Posts by Pacatus

After all that, my brain is creamed corn. I go with “knowledge is possible.” My guess is that infallible knowledge is logically possible – but I don’t claim to have any.

And I refuse to be anxious about it. (Chuckling as I say that.)

EDIT: I may have overshot your question, Cassius. I am using certainty in an objective empirical sense, not how "sure" someone is or feels subjectively. Confidence can include a subjective level of surety, or some objective statistical measure. I'm really using it in the former sense. (Don't know if that helps.)

Now, my brain really is creamed corn ...

Knowledge is usually defined as “justified, true belief.” That is, you 1) believe something (think it is so); 2) have good reason to think it is so(otherwise you're just guessing); and 3) it turns out to be true (factually confirmed).

Now, suppose I point and say: “That’s a maple tree.”

You ask: “Are you sure?”

Well, am I? Objectively? I’d say it depends on how close we are and how well we examine it.

[This is akin to the oft-cited “square tower / round tower” example.]

At some evidentiary point, I think it’s reasonable to claim certainty in such a case. My point about anxiety comes in when someone has some fear of being wrong – or even uncertain. I’ve encountered that, for example, among some Christians. [And I should add that there is some controversy among epistemologists about fallibilism versus infallibilism. I think the ancient Greeks thought of actual knowledge as being infallible. I tend to as well. But the question becomes, not is knowledge possible, per se, but is infallibility possible -- to know something infallibly (and a perhaps a stronger version?) do I infallibly know that my knowledge of some proposition is infallible? That is, am I infallibly certain about my own capacity for having infallibly certain knowledge? (That would border on a claim of omniscience, it seems to me).]

But that means that if (contrary to all expectation) it was somehow shown that there are gods that intervene in some way in our world, I would not be anxious about it (partly because I see most claims about supernatural gods to be logically absurd – so any such gods would have to be part of the nature of the cosmos, etc.). Just as I have no anxiety about idealism versus realism for the Epicurean view of the gods.

But we need to be careful about thinking the sheer number of observations can confirm to a probability of 1.0 the truth of a hypothesis – it only takes one (as yet unobserved) counter-observation to disconfirm it. (The “Black Swan” event.)

So, I guess my general viewpoint is to rest easy about such things – and don’t cling to a need for certainty: that does not always relieve anxiety. (I think sometimes we can cling to a need for too much precision as well.)

I always liked Rilke’s definition of love: “Love consists of this: two solitudes that meet, protect and greet each other.” I’d just expand the possible number and call it friendship.

Note: I’m a pretty strong introvert (which I do not accept as a flaw to struggle against – even though extroverts are the vast majority in our society); I do not get “lonely” when I’m alone; I value and cherish a few friends.

I want to add that I’m not sure how keen our reasoning needs to be – but I don’t think that Epicureanism is somehow reserved for the intellectual elite or experts in deductive and inductive logic. Nor do I think we need to trouble ourselves over our own perceived shortcomings in such regard. (I’m reminded of Philodemus rejection of the need for technical expertise – “techne” – in household management.)

A few notes –

The idea that anyone can or should objectively believe a proposition – regardless of evidentiary confidence – because such belief will relieve anxiety is absurd. Such a “belief” would, at best, involve some cognitive dissonance (or at least some non-evidentiary notion of “belief” that would, I think, would allow anyone to believe anything willy-nilly – allowing any kind of religious cultism or conspiracy theories flying in the face of empirical evidence).

Now, I use the word “believe” (or “belief”) strictly to mean such things as: “It seems [or appears] to me that …;” or “the [preponderance of] evidence indicates that …;” and the like.

Subjective confidence, even when supported by a plethora of evidence is still not the same as objective (empirical) certainty – though a subjective attitude of confidence in the face of recognized objective uncertainty can be a psychological help in agency/action (ala in sports psychology).

And while absence of evidence might not be evidentiary proof of absence, repeated null findings can add to a reasonably secure confidence (think of supernatural, interventionist gods – or unicorns).

However, belief in something that is logically absurd is simply delusive. The opposite of “logical” (in the deductive sense) is not “false” but – absurd, incoherent, “gobbledygook.” (Hmm: once again I think of supernatural, interventionist gods … But maybe I’m wrong. 😉 )*

For some people, the very idea that they could be wrong is a source of anxiety. (I suspect that has a lot to do with a person’s experiences and pressures during their formative years – which can often be a kind of psychological conditioning than can be difficult to jettison, even if one realizes it is there.) And that can lead to a willingness to “believe” anything at all – and back to the first paragraph …

And, to make a long story longer, the best we've got is the evidence of the senses and our best, evolving reasoning therefrom (and a due nod to prolepsis). And, for me personally, once I let go of a perceived need for certainty, a lot of prior anxiety fell away too.

~ ~ ~

* I always liked that quote by the detective Mr. Monk (from the TV series Monk) : “I could be wrong. … But I don’t think so.”

Quote from Don

Christmas - This one's tougher. The Christian context is the birth of Christ, the "bringer of light to the world." Well, we already have Epicurus's birthday in Jan/Feb to celebrate the birth of the founder. So, what to do with Christmas? There's gift giving. Maybe something to do with that?

The winter solstice: when the days (daylight) start lengthening again.

And Thanksgiving comes at the end of the fall harvest (and stomping the grapes -- and Nouveau Beaujolais wine!)

Quote from Kalosyni

Here is a quiz on emotions felt in the previous 24 hours:

Positivity: 9

Negativity: 7

Ratio: 1.29

A pleasurable and peaceful Thanksgiving to all!

I came upon this, regarding the trap of certainty:

“Epicurus also saw that man’s natural fear of the unknown is seized upon as a tool by false priests, professors, and politicians who demand obedience through the call for ‘certainty.’ The call for ‘certainty’ in human action is a false standard which can never be met, and the real evil of those who call for it is that they are aware of the trap which they lay for the unthinking. The only remedy for this abomination is for men to acknowledge that their knowledge and their lives are limited to the scope to the bounds established by Nature.”

– Cassius Amicus, Ante Oculos: Epicurus and the Evidence-Based Life (emphasis in the original)

I had this e-book long ago, but, it seems, never finished it (mea culpa! – I’ll blame my ADD).

Cassius

I want to add that “philosophy” can be a “red-flag” word too, in the modern (seemingly pervasive) academic sense that it strictly involves intellectual pursuit – rather than as a therapeutic way of life, as the Hellenistic philosophers (especially Epicureans) understood it. And a (over-) reliance on intellection seems to inform things like CBT, as embraced by modern Stoics.

Since other languages sometimes seem to get me out of everyday and ingrained definitions, maybe the Spanish “via vida” is a good substitute (for me) for “faith.” "Es mi via vida."

Yes. I hasten to add that for me neither “belief” nor “faith” are interchangeable with being 100% certain (let alone the absurdity of some Christians who, generally quoting St. Paul, claim that faith itself either a) is knowledge, or b) is itself actually evidence that guarantees knowledge).

Yes, faith is still a “red flag” word (my wife grimaced a bit when I used it ), and there are likely better ones …

Quote from Kalosyni

The Golden Rule: Treat others the way you would want to be treated

The Platinum Rule: Treat others as they would want you to treat them

These always remind me of the conversation between the masochist and the sadist, to wit (pun intended) –

Masochist: “Beat me, torture, make me feel pain!”

Sadist: “No.”

+++++++++++

On a more serious note, I always liked this quote from the Catholic theologian Urs Von Balthsar, as a caution against willy-nilly applying simple rules:

“When it comes to shaping one’s personal behavior, all the rules of morality, as precise as they may be, remain abstract in the face of the infinite complexity of the concrete.”

—Hans Urs von Balthasar, “Presence and Thought: An Essay on the Religious Philosophy of Gregory of Nyssa” (from the Foreword).

++++++++++++

I will add that there is another version of the Golden Rule, attributed to Rabbi Hillel: “What you do not like done to yourself, don’t do to other.” (The same Balthasarian caution applies.)

Not sure if this is the right place to post this, but –

Last night we watched a lovely documentary on Netflix called “From Stress to Happiness.” The main guide is a Buddhist monk (though the Benedictine brother David-Steindl-Rast, now aged 96, also makes an appearance).

As I watched, I found myself reinterpreting into Epicurean terms – and concluded that their message (though very good) would be even clearer and better grounded from an Epicurean perspective (and without Buddhist commitment to such things as “samsara” – which, though not emphasized, naturally crept in).

Also, I thought that an expansive understanding of Epicurean friendship can cover most of the ground of Buddhist compassion and loving-kindness – even if an attitude of friendliness is not reciprocated (and self-protection, especially by withdrawal, is called for), that attitude (like an “attitude of gratitude” even in the face of travail) is still more conducive to our own happiness.

Also, for the first time, I really started to think of Epicureanism as a “faith” – without supernaturalism or strict religious insistence on “right doctrinal belief” no matter what (to be a “True Epicurean™”?). A reality-based faith that evolves well into our modern world (e.g. modern theories of physics, neurobiology and more developed understandings of deductive/inductive logic). A faith, rather than just an intellect-based philosophy as a good guide to life. A faith as an evolving way of life – in which I will always be a beginner (with my own fits and starts).

[All of which is to say that maybe I finally absorbed (beyond just intellectual assent) some of what Epicurus’ was actually trying to say – and has been said on here.]

Anyway, I just wanted to share my initial, unsorted thoughts on seeing the film.

Quote from Kalosyni

Oh this is great for a meal prayer!

And that gets me thinking about what might I like to compose for a meal prayer.

Thank you so much. Yes, I think these things need to be individualized because we will all feel it a bit differently.

And I really like your prayer/meditation for self-guidance.

At my wife’s request, we started using my attempt at a Tetrapharmicon Prayer/Meditation as a kind of “saying grace” at dinner. I realized that my overburdening wordplay made it quite cumbersome. So I simplified and generalized (still guilty of stretching the wordplay a bit: aiming at rhyme as a mnemonic aid, even if the rhymes have an archaic feel; and quasi-meter – not quite tetrameter, but each eight-syllable line ends with an iamb).

Instead of an “amen” I appended the Spanish “¡Pura Vida! ¡Salud!” as a kind of exclamation of good cheer. My wife and I usually toast, especially before a meal, with “Salud!” – and “Pura Vida!” (Pure Life!) is a popular phrase in Costa Rica, where it is used for everything from “Hello” to a response to the question “How are you doing?” to a cheer (we first were made aware of by the Costa Rican soccer fans some years ago while watching the World Cup on TV, who cheered with it and displayed it on banners).

It’s not quite the Tetrapharmicon, except by implication. I also try to use it in the morning to start the day.

++++++++++++++

An Epicurean Prayer Meditation

Unaffrighted by gods or fates,

a happy soul travail abates.

Easy fare makes bountiful fest,

and gratitude a Garden blest.

~ ~ ~

¡Pura Vida! ¡Salud!

Quote from Charles

An Epicurean society is political in the sense of caring for the well-being and health of their country. Its citizens would not be ignorant or secluded from the world around them, on the contrary, they would have knowledge of the various figures and events around them. Epicurus was well read on Plato and his contemporaries; he could not have rejected them and devised the system of the garden had he chosen to completely and utterly withdraw into isolation.

The same applies to civic government and culture. The only difference is that our activism is within the interest of the garden and the safeguarding of our pleasure, not partisan issues that ebb and flow with each week and month. I think focusing on the desires in the scope of a political society is a bit tunnel visioned. What matters more is the culture that surrounds an Epicurean, and whether their pursuance of pleasure is admonished, encouraged, or ignored. The doctrines concerning justice and no absolute pleasure are the remedy to this. That's the key to flexibility and ultimately the answer of politics within the philosophy.

Yes. I think this is spot on, and provides an Epicurean grounding for social activity and political participation. Thank you.

Welcome!

I just got the Kindle edition. It will take me awhile to read it all, I’m sure, with my piecemeal-patchwork, easily redirected brain.

I already like her style, using modern images/memes to relate to the ancients – e.g. Seneca comparing Epicurus to “a drag-queen at a festival.” (Probably there were drag queens back then, but comedy drag shows are certainly in the contemporary culture wars.)

The Silent Lamp

– A free rendering from a Greek poem by Philodemus

The loyal nightstand lamp keeps silent:
confidante of intimate affairs
we dare not speak of, even in the dark.

But intoxicate her wick with perfumed oil,
Philaenis, inflame the room with light –
and leave us alone behind locked door.

For Eros desires no living witness
other than herself, Xantho – as in our bed
we explore Aphrodite’s ecstatic lore.

++++++++++++++

From Epigram 5.4 of The Greek Anthology cited above. In addition to that translation, I also consulted Nisbet’s translation from “Epigrams from the Greek Anthology: a new translation by Gideon Nesbit” (Oxford World Classics, 2020); here is his translation:

The silent lamp, complicit partner in

The things we mustn’t speak of carelessly:

Philaenis, make it drunk with drops of oil.

Then take your leave: for Love alone desires

No living witness; close the jointed door.

And you, dear Xantho—but the lover’s bed

Well knows what Aphrodite has in store.

Tetrapharmakos Meditation Prayer

Unaffrighted by carefree gods,

untroubled by unfeeling death –

humble pleasures proffer delight,

tranquility becalms travail.

~ ~ ~

By spirit of your Garden blest,

each today be bountiful fest.

++++++++++

Another pass (stimulated by Don’s – but not a competition! 😊).

Cast in a rough [mixed] tetrameter. I chose “unaffrighted” rather than “unafraid” to avoid any Stoic connotations. “Bountiful fest”: following on “humble pleasures,” trying to convey the notion of “enough is a feast” (one of my wife’s favorite sayings).