New Graphics: Are You On Team Epicurus? | Comparison Chart: Epicurus vs. Other Philosophies | Chart Of Key Epicurean Quotations | Accelerating Study Of Canonics Through Philodemus' "On Methods Of Inference" | Note to all users: If you have a problem posting in any forum, please message Cassius
In my research today, I just found this first chapter on the Letter to Menoeceus, from a new book just published February 2026, by Solmeng-Jonas Hirschi. (Written as a scholarly/academic examination).
It looks like it will have special interest for those who are studying ancient Greek language. Bryan Don Eikadistes
This gives you 40 seconds of the opening of the Letter to Menoeceus:
It certainly illustrates something but i am not sure exactly what!
It shows how the gods have lots to see and do in their blessed and immortal realm. 
...and this one:
I just found this video, and I think it illustrates the Epicurean philosophical idea that the gods are blessed and immortal. PD01 "The blessed and immortal nature knows no trouble itself, nor causes trouble to any other, so that it is never constrained by anger or favor. For all such things exist only in the weak." (See also Letter to Menoeceus, section 123)
Happy Belated Birthday Pacatus 
Happy Birthday! Patrikios
Happy Twentieth Everyone!
I have not fully read the article above, but wanted to comment regarding any idea that Epicurean philosophy would be a better option for an individual interested in Christianity -- I think that anyone who is moving toward Christianity hasn't fully dealt with certain existential questions, and that they have certain psychological desires that they want to see fulfilled. The foremost desire would be for "immortality" since within Christian belief the soul does not die. Asking anyone with that desire to consider Epicureanism would not go over well. A given person in this situation won't accept something that they aren't wanting or ready to hear.
Unfortunately modernity and the larger system what we now exist within, directly or indirectly reinforces the idea of an immortal soul. Maybe the "desire for immortality" is a chicken-and-egg thing, that feeds back into itself - present in religion and present in masses and the mythos of civilization itself.
Welcome to the forum Aeneadum
The greatest motivation for quiting addictions is realizing that the pain outweighs the pleasure. Also, the strong desire to feel healthy again, and the strong desire to do what is necessary to maintain long-term health and put effort into that which enables one to enjoy a long life of health.
There is a thread (maybe more than one) regarding 12-step and Epicureanism. I'll see if I can track it down and post the link when I find it.
And the best way to do that is through regular teamwork with people who already agree
Maybe we need an Epicurean "Death Cafe"?
Except an "Epicurean death discussion" would end up being different than the objectives of a Death Cafe, because we would be exploring why "death is nothing to us".
According to the Death Cafe website, theirs is very open-ended:
A Death Cafe is a group directed discussion of death with no agenda, objectives or themes. It is a discussion group rather than a grief support or counselling session.
And the best way to do that is through regular teamwork with people who already agree
Maybe we need an Epicurean "Death Cafe"?
Therefore since biologically the brain is constantly trying to predict what will happen next (for my continued existence), it has a problem seeing the world after death. He speculates that this is why an afterlife of some type is an element of almost every religious beliefs system.
And the internal experience of being alive is as if we "feel" immortal (and yet we are not).
Also, it is much more appealing to think that there is something good coming (such as heaven) rather than nothingness.
But just because we "feel" immortal doesn't actually make us immortal. And just because we can imagine a heavenly place after death, doesn't make it so.
I think that the Epicurean needs to spend time contemplating the truth of the cessation of the senses and the mind. And, also needs to focus intently on living life to the fullest by making good and joyful choices - and in a way "make heaven on earth".
We can see the Epicurean understanding of the gods in Principal Doctrine 01, the Letter to Menoeceus, and in Lucretius. And perhaps Epicurus was influenced by Xenophanes ideas (which alos came down through Plato/Aristotle, but Epicurus forms different conclusions). I'm thinking that buy studying this we can come to a greater understanding of PD01. Do we already have threads on this elsewhere? Bryan ?
The following is a quote from Stanford.edu website:
...we may infer from the concluding call to pay due honor to the gods in Xenophanes’ B1 that an attribution of scandalous conduct would be incompatible with the goodness or perfection any divine being must be assumed to possess (cf. Aristotle Meta. 1072b; Plato, Rep. 379b.)
In the well-known fragments B14–16, Xenophanes comments on the general tendency of human beings to conceive of divine beings in human form:
But mortals suppose that gods are born,
wear their own clothers and have a voice and body. (B14)
Ethiopians say that their gods are snub-nosed and black;
Thracians that theirs are are blue-eyed and red-haired. (B16)B15 adds, probably in a satirical vein, that if horses and oxen had hands and could draw pictures, their gods would look remarkably like horses and oxen.
Source:
Welcome to the forum LAMAR__44 ...here are my thoughts to give some correction and guidance:
pleasure is the sole good, and pain is the sole evil, everything else that we should pursue has the characteristic of being instrumental towards pleasure, and everything we avoid has the characteristic of being instrumental towards pain. This helps significantly in judging what is worthy of pursuit and what isn’t.
I think that your wording here makes for an incorrect understanding and application -- the meaning of the word "sole" = only. This sets you up for a big problem, because sometimes we do what is needed for good health and for long-term happiness. If you think with the word "sole" the error could be that your pleasure has to be sensory oriented or somehow a big pleasure. And it is important to understand that anything that we do that doesn't contain painful sensations is also labeled "a pleasure". We also see in the letter to Menoeceus: "And since pleasure is the first good and natural to us, for this very reason we do not choose every pleasure, but sometimes we pass over many pleasures, when greater discomfort accrues to us as the result of them: and similarly we think many pains better than pleasures, since a greater pleasure comes to us when we have endured pains for a long time. Every pleasure then because of its natural kinship to us is good, yet not every pleasure is to be chosen: even as every pain also is an evil, yet not all are always of a nature to be avoided."
it’s hard for me to think of this with relationships. I think it makes sense to evaluate before starting a friendship or romantic relationship whether there will be net pleasure or pain, but doing this inside of relationships seems to make them feel shallow and transactional, at least for me.
Your error here is in thinking too abstractly (net pleasure vs net pain). I think most people wouldn't tolerate a friend who seems to criticize all the time or who is impatient or unkind - we all know how to instinctively avoid these people. Even if the person is a family member (sibling, etc) then we make sure to keep our distance (for self-protection). So as soon as we sense that a potential friend has those characteristics, we should have no qualms in steering clear of making friends with a person like this.
I must say that there is no intrinsic value in my relationships with my loved ones, they only have value in so that they’re instrumental to my pleasure, but in doing this, I lower my experience of pleasure within these relationships. But that would result in less net pleasure then if I decided to disbelieve in hedonism, so to live according to hedonism, I need to disbelieve in hedonism.
First, regarding your cognition of "pleasure" in relationships -- if you think too abstractly then perhaps that is why you may be for some reason not feeling enjoyment. Joy is a feeling, and it has concrete and specific causes. All relationships are about about a type of "inter-dependence"...meaning that we "inter-are" and we experience things based on what all the people in the relationship do. Pleasure not only comes from what my loved ones do, but pleasure also comes when I give pleasure to my loved ones.
You don't choose your family, but you choose your friends -- so potentially your friends will be bringing more love and acceptance into your connection and interactions (for example, since in friendships there won't be any conscious or unconscious sibling rivalry that could occur in family relationships).
Regarding your idea of "no intrinsic value except through being instrumental for pleasure" -- there is an error of thinking here also -- because you are again stuck in a concept and have forgotten your heart. The sense of our heart contains the emotions and feelings together with breath of the body and the feelings of aliveness. All of this is the reason why it says in the Principal Doctrines: PD27. "Of all the things which wisdom acquires to produce the blessedness of the complete life, far the greatest is the possession of friendship."
Here is an interesting Q & A, but looks like the main article is behind a paywall.
Tell us a bit about your article.
My article explores Frances Wright’s defense of Epicurus in her A Few Days in Athens (1822). Epicurus was an ancient Athenian philosopher and a materialist, who argued for the senses and pleasure as the best gauges of virtue. Controversially, he also welcomed women as well as enslaved people to his school. Through her work on Epicurus, Frances Wright developed her own understanding of the relationship between pleasure and virtue, and this served as the basis for her feminist philosophy.
Despite its popularly in the nineteenth century, A Few Days in Athens has been hard to place in feminist philosophy and history. It’s generically uncertain; in places, it reads like a philosophical dialogue, but it also borrows tropes from the novel. In addition, pleasure remains difficult to discuss within feminism because of its association with sex and the body. My article grapples with Wright’s attempt to make pleasure central to living a virtuous life.
You can read the full Q & A here:
This very short video may be relevant:
Here's a fun and short travel video in Greece (and they have done other places in the world too).
Eikadistes Thank you for your work on the Philodemus text! I see over at your link (the Twentiers website), there is this symbol used in the text:
[...]
...which is used when parts of the text are missing. Does the source text give any indication of how many words or lines are missing at each of these points?
And in general regarding Philodemus texts, are there differences of whether this is addressed or not, to be found depending on the text or the source?
This very good article talks about "The 'Busy' Trap", written back in 2012, and perhaps relevant for some people still today. And this article helps shed some light on VS14, bringing a modern twist.
Happiness causes, which (according to the above article) are unique to each person, meaning that the specifics and the quantities are variable and different for each person - there is no "one-size-fits-all" prescription for happiness. And this also shines the light on how some people can be happy even when they do not have certain externals, because they have figured out how to compensate from other areas of their lives (either other externals or through internals).
External Causes of Happiness:
Having sufficient necessities, such as enough food to eat, adequate housing, and safety, etc.
Having good health
Having good friendships
Having good family and spousal relationships
Enjoyment of common pleasures: tasty foods, enjoyable scenery or living environments, enjoyable music and art, etc.
Enjoyment of intellectual pursuits or hobbies
Internal Causes of Happiness:
Good attitudes
Good feelings
Good thoughts
Good moods
*****
I think that Epicurean philosophy would say that happiness comes from a combination of both External and Internal causes.
