Posts by Kalosyni

Here are some definitions from Wikipedia:

Quote

Scientism is the view that science and the scientific method are the best or only way to render truth about the world and reality.^[1][2]

While the term was defined originally to mean "methods and attitudes typical of or attributed to natural scientists", some scholars, as well as political and religious leaders, have also adopted it as a pejorative term with the meaning "an exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science applied to all areas of investigation (as in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities)".

Source

Quote

Science is a strict systematic discipline that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable hypotheses and predictions about the world.[1][2] Modern science is typically divided into three major branches:[3] the natural sciences (e.g., physics, chemistry, and biology), which study the physical world; the social sciences (e.g., economics, psychology, and sociology), which study individuals and societies;[4][5] and the formal sciences (e.g., logic, mathematics, and theoretical computer science), which study formal systems, governed by axioms and rules.[6][7] There is disagreement whether the formal sciences are scientific disciplines,[8][9][10] as they do not rely on empirical evidence.[11][9] Applied sciences are disciplines that use scientific knowledge for practical purposes, such as in engineering and medicine.

Source

Quote

The scientific method is an empirical method for acquiring knowledge that has characterized the development of science since at least the 17th century. The scientific method involves careful observation coupled with rigorous scepticism, because cognitive assumptions can distort the interpretation of the observation. Scientific inquiry includes creating a hypothesis through inductive reasoning, testing it through experiments and statistical analysis, and adjusting or discarding the hypothesis based on the results.[1][2][3]

Although procedures vary from one field of inquiry to another, the underlying process is often similar. The process in the scientific method involves making conjectures (hypothetical explanations), deriving predictions from the hypotheses as logical consequences, and then carrying out experiments or empirical observations based on those predictions.[4] A hypothesis is a conjecture based on knowledge obtained while seeking answers to the question. The hypothesis might be very specific or it might be broad. Scientists then test hypotheses by conducting experiments or studies. A scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable, implying that it is possible to identify a possible outcome of an experiment or observation that conflicts with predictions deduced from the hypothesis; otherwise, the hypothesis cannot be meaningfully tested.[5]

While the scientific method is often presented as a fixed sequence of steps, it represents rather a set of general principles. Not all steps take place in every scientific inquiry (nor to the same degree), and they are not always in the same order.

Source

Quote

Pseudoscience consists of statements, beliefs, or practices that claim to be both scientific and factual but are incompatible with the scientific method.[Note 1] Pseudoscience is often characterized by contradictory, exaggerated or unfalsifiable claims; reliance on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts; absence of systematic practices when developing hypotheses; and continued adherence long after the pseudoscientific hypotheses have been experimentally discredited.

Source

Quote

Junk science is spurious or fraudulent scientific data, research, or analysis. The concept is often invoked in political and legal contexts where facts and scientific results have a great amount of weight in making a determination. It usually conveys a pejorative connotation that the research has been untowardly driven by political, ideological, financial, or otherwise unscientific motives.

Source

I think this is a much needed discussion, because those who consider themselves materialists, and study Epicurus, will likely have questions as to science, scientism, vs Epicurean physics.

Quote from Little Rocker

I just need to look at the text again to see if he's ever like, 'but don't generate implausible explanations just to muddy the water,' or 'but you should feel free to narrow it down to the more probable.' Or, 'sure, there's only one actual best explanation, but we would all do well to recognize our intellectual limitations when it comes to discovering it.'

Here is an excerpt from Letter to Herodotus, which gives us an overview of what Epicurus recommended to his students:

Quote

"For those who are unable to study carefully all my physical writings or to go into the longer treatises at all, I have myself prepared an epitome⁵⁶ of the whole system, Herodotus, to preserve in the memory enough of the principal doctrines,⁵⁷ to the end that on every occasion they may be able to aid themselves on the most important points, so far as they take up the study of Physics. Those who have made some advance in the survey of the entire system ought to fix in their minds under the principal headings an elementary outline of the whole treatment of the subject. For a comprehensive view is often required, the details but seldom.

[36] "To the former, then--the main heads--we must continually return, and must memorize them so far as to get a valid conception of the facts, as well as the means of discovering all the details exactly when once the general outlines are rightly understood and remembered ; since it is the privilege of the mature student to make a ready use of his conceptions by referring every one of them to elementary facts and simple terms. For it is impossible to gather up the results of continuous diligent study of the entirety of things, unless we can embrace in short formulas and hold in mind all that might have been accurately expressed even to the minutest detail.

[37] "Hence, since such a course is of service to all who take up natural science, I, who devote to the subject my continuous energy and reap the calm enjoyment of a life like this, have prepared for you just such an epitome and manual of the doctrines as a whole.

"In the first place, Herodotus, you must understand what it is that words denote, in order that by reference to this we may be in a position to test opinions, inquiries, or problems, so that our proofs may not run on untested ad infinitum, nor the terms we use be empty of meaning. [38] For the primary signification of every term employed must be clearly seen, and ought to need no proving⁵⁸; this being necessary, if we are to have something to which the point at issue or the problem or the opinion before us can be referred.

"Next, we must by all means stick to our sensations, that is, simply to the present impressions whether of the mind or of any criterion whatever, and similarly to our actual feelings, in order that we may have the means of determining that which needs confirmation and that which is obscure.

"When this is clearly understood, it is time to consider generally things which are obscure. To begin with, nothing comes into being out of what is non-existent.⁵⁹ For in that case anything would have arisen out of anything, standing as it would in no need of its proper germs.⁶⁰ [39] And if that which disappears had been destroyed and become non-existent, everything would have perished, that into which the things were dissolved being non-existent. Moreover, the sum total of things was always such as it is now, and such it will ever remain. For there is nothing into which it can change. For outside the sum of things there is nothing which could enter into it and bring about the change.

"Further [this he says also in the Larger Epitome near the beginning and in his First Book "On Nature"],...

Display More

Don your outline looks great! Looking forward to taking in the full experience of your amazing project.

There is Epicurus and his canonics...and wondering if there is a name or label for the part which says to be sure you are bringing up multiple hypothoses and do not settle too quickly onto one explanation for causes of phenomenon? ( Cassius ?)

Seems like it might be good to also compare Epicurus to science. And also to be clear about pseudoscience.

So we can study the extant texts of Epicurus, but we live now in modern times, so we have a much more evolved understanding of the world.

Being clear what is good science, what is scientism, and what is pseudoscience ...being clear on these would be good for the modern Epicurean ...so that we can be certain about things and not ambivalent/skeptical about the world that we now live in.

Just for fun here is a wikipedia entry on "Scientism":

Scientism - Wikipedia

"Nor does it make you more thirsty with every drink; it slakes the thirst by a natural cure, – a cure that demands no fee."

I think this is dealing with the idea of excess, as with intoxication by alcohol (and the feeling of wanting yet another drink) and the fee that is paid comes the next morning with a bad hang-over.

Quote

In contrast to the Greek ideal, the Romans had drinking habits that encouraged excessive consumption of wine, such as:

• They began drinking before meals on empty stomachs.
• They consumed excessive quantities of wine and food, and then vomited so that they had room for more.
• They played drinking games, including one where somebody would drink as many cups of wine as a throw of a dice indicated.

Clearly, in the first and second centuries BC, it was not uncommon to encounter intoxication among Greeks and Romans. However, initially it was not a universal vice and famous people like Cato the Elder and Julius Caesar only took wine in moderation. As moral values associated with drinking continued to decay, the habit of excessive drinking became more widespread.

Source

Quote from Cassius

As I see it, heart of the doctrine is that "full cannot be made more full no matter how long the time frame." If that is correct, then the analogy of it being impossible to make a full vessel being made "more full" over time applies no matter what is placed inside it.

Therefore:

Pleasure = a feeling of satisfaction and a state of being satisfied.

And now I recall what Seneca wrote regarding the Epicurean philosophy:

Quote

"This garden," he [the caretaker of the Garden] says, "does not whet your appetite; it quenches it. Nor does it make you more thirsty with every drink; it slakes the thirst by a natural cure, – a cure that demands no fee.

....The belly will not listen to advice; it makes demands, it importunes. And yet it is not a troublesome creditor; you can send it away at small cost, provided only that you give it what you owe, not merely all you are able to give.

Source

We aren't sure how the moon formed and here are three current hypotheses:

Wishing Everyone a Happy Twentieth!

(And today is the 55th anniversary of the Apollo 11 landing!)

Tonight we memorialize Epicurus and Metrodorus as always, and we give special attention to Titus Pomponius Atticus, friend of Cicero, and Siro of Naples, teacher of Philodemus, as per our Memorial Calendar.

Here is the section on the moon, from Letter to Pythocles:

94] The wanings of the moon and its subsequent waxings might be due to the revolution of its own body, or equally well to successive conformations of the atmosphere, or again to the interposition of other bodies; they may be accounted for in all the ways in which phenomena on earth invite us to such explanations of these phases; provided only one does not become enamoured of the method of the single cause and groundlessly put the others out of court, without having considered what it is possible for a man to observe and what is not, and desiring therefore to observe what is impossible. Next the moon may have her light from herself or from the sun.

[95] For on earth too we see many things shining with their own, and many with reflected light. Nor is any celestial phenomenon against these explanations, if one always remembers the method of manifold causes and investigates hypotheses and explanations consistent with them, and does not look to inconsistent notions and emphasize them without cause and so fall back in different ways on different occasions on the method of the single cause. The impression of a face in the moon may be due to the variation of its parts or to interposition or to any one of many causes which might be observed, all in harmony with phenomena.

[96] For in the case of all celestial phenomena this process of investigation must never be abandoned - for if one is in opposition to clear-seen facts, he can never have his part in true peace of mind.

Charles Happy Birthday!

Quote from Don

My little project will be to list those out when I get a chance to see how Άπειρος gets used and translated... Since Epicurus appears to call us to study these ideas.

I find it interesting that αρχή is a limit, the beginnings or foundations, and άπειρος is something without limits.

Could this be connected with the idea of determining what is possible and what is not possible?

Also, what is in the imagination of the mind (infinity) vs. what has physical potential (that which has limits and boundaries) ?

Also, fear and anxiety arises when a person (especially a child) does not understand the nature of the physical world and starts imagining all sorts of bad things.

Just thinking about practical applications.

This article seems relevant...from the introduction:

Quote

• Thoughts of the infinite have mesmerized and confounded human beings through the millennia.
• The concept of infinity remains a controversial and paradoxical topic today, galvanizing international conferences and heated scholarly disputes.
• In his book Probable Impossibilities: Musings on Beginnings and Endings, Alan Lightman explores the history of the concept of infinity and how it’s been contemplated by thinkers across various disciplines.

Why the paradoxes of infinity still puzzle us today

In his "Probable Impossibilities", Alan Lightman explores the history of infinity and how it's been contemplated by various thinkers.

bigthink.com

Excerpt from the article:

Quote

For astronomers, the question is whether outer space goes on and on and on and on ad infinitum. And if it does, as cosmologists now believe, unsettling consequences abound. For one, there should be an infinite number of copies of each of us somewhere out there in the cosmos. Because even a situation of minuscule probability—like the creation of a particular individual’s exact arrangement of atoms—when multiplied by an infinite number of trials, repeats itself an infinite number of times. Infinity multiplied by any number (except 0) equals infinity.

Just for fun, I will add clickable links to info on the modern scientific understanding of the phenomenon listed in the Letter to Pythocles.

Infinite worlds and how they come into being (?)

How the sun, moon, and stars came into being - three hypothesis on how the moon was formed

The size of the sun, moon, and other stars

The risings and settings of the sun, moon, and other heavenly bodies

The tropics of sun and moon [The farthest points from the equator where the Sun can appear directly overhead are referred to as the tropics?]

The wanings of the moon and its subsequent waxings, and the source of the moon's light

The impression of a face in the moon [why the same side faces Earth]

The eclipse of sun and moon

The regularity of the periods of the heavenly bodies

The successive changes in the length of nights and days [and seasons]

Signs of the weather - clouds, rain, thunder, lightening and thunderbolts, wind, cyclones, [tornado] / waterspouts, hail, snow, dew, ice, rainbows, a halo around the moon

Earthquakes

Comets

Stationary stars

Wandering stars [planets]

Falling stars

Signs of the weather given by certain animals

I looked up "curule" and found a wikipedia entry on it!

Here is the first paragraph:

Quote

In the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, the curule chair (sella curulis, supposedly from currus, "chariot") was the seat upon which magistrates holding imperium were entitled to sit. This includes dictators, magistri equitum, consuls, praetors, curule aediles, and the promagistrates, temporary or de facto holders of such offices.

Here is a work-in-progress outline for a course on the Ethics of Epicurus. (I will be adding in more details, and still needing to incorporate the above tips by Don, and others, as well as add in from Cassius' wiki list: Epicurean Ethics).

The Ethics of Epicurus 7 Week Course

Week 1: Introduction to Epicurean Philosophy Basics

Topics:

• Epicurus' life and historical context
• Brief overview of basic concepts: a materialist universe of "atoms and void" and Epicurean canonics (senses, feelings, and anticipations)
• no supernatural gods and everything has natural causes (non-supernature nature of the universe)
• the nature of the soul, and death is the end of both the body and soul.

Readings:

• "Epicurus and His Philosophy" by Norman DeWitt – Chapter 2: "Samos and Athens"
• "Philosophy for the Millions" essay by Norman DeWitt

Week 2: The Nature of Pleasure and Pain

Topics:

• The definition of pleasure and pain based on sensation, and Nature's goal.
• Pleasure as the telos (highest good).
• The absence of pain as pleasure. Reframing the cognition of pleasure - there is no neutral state, so if you are not feeling pain then that is understood as feeling pleasure.
• The limits of pleasure and pain, and dealing with physical pain.
• The relationship of happiness to pleasure.
• Types of Desires: natural and necessary desires, natural but unnecessary desires, and vain desires.
• Choice and Avoidance - circumstance and outcome determines choiceworthiness.
• Continuous pleasure - the role of making and recalling happy memories.

Readings:

• Letter to Menoeceus
• https://newepicurean.com/the-true-natur…urean-pleasure/
• Cicero's "On Ends" Torquatus section

Week 3: The Role of Virtue

Topics:

• The relationship between virtue and pleasure, instrumental value of virtues - tools not rules.
• “Good” and “evil” according to Epicurus.
• Prudence and Temperance, and how Epicurean beliefs lead to ethical living. "Moderation in all things" is an incorrect way to make choices -- prudence uses reason as well as evaluation or pleasure/pain and unique circumstances.
• Justice and how the choice of non-harming leads to a pleasant life.
• Courage - sometimes short-term pain must be endured to for the most pleasant outcome (or to avoid a worse pain) or for the health of the body

Readings:

      
Week 4: The Epicurean View of Gods and Death; Nature, Science, and Well-Being

Topics:

• Epicurean views on god(s)
• Working through the fear of death
• Nature and natural causes (no supernatural forces)
• Science vs Epicurean canonics (and the ancient idea of observations followed by hypothesis)
• Dealing with the incorrect notion of the need to find meaning (this comes out of Christianity or a lack of social connection)
• The "Epicurean Trilemma" (which was not originated by Epicurus)
• Removing religious anxieties of death and god (the nature of death and the soul) and developing rapport with Nature.

Readings:

Week 5: Friendship, Community, and Reverence for the Wise Man

Topics:

• Importance of friendship, social bonds, and community in achieving a pleasurable life.
• The role of studying together and the Twentieth celebration as community sustaining rituals.
• The role of honoring those who are wise in Epicurean understanding and practice.
• Tips on how to create strong friendships.

Readings:

Week 6: Freedom, Personal Agency, Self-Sufficiency, Tranquility vs Risk-taking, and Clear-minded Living

Topics:

• Definition of autarky
• Free will and personal responsibility - free will frees us from determinism and fate.
• Further discussion on choices and avoidances (natural, natural and necessary, natural and unnecessary, unnatural: vain/empty and unnecessary
• Risk-taking as an individual choice (there is only this life)
• Sound mind in a healthy body

Readings:

Week 7: Applying the Philosophy of Epicurus in Modern Daily Life

Topics:

• Choice and avoidance and practical applications (thinking through career choices, marriage or staying single, and discussion of other practical dilemmas)
• Living with non-Epicureans who are religious or believe in supernatural powers
• The avoidance of being in the spotlight (pros and cons)
• Tips for starting an Epicurean philosophy study group

Readings:

Quote from Cassius

Maybe this thread "Give Us An Example of A God!" should come after examination of "Give Us An Example of A Prolepsis!"

fyi...Don started this thread not too long ago:

Post

Prolepsis Citations from Long & Sedley

This thread is an offshoot of this thread:

epicureanfriends.com/thread/?postID=31229#post31229 In dealing with the prolepseis over there, I decided to turn to Long & Sedley's The Hellenistic Philosophers (which is available to borrow on Internet Archive with a free account) to see what they have to say. It turns out they cite a number of instances of mention of the prolepseis/preconceptions. Their numbering system (ex. 21A 4) uses their individual section, cited text, then their subsection of…

Don

July 2, 2024 at 11:04 PM

At the link I posted above (in post 29) I found a transcript further down that page, and found this:

Quote

For the Greeks, dreams were not imagined stories or even narratives, they were actually real visitations, the gods or the Oneiroi appearing to them as a vision. So I want to read you a passage from the book An Ancient Dream Manual by Peter Thonemann. I think he does a really perfect job of explaining how the Greeks understood dreams. He says,

“Greek and Roman authors do not speak of ‘having a dream’ or ‘dreaming that x happened’, but rather of ‘seeing a dream’, where the dream is objectified or personified as a thing or person that appears to the dreamer in his or her sleep. The archetypal Greek or Roman dream is therefore not an experience…but a kind of apparition.”

OK, but that’s not to say that what appears in the dream is necessarily literal for the dreamer.

As Thonemann continues, “In their dreams [they] ‘see’ a sequence of discrete and isolated dream-elements (an eagle, a flock of sheep, a whale), each of which is then individually decoded as a symbolic representation of a person or thing in their waking world.”

Perhaps there were those who had a feeling that dreams of gods were part of reality, vs. those who saw dreams as only symbolic.

Quote from Twentier

Eh, I don't know. I really want to dream about Zeus once and put an end to it.

Eikadistes you may like this...and it looks like the main explanation is a podcast recording...I only listened to the first ten minutes, but it seems like it may have some good stuff!

Hypnos & the Poppy: Ancient Greek Dream Incubation — Mira Karakitsou

In this episode, we’ll be meeting the Greek gods of Night, Sleep, and Dreams — Nyx, Hypnos, the Oneiroi, Mnemosyne, and more. We’ll explore dream rituals in…

atemplewild.com

Welcome @Nayborba !

I see that you posted your first post over in this thread, thank you!

Please when you get a chance, introduce yourself here in this Welcome thread - tell us how you found the forum, and if you have any previous study of Epicurean philosophy. Also, you may like to share just a little about yourself, whatever you feel comfortable sharing...such as what country you are in, (we're always interested to see how the study of Epicurean philosophy is developing, and which may in future help you in finding others nearby who are also studying Epicurus).

Welcome @Nayborba

Please check out our Getting Started page, but in the meantime there is one last step to complete your registration:

• All new registrants must post a response to this message here in this welcome thread (we do this in order to minimize spam registrations).

  You must post your response within 72 hours, or your account will be subject to deletion.

  Please say "Hello" by introducing yourself, tell us what prompted your interest in Epicureanism and which particular aspects of Epicureanism most interest you, and/or post a question.

  This forum is the place for students of Epicurus to coordinate their studies and work together to promote the philosophy of Epicurus. Please remember that all posting here is subject to our Community Standards / Rules of the Forum our Not Neo-Epicurean, But Epicurean and our Posting Policy statements and associated posts.

  Please understand that the leaders of this forum are well aware that many fans of Epicurus may have sincerely-held views of what Epicurus taught that are incompatible with the purposes and standards of this forum. This forum is dedicated exclusively to the study and support of people who are committed to classical Epicurean views. As a result, this forum is not for people who seek to mix and match some Epicurean views with positions that are inherently inconsistent with the core teachings of Epicurus.

  All of us who are here have arrived at our respect for Epicurus after long journeys through other philosophies, and we do not demand of others what we were not able to do ourselves. Epicurean philosophy is very different from other viewpoints, and it takes time to understand how deep those differences really are. That's why we have membership levels here at the forum which allow for new participants to discuss and develop their own learning, but it's also why we have standards that will lead in some cases to arguments being limited, and even participants being removed, when the purposes of the community require it. Epicurean philosophy is not inherently democratic, or committed to unlimited free speech, or devoted to any other form of organization other than the pursuit by our community of happy living through the principles of Epicurean philosophy.

  One way you can be most assured of your time here being productive is to tell us a little about yourself and personal your background in reading Epicurean texts. It would also be helpful if you could tell us how you found this forum, and any particular areas of interest that you have which would help us make sure that your questions and thoughts are addressed.

  In that regard we have found over the years that there are a number of key texts and references which most all serious students of Epicurus will want to read and evaluate for themselves. Those include the following.

  "Epicurus and His Philosophy" by Norman DeWitt

  The Biography of Epicurus by Diogenes Laertius. This includes the surviving letters of Epicurus, including those to Herodotus, Pythocles, and Menoeceus.

  "On The Nature of Things" - by Lucretius (a poetic abridgement of Epicurus' "On Nature"

  "Epicurus on Pleasure" - By Boris Nikolsky

  The chapters on Epicurus in Gosling and Taylor's "The Greeks On Pleasure."

  Cicero's "On Ends" - Torquatus Section

  Cicero's "On The Nature of the Gods" - Velleius Section

  The Inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda - Martin Ferguson Smith translation

  A Few Days In Athens" - Frances Wright

  Lucian Core Texts on Epicurus: (1) Alexander the Oracle-Monger, (2) Hermotimus

  Philodemus "On Methods of Inference" (De Lacy version, including his appendix on relationship of Epicurean canon to Aristotle and other Greeks)

  "The Greeks on Pleasure" -Gosling & Taylor Sections on Epicurus, especially the section on katastematic and kinetic pleasure which explains why ultimately this distinction was not of great significance to Epicurus.

  It is by no means essential or required that you have read these texts before participating in the forum, but your understanding of Epicurus will be much enhanced the more of these you have read. Feel free to join in on one or more of our conversation threads under various topics found throughout the forum, where you can to ask questions or to add in any of your insights as you study the Epicurean philosophy.

  And time has also indicated to us that if you can find the time to read one book which will best explain classical Epicurean philosophy, as opposed to most modern "eclectic" interpretations of Epicurus, that book is Norman DeWitt's Epicurus And His Philosophy.

  (If you have any questions regarding the usage of the forum or finding info, please post any questions in this thread).

  Welcome to the forum!