessedness doesn't?

It seems that being alive requires having sensations of actions as well as sensations of condition.

Quote from Kalosyni

It seems that eudaimonia isn't just a fleeting emotion of giddiness that arises when you get something that you want, but instead it is an expansive sense of fulfillment and completeness.

Yes, you must be correct. I think "well-being" has most of the same sense -- it is our deeply internal and long-enduring sense of well-being. Of course, we can easily see how well-being is closely connected with the pleasure of being alive.

Quote from TauPhi

Here you can find the transcription, at the very least:

Epicurus-Deperditorum librorum reliquiae

Wow! This will be very helpful -- thank you so much! I have been using a "PDF to text" version of Usener and correcting it back to match the book. This is the smooth transcription I have been looking for! I am happy to have it now at the beginning of the project, it would be unfortunate to find it towards the end!

Quote from TauPhi

there together with transcription, photos of the fragments, sketches and engravings.

Yes that is a great resource for the primary texts -- for P.Herc. 163 I am just looking around for a translation before I start hazarding through and trying to make one (they are not part of Eriks work).

For Usener's "Vol. Herc. 2, 10.201 fr. 44." however -- I dont know what the P.Herc. number is or have any access the primary text beyond what Usener gives.

Quote from Don

a start...

Thank you Don, that book does have the same quotes. One issue, however, is that, given it is also an old German book, it is giving the same old version listing of the P.Herc that Usener provides. So far, I have not able to find the corresponding Digital Corpus of Literary Papyri number for the quote.

Quote from TauPhi

Good stuff starts on page 37.

Another win from Brigham Young! Thank you TauPhi. Erik Anderson does not provide translations for a lot of the Philodemus quotes. This paper covers P. Herc. 1570, which is Philodemus, On Wealth, Book number unknown -- and I am saving it for when we get there! But in the U40's Usener is pulling from Philodemus, On Wealth, Book 1, which corresponds to P.Herc. 163.

This was another good one -- thank you!

So many good points!

"This view, that we are a soul trapped in the body, is at the heart of so much of this wrong thinking that you see in the ancient world" Well summed-up Joshua!

Looking at U41, Usener says the author is uncertain and gives the citation "Vol. Herc. 2, 10.201 fr. 44" and the text "…καὶ ἄλ]ληι κἀν [τῶι Περὶ Ὁ]σιότηιτ[ος, κἀν τῶι] δωδεκάτωι καὶ] τρεισκα[ιδεκάτωι] Περὶ Φύσε[ως, κἀν τῶι] πρώτω[ι τῶν περὶ] Τιμοκράτους."

I am unable to find the P.Herc. for this quote. Any ideas about finding a source for the text would be much appreciated.

Also, do we have any translations of Philodemus On Wealth?

In the context of Philista, we have "ἐκ μειρακίου" ("lad, stripling") but I think that could go either way. We also have:

P.Herc. 1027 col. 15

...ὃν ὁρῶμεν εὑρηκέ-
[ναι περὶ τ]ῶν [κ]υρι̣ωτά-
των δι[αλ]όγισμα γνήσ[ι-]
ον π̣αρ̣' αὐτῆι...

Which is something like: ".…[whom] we recognize to have identified an authentic deliberation on key subjects about her..."

Also at the end we have "ΚΑΡΝΕΙΣΚΟΥ ΦΙΛΙΣΤΑ Β." So I think we have a woman "Philista" that Carneiscus is writing about.

Carneiscus address a certain "Zōpyrus" and writes about how good a person Philista was. He also touches on the topic of depression after the death of a friend and critiques Praxiphanes.