Search Results

Search results 1-3 of 3.

  • Today I was looking at the graphic I did which lists four key aspects of Epicurean thought, and I prepared this to focus on alternate translations of the third of the points: Posted at FB with this discussion starter: Here is a significant passage from the Letter to Menoeceus which mentions "good" and "evil." Some might choose to read this as saying simply that we cannot recognize good and evil without our senses, but others will say that Epicurus went further, and taught that independent standa…
  • Yes Don if those were substituted I do think the modern interpretation of that would change a lot, because I don't think today we consider good/evil synonymous with pleasure/pain at all. But I also feel sure that Epicurus understood that there was a dramatic issue involved in choosing between the two sets of words, so we need to take a position on whether the "wider" meaning (referring to good and evil) is more true to what Epicurus said, or whether it's the more narrow reference to pleasure and…
  • Yes on your posts 4 and 5. I think your conclusion is absolutely correct as to Epicurus, and i suspect we agree on what I am about to say as to the manner of presentation: Until someone sees the Epicurean conclusion that you just stated, it isn't appropriate to collapse the reasoning process too fast. Just like in the Epicurus quote about "the meaning of good" and walking around endlessly discussing it, Epicurus would have been faced with opposing schools constantly talking about "the good." So …