Search Results

Current "best version" in our Core Texts section: Cicero's "Torquatus" Presentation of Epicurean Ethics - from "On Ends" Of all the remaining texts, Torquatus' statement at XII - 40 of Book One of On Ends might be the most clear, direct, and practical statement of the Epicurean view of the "ultimate good" - and how to achieve it - that survives to us. Until now I don't think we have a thread focusing directly on this passage so this is to serve that purpose. It seems to me that almost every phra…

Here is a link to the Latin at Perseus: [40] Extremum autem esse bonorum voluptatem ex hoc facillime perspici potest: Constituamus aliquem magnis, multis, perpetuis fruentem et animo et corpore voluptatibus nullo dolore nec impediente nec inpendente, quem tandem hoc statu praestabiliorem aut magis expetendum possimus dicere? inesse enim necesse est in eo, qui ita sit affectus, et firmitatem animi nec mortem nec dolorem timentis, quod mors sensu careat, dolor in longinquitate levis, in gravitate …

Rackham 1931Parker 1812Yonge 1853Reid 1883Latin Library Edition[40] “The truth of the position that pleasure is the ultimate good will most readily appear from the following illustration. Let us imagine a man living in the continuous enjoyment of numerous and vivid pleasures alike of body and of mind, undisturbed either by the presence or the prospect of pain: what possible state of existence could we describe as being more excellent or more desirable? One so situated must possess in the first p…

I have always been more than a little concerned with Rackham's translation, and the absence of many others to which to compare it. If others can find other versions (or want to make their own!) please post in this thread. Look at this for example: In the final sentence the latin is jocunde - of which "agreeable" is one translation, but of the options listed at Perseus "agreeably' is probably the least appropriate. Since we are talking clearly about pleasure in this passage, why not use the more …

OK I will be more plain: we need Don and Joshua versions of these three passages!

The 1812 Version by S Parker

Yonge version:

Yes exactly. Many of these older translators (and maybe some not so old too) seem to be trying to effectively edit and change the teachings through choice of words - and that's where we have to drill down to get past that back to a more clear statement of what Epicurus was saying. I was able to find and post two more versions above that I didn't have in front of me before. I see maybe that "agreeably" maybe started with Yonge and the older Parker version has it right. However I see the Parker ve…

But it looks like Parker is not including the parenthetical "which the Greeks call the telos" so likely he's not being strictly literal either. At least as of this morning I am only finding three translations: Rackham, Yonge, Parker. But at least that's two more than I had before.

Parker translation: I will begin in that method which my master observed before me, and define the subject of the question ; not that I suppose you want any such instruction, but that we may proceed more regularly. It is therefore demanded what is our chief and ultimate good, into which, as it is agreed among all philosophers what- soever, the rest are universally resolved, and itself into none. Epicurus will have this to be pleasure; as, on the contrary, pain to be the greatest of evils; and he…

No! thank you! Oh gosh it's got those funny "s" characters -- but who knows -- the Brown has that too and it's my favorite, so we need to see if this guy also does as well or better than the Moderns.

OK on second look that version IS the same version as the "S.Parker" cited above. Looks like this is like the Browne version of Lucretius - they are obscuring the name of the translator to protect him or otherwise. I haven't checked the actual text yet but the Collier introduction appears exactly the same. Interesting!

BINGO ! Another good one to add to the list -- thanks! I won't be surprised if there are many others, actually, given Cicero's stature and the topics of the book. Hopefully we will find some more but this one looks like an interesting version!

I would rebuke Reid for his failure to use the -- what is it called _____comma? -- after the "numerous," but otherwise I agree! And that's probably not the only place his version is better by far Got it -- the OXFORD comma.

I think I also like Reid's version of the Chryssipus statue example: But actually at Athens, as my father used to tell me, when he wittily and humorously ridiculed the Stoics, there is in the Ceramicus a statue of Chrysippus, sitting with his hand extended, which hand indicates that he was fond of the following little argument: Does your hand, being in its present condition, feel the lack of anything at all? Certainly of nothing. But if pleasure were the supreme good, it would feel a lack. I agr…

I have completed a transcription of the Reid translation over to the forum, and I am going to feature it instead of the Rackham version in the "Core Texts" links. Here it is: Cicero's "Torquatus" Presentation of Epicurean Ethics - from "On Ends" All comments on the differences between this and Rackham are welcome so if you have any please post.

I think I am now repeating myself but every time I read this paragraph I come back to it wondering exactly what is going on. So now I can wonder about the Reid version: (Quote) I am all in favor of wittily ridiculing the Stoics, but am I the only one who finds Chrysippus' witticism hard to follow? Is it necessary to feel a lack of it (when it is absent) in order to identify something as the supreme good? Or maybe there's some entirely different point. I certainly think I understand the issue on …

(Quote from JJElbert) Unfortunately I agree with that comment. I think in order to really understand the argument there's something about "feeling the lack" that connects "the supreme good" in a way that doesn't seem obvious (at least to me). More to the point, I think I can come up with an elaborate explanation of it (see above) but since we are going to be talking about this to people who are new to Epicurus and philosophy in general, we need a clear and direct way of explaining what is going …

At this moment I think I would try to link this to the discussion with Philia as an example of trying to "measure pleasure by reason" and coming to a "reasoned understanding of pleasure" in order to dig out why the illustration seems (again, to me) so unsatisfying. Part of the problem may be that this is an argument from Chrysippus, who has a Stoic was an arch-proponent of logic over feeling, trying to make a ham-handed logic-based point about pleasure (which he detests as a feeling that distrac…

(Quote from Cassius) (Quote from Cassius) I can almost see Epicurus gasping "OMG!!! " if he could know that some in his own school were arguing that. Though I doubt he would have restrained his response to an expression of exasperation. Someone(s) would have had a lot of explaining to do to Epicurus as to how they managed to fall so far from the prototype. For anyone who didn't get the message after he explained it to them in person, we'd probably have some good texts on excommunication if he co…