Posts by Patrikios

In Norman DeWitt's Epicurus and His Philosophy, I found this interesting quote. This is in Chapter XIV: The New Virtues, in the section on Hope. DeWitt quotes Vatican Saying 33.

"The cry of the flesh is not to hunger, not to thirst, not to surfer cold, because, possessing these and expecting to possess them, a man may vie with Zeus himself in respect of happiness."

Then while discussing how hope is 'confident expectation', DeWitt cites this quote:

“The stable condition of well-being in the flesh and the confident hope concerning this means the height of enjoyment and the greatest certainty of it for those who are capable of figuring the problem out."

The footnote reference is :

Any thoughts from our more learned friends as to what was meant by, and who are "those who are capable of figuring the problem out" ?

I'm still trying to figure this problem out

Thanks

Quote from Robert

In other words, modern science hasn't changed the basic principles underlying the Epicurean approach, but it has expanded the applicability--and, in so doing, made the competing supernaturalist approaches less plausible.

Robert

Modern science now has tools to better examine and correlate mental states with our feelings, using enhanced bio-feedback tools.

There is an interesting organization that is conducting rigorous research into the sphere of noetics. The Institute of Noetic Science (IONS) conducts scientific research into understanding the power of the human mind. They are also testing theories of how the human mind can gain extraordinary knowledge thorough ‘natural’ means (e.g. clairvoyance, esp), using scientific methods.

The term “Noetic” comes from the Greek word noēsis/noētikos that means inner wisdom, direct knowing, intuition, or implicit understanding.


“At the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS), we are inspired by the power of science to explain phenomena not previously understood, harnessing the best of the rational mind to make advances that further our knowledge and enhance our human experience.

The mission of the Institute of Noetic Sciences is to reveal the interconnected nature of reality through scientific exploration and personal discovery.”

I found some of their research articles helped understand what Epicurus taught to have mental focus (ebole).

Quote from Cassius

Epicurus could easily be saying, and apparently did say, that:

1. Pain is always "evil," because it is undesirable in itself.

2. But "infamy" is not always "evil." - An Epicurean could say that he doesn't care at all what the crowd thinks, if he thinks what he is doing is the correct thing to do, but he would care if the crowd takes action to inflict pain on him because of it.

For Sunday June1st discussion.

For an Epicurean (“wise man”) who is trying to live prudently, honestly, justly and pleasantly; wouldn’t an unkind, untrue, or manufactured accusation that caused public infamy, also bring mental pain to the wise man? Thus there can be mental pain from untrue infamy, right?

Quote from Robert

Hi, Patrikios--I just finished reading the paper on epibole--thank you for suggesting it! A quick reaction (assuming I understood Tsouna's line of argument) is that it sheds some light on why memorization of the teachings is important. It seems to form part of a mental training that leads first to epibole about specific topics and ultimately to the cosmic-level view that Lucretius and Philodemus both attribute to the the Epicurean sage. Does this seem correct to you?

Robert , yes, you summarized my current understanding of the practical applications of epibole and prolapses to the Epicurean education process. After reading those papers by Voula Tsouna, I found that studying the Key Doctrines in short groups of 3 or 4 related doctrines was more beneficial to focus on a key topic. But I was having trouble just memorizing each KD, so I found by also reading different translations and when I allowed the words to generate feelings, those sensations brought up images or recollections related to the doctrine. In this way, we are programming our unconscious (the RAS, etc.) by employing the epibole to begin focusing the full mind which then correlates the words with feelings and images that are meaningful from your personal experience.

Would you call this immersive or whole-brain learning that was being taught in Epicurean schools?

Quote from Kalosyni

The thought is that we need a regular series for those who mainly want to get "introduced" to the basics of the philosophy

We've done several series in the past on the Principal Doctrines, the Vatican Sayings, Frances Wright's Book, DeWitt's book, and Emily Austin's book.

I like the idea of the Sunday meeting being more of an interactive study group with reading material ahead of class. Consider scheduling for 90 minutes with full class participation.

While DeWitt said there is very little info on how the Epicurean school classes were conducted over the 800 years of existence, are there some educational practices we should be learning? Is there a learning process we can incorporate into a study session like this, if there are others with similar interests?

The First Monday sessions are good for an intro to key doctrine and welcome to meeting new faces.

The Wednesday sessions appear to be for more advanced practitioners.

The Sunday sessions could oriented towards grappling with some of the more complex principles, and those that address how to apply Epicurean principles in our daily lives.

As for topics to consider:

What was meant by the knowledge of gods comes from receiving images of god via prolepsis?

What, if any, preconceptions (prolepses) are innate?


While it is great to hear our leading minds discuss key topics on the Lucretius Today podcast, and some of these topics get text interactions online, but having live Q&A helps to understand the nuances of applying Epicurean principles daily.

Thanks for all the thoughts and time that goes into making these Zoom sessions productive!

Quote from Patrikios

“For what I label the Lockean view typically involves the idea that preconceptions are formed passively, without any movement of thought, whereas what I call the Kantian view is accompanied by the contention that epibolē, a mental focusing, is an integral component of the formation of basic concepts.”

According to Epicurus' Letter to Herodotus (37-38), students were instructed to actively focus their minds (epibolē) on the "indemonstrable starting points" (the core doctrines) so they could properly apply these principles in daily life. This mental focusing helped reinforce the preconceptions (prolēpsis) that developed naturally through experience.

What is fascinating is that Epicurus understood the functioning of our brain's reticular activating system (RAS). The RAS does indeed function similarly to how Epicureans described epibolē working. The RAS acts as a filtering system that brings relevant information to consciousness based on what we've programmed ourselves to consider important.

I find this comparison aligns remarkably well with Epicurean teaching methods.

1. The RAS, like epibolē, actively filters incoming information based on what we've trained ourselves to consider significant

2. When we consciously focus on Epicurean principles through epibolē, we're essentially programming the RAS to notice related patterns

3. The brain's "predictive mind" function works similarly to how Epicureans described the interaction between epibolē and prolepsis.

Do others here have a similar understanding of how to apply the principles of epibolē and prolēpsis to create a more pleasurable Epicurean practice?

Quote from Rolf

Why is this? If the absence of pain is pleasurable, then shouldn't the absence of pleasure be painful, by necessity? When pleasure simply fades away, what are we left with if not pain?

Quote from Cassius

We can and should through reason and logic affirmatively identify the healthy normal functioning of the mind and body (even when they are not being "stimulated") as pleasure.

Rolf , I too had a hard time understanding that Epicurus did not allow for a neutral third state; only pleasure or pain. What I have come to learn from all these Epicurean writings is that if there is no pain (body aches or mental anxiety), there is always pleasure present. You just have to tune your mind in to the small pleasures that your body is experiencing when it is just operating normally. This is also what has been described as your body operating in homeostasis, or in eustatheia (psychosomatic balance).

When sitting, standing, or walking in a neutral state, your mind can find many pleasures, just by tuning into your body's senses. The practice of "being present" is a good way to acknowledge natural pleasures; feel a soft breeze, hear a bird signing, see a beautiful photo.

Quote from Robert

Secondly, I was reading Voula Tsouna's chapter on Epicurean "therapies" (in her book on the ethics of Philodemus), which got me thinking about how we might view Epicureanism as a set of practices, as opposed to (simply) a set of views.

@Eikadistes, I'm reminded of this distinction when you write that Epicurean teachings aren't "passing curiosities" but "practical guidance so we can confidently respond to the obstacles that characterize daily life." Also, your comments on memorization/recitation dovetail with what I just read in Sorabji's chapter (in Emotion and Peace of Mind) on Hellenistic spiritual exercises, as well as Hadot's discussion of same (in Philosophy as a Way of Life). Both authors point to memorization as a characteristic Epicurean practice.

Robert , have you read Voula Tsouna's paper on epibole, where she talks about the process of how we should study and pay attention to the words and meanings of Epicurus writings.

https://www.bsa.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Tsouna_310321_ABSTRACT-HANDOUT.pdf

In her paper on prolepsis, she emphasizes the role of mental focus in learning Epicurean concepts.

“For what I label the Lockean view typically involves the idea that preconceptions are formed passively, without any movement of thought, whereas what I call the Kantian view is accompanied by the contention that epibolē, a mental focusing, is an integral component of the formation of basic concepts.”

Epicurean Preconceptions

This paper provides a comprehensive study of the Epicurean theory of 'preconception'. It addresses what a preconception is; how our preconception of…

www.academia.edu

I find that understanding these concepts of prolepsis and epibole are key to better understanding how to integrate the simple, but powerful, practices of living prudently, pleasurably, and pleasantly.

Here is a reference to the previous discussion on prolepsis and epibole by Voula Tsouna.

"Epicurean Preconceptions" by Voula Tsouna

Thread

"Epicurean Preconceptions" by Voula Tsouna

I know that several of us had a long conversation about this article when it came out, but I can't find it. If anyone has notes in addition to Hiram, please post.

epicureanfriends.com/wcf/filebase/file/17/

Cassius

April 13, 2019 at 11:32 PM

Here is a link to the full paper:

Epicurean Preconceptions

This paper provides a comprehensive study of the Epicurean theory of 'preconception'. It addresses what a preconception is; how our preconception of…

www.academia.edu

She also wrote a paper on "THE EPICUREAN NOTION OF EPIBOLÊ"

https://www.bsa.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Tsouna_310321_ABSTRACT-HANDOUT.pdf

Quote from Cassius

Thank you Don for that. The title looks promising.

One would like to think (since we admire Epicurus' thinking on his subject) that others would be logically drawn to the same conclusion, whether or not they have ever heard of Epicurus. So it shouldn't be surprising for us to find people who agree without mentioning Epicurus. I hope we will find that she has an affinity for Epicurus, but the disappointing thing in life is that so few seem willing to say what she seems willing to say.

It appears from this interview with Hossenfelder, that she does read philosophy. Might be interesting to just ask her about her views on Epicurus focus on natural science.

Horgan: Do you find philosophy useful?

Hossenfelder: Sometimes. I find philosophy useful to understand what it is that we really do in science, or at least the different ways to think about it. I would classify myself as an instrumentalist, but not all my colleagues are. And it’s good to know what their attitude is because it helps me put their motivations and interests into context.

Quote from Kalosyni

I'm pondering this question today (again)...of which there are two sides...1) "what would make me Epicurean"

Kalosyni , thank you for this simple question.

First, I don’t think of being an “Epicurean” as a noun, a label. Rather, I see being a Friend of Epicurus as a life-long process of learning, applying, and re-learning the basic principles taught by Epicurus. I have learned to reject the use of labels to categorize myself (or others), as I could never live up to the expectations of others who applied specific criteria to their label more vigorously.

For me, the key qualities that outline my Epicurean journey include:
- Pursuing rational pleasure while avoiding excess
- Valuing friendship and community
- Embracing natural explanations over supernatural ones
- Seeking tranquility (ataraxia) as a highest good
- Practicing practical wisdom (phronesis) in daily life

Through the help of contributors on this website, I gain a better understanding of how to implement an Epicurean philosophical practice that leads to a life of wellbeing (eudaimonia). 😊

Quote from Rolf

The way I understand the quote, there is a lot in between - I take it to mean that there are people who can experience pleasure, but lack the “physical constitution” to be truly wise and prudent due to circumstances outside of their control. There are many people with chronic physical or mental illnesses that can be mitigated but not removed - would Epicurus say that these people lack the “physical constitution” to be wise?

As I see it, Epicureanism still offers valuable guidance for everyone, even if the highest levels of wisdom might be harder to achieve in certain circumstances.

Consider these points:
1. Everyone can work towards reducing unnecessary fears and anxieties
2. Basic Epicurean principles about friendship and simple pleasures are universally accessible
3. The pursuit of wisdom exists on a spectrum, not as an all-or-nothing proposition

Does this seem meaningful?

Quote from Kalosyni

start a half hour early and run from 7:30pm ET till 9pm ET.

This cuts into dinner time and PBS Newshour time for some

Quote from Don

Thinking out loud (fully realizing I just said no letters )

Φ or Φ - Greek phi

= Philosophy
Two stylized Ps back to back = Pleasure and Pain

If the Epicurean philosophy is about choice of Pleasure or Pain, then

Pleasure/Pain = Φ/Φ

Quote from Cassius

As I read Kalosyni, she is objecting to Lucretius listing these character traits as undesirable "in general" because she thinks that sounds too much like a Stoic.

Lucretius could also be considering the implications of PD-5:

“It is impossible to live a pleasant life without living wisely and honorably and justly, and it is impossible to live wisely and honorably and justly without living pleasantly.”

The list of vices could be examples of acts that would not be considered wise, honorable, or just in most situations. I found PD-5 to be a good way of prudently making choices that require what DeWitt referred to as “calculus of pleasure”.

Thanks, Kalosyni for this interesting question.

In this Episode 277, Cicero appears to make wild leaps, that just by contemplating the beauty of nature, we are supposed to conclude all these supernatural attributions accrue to a manipulative, punitive, personified deity.

“Thus, though you see not the soul of man, as you see not the Deity, yet, as by the contemplation of his works you are led to acknowledge a God, so you must own the divine power of the soul, from its remembering things, from its invention, from the quickness of its motion, and from all the beauty of virtue. Where, then, is it seated, you will say?”

From reading DeWitt, and Epicurus’ letters, it appears that Epicurus was describing the ‘soul’ as what we know today as our nervous system. Our nervous system includes the brain and nerve cells that run throughout our body carrying both thought-initiated commands to move certain muscles, as well as carrying the signals from our 5 senses.

“Of the Twelve Principles the most important was the third: "The universe consists of atoms and void." Since the void is incapable either of delivering or receiving a stimulus, it followed that the soul, which is capable both of stimulating and being stimulated, must be corporeal by nature, composed of atoms.” [DeWitt: Epicurus & His Philosophy, p6]

Quote from Kalosyni

Happy Birthday Patrikios !

Kalosyni, thanks for the beautiful collage of simple pleasures. BTW, my birthday pleasures included a nice long walk in the sand on beautiful Lido Beach.

Quote from Cassius

Happy Birthday to Patrikios! Learn more about Patrikios and say happy birthday on Patrikios's timeline: Patrikios

Cassius , thank you for the remembrance. Taking time to read the writings of Epicureans and the Friends of Epicurus here is one of the best gifts I can enjoy on my birthday, and every day.

Peace & Safety

Quote from Rolf

Likewise, “absence of pain” and “pleasure” mean the same thing (considering only pleasure and pain exist), but the negative form, “absence of pain”, implies the highest degree of pleasure.

Rolf , thanks for this thoughtful perspective. I understand the “spotless” analogy.

I’m wondering whether “absence of pain”, implies the highest degree of pleasure fits for all persons. Couldn’t the “absence of pain” lead one to simply be in a relaxed, neutral state; with highest degree of pleasure coming from a favorite kinetic pleasure?

I may be missing something in the way you described the analogy.

As was mentioned in section XXIV, is the topic of learning vs recollection discussed elsewhere within this forum?

“From whence Socrates would infer, that learning is nothing more than recollection; and this topic he explains more accurately, in the discourse which he held the very day he died; for he there asserts that any one who seeming to be entirely illiterate, is yet able to answer a question well that is proposed to him, does in so doing manifestly show that he is not learning it then, but recollecting it by his memory.”