Posts by AxA

Tonight's discussion helped me to see the impossibility of neatly categorizing the desires. These three “categories” really might be best seen as a spectrum, from the natural/necessary end of being easy to obtain with a huge pleasure payoff, to the unnatural/unnecessary end of being impossible to obtain with a very dubious pleasure payoff.

Here's the message I sent out to all group members after our last gathering, a pot luck on Saturday:

Thank you to all who have been a part of this experiment.

I started this group because talking about the "big questions" has always been one of my favourite activities. I recently discovered the surprisingly refreshing philosophy of Epicurus, and I was surprised how almost nobody had even heard of these ideas. So I wanted to meet some others who also enjoy these topics and enjoy some philosophical discussion together.

I was initially imagining 5 people sitting around a cafe table, and I was blown away by the big turnout. My first learning curve was how to actually have a group conversation. As a rules minimalist, I actually started with "everybody can share whatever they want about whatever topic they feel is important" lol. And so I learned what a moderator is and what a real art and skill it is to guide a group conversation. I kept hearing from multiple sources that there is one meetup group that has really nailed how to do this: Practical Philosophy.

Practical Philosophy Club - Ontario 🇨🇦 | Meetup

The goal of the Practical Philosophy Club is to create a community that is open discussing ideas that can be used practically in everyday life.Our discussions…

www.meetup.com

We've had four group discussions in total, and each one has provided some surprising new ideas for me and some tasty food for thought. But I also found that these group discussions are not the way I find most rewarding to discuss philosophy. I've learned to respect and admire the position of a moderator to handle all the different personalities and shape a discussion into something that is valuable for all. But I don't find it particularly pleasant. My ideal for a philosophical conversation is more like two people walking in a park. Maybe three or four. Where there's room for each person to go into depth about what they each consider important.

So once I realized this, the second phase of the experiment was the idea that instead of talking about philosophy, I want to find ways to "put it into practice". But what does that even mean? As was pointed out to me last night, philosophy is something that is expressed not in any particular activity but in the way we live in totality. Our philosophy comes out in our style, the way we do every little thing.

The one thing that came to mind for me was the practice of communal eating. I believe this is a very good activity in so many ways. I love the idea of full on community meal prep. But the simplest way into this is with a simple potluck meal. So this was my next learning curve. Once again I started with the minimal rules possible: "everybody bring whatever you want". Which resulted in an assortment of snacks and 50 leftover tangerines (which I took home, peeled and froze lol). And so I learned with the help of this group how to do a potluck. Thanks to this new level of organization, the new generously hosted venue, and everyone's participation in bringing an impressive variety of dishes, I was very satisfied with what came together as a real full potluck meal last night. I was pleased to see the general good cheer and enjoyment in the room and I was glad to be part of making that event happen for everyone's benefit. But it was general group socializing, something I don't particularly enjoy myself. I love an in depth one on one conversation, and I love doing useful work in a group, but just with my personality, I don't find much pleasure in that kind of group chatting.

So that reaches the conclusion of the second phase of my experiment, and I don't yet have a third phase in mind.

I would love to hear from any and all of you, eirher in the whatsapp group (contact me by meetup message if you'd like an invite link) or in a private message. What brought you to this group? What worked and what didn't? What do you imagine this group could be? And if you could make this group anything you wanted just for you, what would it be like?

Thank you for enriching my life with these experiences. Before 2025, everything that's happened here was not even in my imagination.

Once again the uniquely tangible reality of pleasure and pain make them much more reliable guides than any concept we can think of!

It's something so "childlike" and basic, it's surprising more philosophies don't make more use of it.

I'm not convinced of the value of "morality" as a concept as I think my preference to behave in ways considered "moral" comes from a combination of the practical value of human cooperation as well as an aesthetic sense of "immoral" actions being "ugly". But when I ask why they're ugly, I'm not clear on the origin of this aesthetic sense that finds unjust actions ugly and therefore painful.

I can't fathom the meaning of beauty (or honour or excellence, translating the same word as beauty) that does not bring pleasure. So I think I could only interpret that passage as meaning the important thing to focus on is the pleasure, rather than some abstract standard of beauty/honour/excellence that loses touch with the basic intrinsic pleasure that all beauty produces.

Quote from Cassius

Quote

Aetius, Doxography, XII p. 547A: And in his work On the End-Goal, he says again:
"{=U70}" And in other passages, he says "I spit upon the honorable and those who
vainly admire it, whenever it produces no pleasure."

Plutarch, Against Kōlṓtēs, 30, p. 1124E: … and when men take for sages those who
"spit on excellence, unless pleasure attends it." [c.f. 1124E @ U368]

What I found especially insightful about this conversation was it made me realize that while I have always accepted the finality of my death, I have a mental timeline that projects from ancient history out into the future, and I imagine myself as part of that timeline. So I judge my life against this expanded sense of time, and see it as very inconvenient to only be alive for a tiny part of it. Without realizing it, I have been applying vain standards on myself. Now that I see this, I can start to imagine what it would be like to be fully comfortable living entirely within my available time window. Still quite an adjustment though!

Last night we had 9 people meet in a “tea house” environment.

I found the smaller group size made for a more natural conversation. But it was a pub-like environment with far too much background noise.

It was framed as an “open discussion” with the Epicurus quotes in my pamphlet as starting points.

I found the most success posing a question that went around the table: “Is life mostly suffering, with some pleasure, or mostly pleasure, with some suffering?” I was expecting a simple answer, just to set up my idea that people who believe life is more suffering than pleasure are more likely to favour beliefs about denying the body and embracing transcendent spiritual realms or afterlives. But instead it led to some very detailed and varied insights on this topic.

We had an issue with a attendee who showed up halfway through and started delivering comedic monologues, always ready to jump in and speak at length. I had to repeatedly stop him and redirect the conversation to others. He had some good commentary and good jokes. He seemed to be aware of what he was doing, even used the term “monologue” and said he “accepts correction”. So he was willing to be interrupted and yield the floor, but it seems like it would require active intervention to maintain a round table discussion. Once again, I’m learning the requirements of being an active moderator, much more than my original idea of saying “talk about whatever you want".

We ended with: “The optional “homework” is to think of ways of bringing this philosophy to life other than talking. Conversation will always of course have an important place in philosophy, but I’m interested in all the other ways to turn these ideas into real life effects. The suggestions so far have been boxing, interpretive dance, and eating (either feasting on cheese or just eating bread, olives and water after a long walk for “hunger sauce” lol).”

Report on the in-person March Eikas in Toronto:

This was the group's second meetup and the first pot luck.

It was generally a good discussion and the people were generally pleased, but I learned a few lessons on how to improve it as well.

There were about 20 people present. We went around the circle for a chance to say names and add any other comment (suggestions being why you came, what a good life means to you, or something about the food). This brought up some questions which I talked about a bit, such as about the "gods don't trouble us" and "death is nothing to us" points. I also introduced some of the justice concepts that we didn't get to in the first meeting (no absolute justice, only by agreement). Someone asked about the natural/necessary taxonomy, which led to questions about the Epicurean view of sex (which I described as being generally more trouble than it's worth).

The conversation took a turn towards the benefits or harms of technology, and through the mention of the harms of social media, led to a discussion of anger and rage and whether one or both or neither are useful. Then it was time to pack up so I steered the topic back toward the idea of applying anger towards useful action.

Lesson #1: saying "bring whatever you want" to a pot luck, and especially in a place without kitchen facilities, led to more of a collection of snacks than a full meal. So for next time, I'm going to implement a more organized signup system where people can sign up for each of the components of a complete meal.

Other tasks to also be delegated include being background music DJ and being gatekeeper/welcomer, both of which I did myself and were distracting.

Lesson #2: The later conversation meandered and felt somewhat random. A unifying topic will help to guide the discussion. A good one to start with for next time: "What does friendship mean to you?"

Lesson #3: I always imagined these events as a single circle, with all of us facing each other and speaking together, but I also never imagined there being more than 5-10 people showing up. 20 barely holds together as a single conversation circle, and it doesn't give enough time for each person to talk. So next time, I will have at least part of the event broken into smaller groups of maybe around 5-6.

Quote from Eikadistes

Out of curiosity, do you know what the general, demographic spread is of religious involvement in your area? I am so pleased with the response to your invitation, and surprised. I am mired in (as I think is the case with a few of us) a Southern Christian swamp (literally) near the genitals of the Bible Belt, and the ideological bubble in which I find myself is thick with criticism toward the Other.

Toronto is very demographically mixed, and I believe most of the religious enthusiasm comes from recent immigration, while long time locals are fleeing far away from religion, with average ages in the formerly dominant churches (e.g. the Anglicans) approaching senior citizen levels. The popular zeal that once went into religion, I find is now often devoted to progressive political causes.

But I wouldn't let any Bible Belt hold me back from holding a gathering, unless I actually felt our safety threatened (in which case I would probably want to move out). Even in the heaviest religious areas, I believe there is always a crop of misfits rebelling against it and looking for a place to go. Even if it's only 10%, even 5%. Because as I keep saying, it only takes one other attendee to make it worthwhile. Really, if I had a circle of 5-10 great friends, I would be set for life. So big numbers aren't needed.

Quote from Kalosyni

And also, "Congratulations" (just as Don said above) because it's pretty awesome, and I've thought about starting a group myself, but I'm feeling that where I live may make it a bit difficult. (Also, to come up with answers to people's questions right off the cuff, could prove challenging...the forum gives space and time for answering )

Quote from AxA

Some of the objections that came up:

- Pain as a source of meaning vs boring bland state of continuous pleasure (I did not even get into the whole "pleasure as absence of pain" definitional issue, and this came up at the end and was never really addressed)

Perhaps this was a reaction to a phrase such as "living a life of simple pleasures" ? (...would need to know what exactly they were reacting to)... or simply the idea of "continuous pleasure" which comes up in Cicero's Torquatus section as a goal for an Epicurean. I could see the idea of continuous pleasure as being just a kind of idealized goal, or perhaps it would be said of the wise elder or Epicurean teacher).

As for pleasures, all pleasures...both ones which are sensory, vary with intensity, location, and duration, as well as those of good health, good internal feeling, and satisfaction with one's life. The sensory pleasures are always in flux, and pain will come because of the natural state of living.

Also, I think that there are two (or more) flavors of Epicurean philosophy (and Epicureans). 1) the early time when Epicurus was alive (or early Garden, and generations close to the time of Epicurus) and would include the lifestyle of Epicurean philosophy students. 2) later Roman times which were removed from the core studies and included wealthy Romans.

We see in Diogenese Laertius Book 10, that Metrodorus (who was Epicurus' closest student) left for 6 months to journey across the Aegean Sea to visit his family in his home town of Lampsacus. This of course would have likely had some level of risk, but the Epicurean would wisely minimize risk by making the journey at the safest time of year for crossing.

Regarding "pain as a source of meaning" - that possibly could be a remnant left over from Christianity: If God is all powerful then why does he allow suffering to exist in the world? Their answer: because he wants to test you and teach you important lessons. (No wonder the world is so screwed up, because the "perfect love" of God is itself evil. As humans (human animals) we inherently dislike pain and suffering, so then to try to extract some meaning from it seems twisted.(for more on the Trilemma you can check out this)

Display More

I encourage everyone to do something in person anywhere in the world. I believe it only takes one other person to join to make it worthwhile!

I would suggest that it's not necessary for the host to be an authority on Epicurean philosophy and be able to answer any questions at all. It can simply be a gathering of people who are interested in studying it and trying it out in practice in one way or another. Somebody asked me what is the Epicurean position on animal or non-human consciousness, and I said I don't know and I'd have to look into it.

The idea of endless pleasure being boring is an interesting response, one that never occurred to me. But I think there would be enough variation of pleasure (that point was never raised), and enough pains are sure to come up anyway along the way, in addition to all the pains that are deliberately chosen because of the greater pleasure they allow. So once again, it's a matter of perspective.

If pain itself had value, why not bang your head against a wall when you're feeling bored and meaningless? I think it's more that pain can be connected with things that are considered meaningful, like overcoming obstacles, achieving difficult tasks, etc. So the mistake would be to glorify the pain itself rather than seeing it as a tradeoff where we accept pain in order to gain the greater pleasure of a job well done.

But the culture of "hard work", "discipline", "overcoming our natures", etc. etc. runs deep.

Quote from Kalosyni

Quote from AxA

One guy even said afterwards that this was exactly the philosophy he's been looking for.

Are you offering (or planning to offer) anything for those individuals? ....those who may want more resources, such as books to read: "Living for Pleasure" by Emily Austin (for someone who is not wanting a deep dive but it generally explains it well) and "Epicurus and His Philosophy" by DeWitt (for someone who enjoys detailed deep dives). I myself would hesitate to recommend the forum itself, because it is a very time consuming endeavor, so only good for those who have tremendous concentration and time to sift through things (I really need to finish working on some basic introductory materials). Cassius has produced some introductory videos, many which are very detailed and which may be good for some folks to check out. This early one is a good one to start with, as it is not too long, but yet covers 5 important aspects:

This is a big open question that I see there has been much discussion about on this forum. How to introduce the philosophy? I watched a couple of videos on the Epicurean Friends youtube channel which have been good. Also one little presentation that I really like is this little play:

There's certainly room to more fully develop a program from total beginner through to solid understanding of the philosophy. Something with a link that could be shared with anyone with an interest.

Quote from Cassius

As to these, here are some personal comments. Not everyone will respond the same, and everyone has to do what they think is right with their own local group. With that caveat, here are some thoughts as to "some of the objections that came up:"

Quote

- Pain as a source of meaning vs boring bland state of continuous pleasure (I did not even get into the whole "pleasure as absence of pain" definitional issue, and this came up at the end and was never really addressed)

Yes, this is why it is necessary ultimately to get into this issue of what "pleasure" really is, and how it encompasses everything we find desirable in life, mentally and physically. There is literally no activity that anyone will find desirable for them to pursue that is not to them pleasure, and there is absolutely no reason for them not to be willing to pursue whatever activities that bring them pleasure, so long as they in fact bring them more pleasure than pain. It is a killer problem to be boxed into pleasure as being ONLY sipping win and eating cheese, and I would avoid that like the plague by taking it head on. Epicureans like Cassius Longinus and his friends certainly did not live that way, nor did those who engaged in spreading the philosophy through writing, and you can cite the examples given by Torquatus in On Ends Book One as to his ancestors who were military leaders being totally reconcilable to Epicurean philosophy.

Pain is not meaning in itself, it's just pain, and Epicureans are fully willing to embrace pain when the result is more pleasure (desirable living) than pain.

There is much that can and should be done to develop this point, and I would push back hard at it any time it raises its head. And it will raise its head, regularly, anytime a group gets started or new people come in, because this attitude is entrenched in the Stoicized view of Epicurus that has prevailed in the academic world for many years. Modern histories and commentaries on Epicurus are mostly written by people who disagree with large aspects of the philosophy, and who want to pick bits and pieces of it just to pursue their own agendas (primarily based on virtue-based ethics). Everyone is going to want to deal with this issues in their own way, but this is the reason for the part of our website which states that it is devoted to "Classical Epicurean Philosophy" and not "neo-Epicureanism"

About Us: Classical Epicurean Philosophy Unadulterated by Humanism, Platonism, Stoicism, Buddhism, or Other Eclecticism

Quote

- The necessity of dealing with violent external enemies raised on hate who will be "harder" than you chill garden people (I had to reassure this guy I'm not a pacifist, but it remains an issue how much to compromise in the name of defence)

Again this objection would be a killer if true, but there is no reason to accept it. THere is every reason to believe that Epicurus and his friends complied with their military service. No one ever accused them of refusing to serve when their time came, and you can be sure that would have been charged had it happened. As in the first answer, you can cite Torquatus, Cassius Longinus, and even Julius Caesar himself as people who were either explicit or implicit Epicureans. "Passivism" as a goal makes no more sense than "virtue," as a goal. Sometimes it is a good idea, sometimes a terrible idea. "Turning the other cheek" is Christianity, not Epicureanism.

Quote

- The value of spiritual beliefs and practices in comforting the afflicted (one participant gave an impassioned speech about the beauty of Aphrodite's grief over the death of Adonis and how oppressed women could find comfort in this. I had no response)

At a deep level you have to come to terms with whether a person is so afraid of pain that they want to adopt fantasy answers, or whether they want the truth. Not everyone wants the truth and those who don't are not going to be at home with Epicurean philosophy. Epicurus appeals mostly to those who see life as intrinsically pleasurable, rather than intrinsically suffering (such as Buddhism or the like) or those who would have preferred never to have been born, or who are in revolt against nature because they themselves think they are superior to nature. You could go on and on with this answer but this is a part of the reason that Epicurus advised not giving in to "the crowd" and to their false beliefs, and Diogenes of Oinoanda pointed out how the crowd catches the disease of false beliefs like sheep. You do your best to help everyone who wants to be helped, but there are lots who don't and you can't let them hold you and your friends back from living happily yourselves.

Quote

- A sense that this philosophy is "for individuals" (or friend groups) and is somehow disconnected from wider politics, something that only the privileged can do, and that does not address world issues (my usual response to this is instead of trying to influence how people vote, which is "downstream" of their beliefs and values, I see more potential in going "upstream" to these beliefs and values themselves - imagine how a world of Epicureans would vote)

As to the philosophy being only for the privileged, that too comes from the false definition of pleasure as ONLY consisting of luxury and sensual stimulation. As for Epicureans being aloof from politics, that is a false idea in large part. Epicurus advised against pursuing a political CAREER, as that places you at the mercy of the mob, but he did not advise against action when action is appropriate. This is developed very well in the Boeri book referenced here on the cite ( podcast interview with the author is here):

Blog Article

Lucretius Today Interviews Dr. Marcelo Boeri - co-author of "Theory and Practice of Epicurean Political Philosophy: Security, Justice, and Tranquility"

In Episode 197 of the Lucretius Today Podcast, on October 19, 2023, we were privileged to speak with Dr. Marcelo Boeri, co-author with Javier Aoiz of Theory and Practice In Epicurean Political Philosophy - Security, Justice, and Tranquility. Professor of Ancient Philosophy at the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile. Dr. Boeri is originally from Buenos Aires, and after receiving his Ph.D. from the University of Salvador in 1995, he has worked extensively in the field of Ancient Greek…

Cassius

October 22, 2023 at 8:20 PM

As mentioned before, we have a rule against pursuing politics here at the forum, and I would advise something similar in any local group, especially in getting off the ground. But that is not a policy against individuals pursuing political issues outside the group, and in fact I personally advise engagement and participation in anything you think will truly lead to greater pleasure for you. The problem with allowing those discussions within the groups is that they are too divisive, and they will lead to the false perception that Epicurean philosophy is necessarily capitalist or communist or left or right or any other necessary grouping. There are clearly some things (primarily supernatural religion) which are off limits due to the philosophy itself, but like-minded friends can organize themselves in many different ways and still be entirely consistent with core Epicurean views. For those who want to debate, it's the aloofness and asceticism of Stoicism that would by nature lead to inactivity. David Sedley has a good article on "The Ethics of Brutus and Cassius" which mentions how -- if you want to talk about resistance to 'tyranny' for example - it's the Stoics who generally postured rather than acted when action was deemed appropriate.

Display More

I think I'm going to have to get into the definition of pleasure issue in the very next discussion.

The idea of life being "primarily suffering" vs "primarily pleasure" is interesting, and I might just say that if you see life as primarily suffering, you will probably find greater comfort in Christianity, Buddhism, and Stoicism, which seek to "revolt against" or "transcend" nature to escape from suffering or somehow give it meaning. I'm very fortunate to live a primarily pleasant life, and I want to spread that and be around others who also feel this or who are at least open to the possibility of a mostly pleasant life.

I sometimes start to get excited about the idea of spreading and expanding the movement, but I have to keep reminding myself that having 10 excellent friends is far better than having 10,000 followers.

I want to encourage this to spread, but I like the idea of a large number of microcommunities based around compatible groups of friends. No need for one unified organization that works for everyone. If groups of Christians, Buddhists and Stoics form friendly associations where they support each other as good friends then that's a net good for everyone. Some Epicurean ideas could be helpful for them even if they reject a lot of the others.

In fact, of all the Epicurean ideas we covered, I think the extreme high value placed on friendship is the most significant of all. Something that could be a benefit even to people who disagree with everything else in the philosophy.

When I think Greek dance I always think of the sirtaki dance from Zorba.

Zorba was not great at managing his desires and household business, but he certainly knew how to enjoy the moment!

A valuable teacher for a stuffy stoic English intellectual like Basil!

I feel dancing has many parallels with laughter as a direct and undeniable physical pleasure. It has a conditioning effect, keeping the body (and thereby mind too) loose and fresh.

Report on yesterday's in-person Eikas gathering in Toronto

The group was formed and event announced on the meetup.com platform 2 weeks ago.

We had 20 people show up at an alternative new age cafe called Alternity, sitting on cushions around a table. (Picture attached.)

4 of them knew me personally, including one friend who was very supportive in joining the group first and sharing with her friends.

2 people said they were familiar with Epicurus. One had read Lucretius and The Swerve. The others almost entirely found the group through general interest in philosophy, although there was one who said she had no interest and philosophy and was interested in the simple living aspect.

We started by going around the circle and each person saying name and why they came or any other comment. Then I introduced some of the main points of the philosophy as shown in the brochure I printed. The rest of the 2 hours was open discussion. I was ready to bring up new points when the conversation stopped, but it continued all the way through.

The group generally responded favourably to these ideas. One guy even said afterwards that this was exactly the philosophy he's been looking for.

Some of the objections that came up:

- Pain as a source of meaning vs boring bland state of continuous pleasure (I did not even get into the whole "pleasure as absence of pain" definitional issue, and this came up at the end and was never really addressed)

- The necessity of dealing with violent external enemies raised on hate who will be "harder" than you chill garden people (I had to reassure this guy I'm not a pacifist, but it remains an issue how much to compromise in the name of defence)

- The value of spiritual beliefs and practices in comforting the afflicted (one participant gave an impassioned speech about the beauty of Aphrodite's grief over the death of Adonis and how oppressed women could find comfort in this. I had no response)

- A sense that this philosophy is "for individuals" (or friend groups) and is somehow disconnected from wider politics, something that only the privileged can do, and that does not address world issues (my usual response to this is instead of trying to influence how people vote, which is "downstream" of their beliefs and values, I see more potential in going "upstream" to these beliefs and values themselves - imagine how a world of Epicureans would vote)

By the end, there was enthusiasm to have another meetup next month, which I will be holding as a pot luck feast, and I will start a second monthly event to be a cafe discussion like this one.

I encourage all Epicureans to arrange in-person gatherings anywhere in the world. As long as at least one other person shows up, it's worth it. No need to wait for other Epicureans to present themselves. The general philosophically curious public is ready for these ideas!

Love that food board! I wonder if there's a cookbook dedicated to Epicurean-style eating? (hidden among the many cookbooks that use the word "Epicurean" to mean "gourmet") If not that would be a fun project.

Quote from Cassius

Quote from AxA

Or even ancient "clickbait" lol

That's a good joke but I wouldn't rule it out entirely.

We have the article here (professor Gellar-Goad) which argues that "The sun is the size it appears to be" was intenionally phrased as a "shibboleth" or litmus test of proper understanding.

"Death is nothing to us" is pretty similar in impact, not to mention "pleasure is the absence of pain." And we have in DIogenes Laertius that Epicurus was known to say spicy things about other philosophers.

Add to that the statement from Cicero's on the nature of the gods that "Hereupon Velleius began, in the confident manner (I need not say) that is customary with Epicureans, afraid of nothing so much as lest he should appear to have doubts about anything. One would have supposed he had just come down from the assembly of the gods in the intermundane spaces of Epicurus!"

So it's entirely possible that certain phrasings where intentionally presented in controversial ways to create what some people call "teachable moments" where you're shocked into looking at things in a new way.

One thing the Epicureans were not was shy, retiring, wallflowers who drew back from the first hint of controversy!

Display More

I like this attitude of fearless playfulness. Seems to be something about the Epicurean perspective that brings out this feeling.

I like the admonition (VS41) that we must "philosophize, laugh, and manage our business" all together. Might even think of it as a triangle that needs all three sides to be maintained. Sound philosophy, prudent practical operations, and an active sense of humour. Whenever I become too dull and serious I know I've gone off somewhere.

Thank you all for the feedback!

I had no idea that there were such reservations about the tetrapharmakos formulation. I'm going to keep it, but in introducing it I'm going to emphasize how it's a highly simplified "kindergarten" version of the philosophy. Or even ancient "clickbait" lol

From my understanding of the PD/VS parallels, PD1 and VS1 match, PD2 and VS2 match, but PD3 doesn't have a VS parallel, and PD4 matches VS3.

For the VS4 translation: I'm going to switch "disregard" to "despise". "Disregard" just sounds too dismissive for pain, too much like the word "ignore". I believe "despise" in antique usage meant something very close to "disregard"/"ignore", but it also has a kind of noble "rising above" and "holding in contempt" flavour to it which I think would be more meaningful to anyone who is actually in pain.

Kalosyni, your brochure looks great. I like the garden motifs like with the vines. I want to collect imagery like this, make a collection of anything that brings out that Epicurean Garden feeling. I see some good images in the gallery here, but I'd like to see more of these kinds of "flavour" images that do not necessarily reference specifically Epicurean things but support the overall "vibe".

I'm going to change "Trust your senses over your thoughts" to "Trust your senses over your theories". "Thoughts" might be too general and suggest we should doubt our own minds in general, whereas I think the contrast of senses vs theories makes it clear what we should base our thoughts on.

Here's my draft brochure for the in-person Eikas this weekend. As a tri-fold brochure it starts on the right panel of page 1, then all of page 2, then finishes on the left and middle panels of page 1.

Curious to hear your feedback and especially if anyone feels I'm misrepresenting Epicurus's views.

Quote from Patrikios

Quote from AxA

In the Youtube video player, first click the "CC" icon to enable captions.

My YouTube player shows "Subtitles/closed captions unavailable".

Hopefully, the subtitles will show up in the completed videos (after the symposium).

Yes, it looks like in this case the subtitles became available as soon as the livestream was complete (same link).

So for any of these videos, the procedure would be:

(1) If you are able to activate Youtube subtitles: first click the "CC" icon to enable captions. Then click the gear icon (settings), choose "Subtitles/CC", choose "Auto-translate", and then choose your target language.

(2) If you are unable to activate Youtube subtitles: open Google Translate alongside the video (in another window or on another device). Select Greek as the input language and click the microphone to start listening. Then play the video.

I only caught a few minutes of the symposium but it was fun to see such an event put on.