Search Results

(Quote from Cassius) From my perspective, the big difference between "pleasure" and, say, "virtue" as the goal is that pleasure is first and primarily a biological reality, then the concept is built in that. Virtue as a concept is built in a foundation of sand at the seashore. There's nothing there. It's a concept on a concept. Pleasure and pain, in contrast, in some form are present in all forms of life down to amoebas and tardigrades. Even plants exhibit some aspect of this. Humans move from t…

I'll need to go and read DeWitt's "summum bonum fallacy" (Where is that again?), but here's my take. I've ranted in similar themes before. To my understanding, summum bonum is the Romans' way of translations Greek τέλος into Latin. They're both trying to get at the same thing. Pleasure is the "highest good", the goal, etc. because it is that to which everything else points. It's at the end of the road (τέλος/goal) to which all roads lead. It's the "highest good" because it's at the top of the mo…

Here are my thoughts on Norman DeWitt’s “Epicurus: The Summum Bonum Fallacy” (1950). Overall, I’m unimpressed with DeWitt’s aim of using a linguistic quirk between Greek and Latin to make a larger philosophical point. Numerous languages get by with no definite article and can convey as complex and nuanced as any language with a definite article: “Linguists believe the common ancestor of the Indo-European languages, Proto-Indo-European, did not have articles. Most of the languages in this family …

(Quote from Cassius) I have to disagree with that characterization. There *is* a single answer for everyone's telos/summum bonum: The "greatest good" for everyone is pleasure.

You posted another reply as I was typing this, but I think this address posts #33 and #35 above... As I said previously, saying "pleasure is the 'highest good' (summum bonum)" doesn't mean the "best among equally good things"; it means the highest, greatest, loftiest, first, supreme, best, utmost, extreme good thing - the one good thing that stands alone; the good thing to which all other good things points. It is the sum of all good things; the summit of all good things. I sincerely don't under…

I was initially going to respond point by point to the comments posted in this thread. That, however, was going to take more work than I was willing to put in, but ya'll may recognize where I'm responding to specific points made elsewhere. We may end up breaking this out into a separate thread at some point as it seems we've strayed far from discussing Aristotle's golden mean. That being said, since I promised I'd have more to say, here is my further contribution to this thread. As I understand …

(Quote from Scott) I have to disagree. The Good (ταγαθον) is nothing more than "that to which all things aim." It couldn't be more concrete. Why do people do what they do? To seek pleasure. They can lie to themselves and say they're being virtuous or being responsible or being selfless or being [fill in the blank].... but they're all aiming at pleasure. The feelings are two. Either you're feeling pain or you're feeling pleasure. Pleasure *is* The Good, the Goal, the Guide. All other motives are …

(Quote from Scott) LOL! Don't get hung up on the capitalization. There's really no other way in English to graphically emphasize "the cheese stands alone" aspect of pleasure. It's not transcendent woo-woo. It simply means there isn't anything other than pleasure that stands alone. Aristotle or the Stoics be damned with their wisdom and virtue - or - to taunt the bull - Wisdom or Virtue. Name anything else - any other motivation - and ultimately it's going to come down to "you're aiming at pleasu…

Sounds good, Scott . That being said, I literally woke up this morning with the following addendum to my "every human" points. One of the characteristics of the wise one is "However, in the end, not every bodily constitution nor every nationality will permit someone to become a sage." (DL X.117) Evidently, not every human being is constitutionally or in a situation that will give them the ability/opportunity to "become wise." So, ideally, every human should be encouraged and able to follow the p…

Scott : I'd concur with Cassius 's answer to your question to me (How's that for a convoluted response!) I'd also add that some people's political situation (authoritarian) may preclude them from fully engaging in the pursuit of pleasure as their natural telos. They still have that innate birthright. They may just be unable to fully realize it.

I don't understand the hesitancy to accept the word "good." In the the letter to Menoikeus alone, Epicurus uses "good" (αγαθός (agathos) or a form of it) 16 times, including: 133. He has diligently considered the end (τέλος) fixed by nature, and understands how easily the limit of good things (των αγαθών περας) can be reached and attained, and how either the duration or the intensity of evils is but slight. 134: he believes that no good or evil is dispensed by chance to men so as to make life bl…

(Quote from Godfrey) Okay, good! Now, we're getting somewhere. So, as a generic adjective or noun in common speech, we all(?) can agree on this this meaning of good and evil. Oh, and I have to applaud the use of "goodies" in #39! That was good (Quote from Godfrey) One of the issues then is talking about pleasure as the capital G Good and not just a lower-case g good. The caveat for that is that I don't think there was any way to capitalize Greek in the time period in which were talking, or Latin…

I want to read the papers posted by both Kalosyni and Cassius but haven't had a chance yet. I also don't have direct responses to Cassius 's questions in post #43 yet, but I'd like to address the summum bonum issue directly in De Finibus. Above in post #19, I said summum bonum was the Latin translation of Greek τελος [telos]. I'm going to amend that to saying summum bonum was the Latin literal translation of Greek ταγαθον [tagathon]. Artistotle defines ταγαθον as that "at which all things aim." …

(Quote from Cassius) That's exactly the opposite conclusion I'm reaching. I think Epicurus felt the answer one gives to that question "What is the Chief Good?" accomplishes everything. If you're aiming at something other than pleasure, your "conduct of life" is going to be off kilter. To me, it's not a "logic game," it's as practical as it gets for Epicurus in this "problem" that "all philosophers" are expected to answer. Aristotle's and "Torquatus's" definition of the Chief Good is simply "that…

(Quote from Cassius) You use that to wisely inform every choice and rejection in the conduct of your life. Pleasure is your North Star, the lighthouse by which to steer your little boat.

(Quote from Godfrey) I'm legitimately sorry for being dense, but I'm just not seeing the "logic game" in all this. Steering toward pleasurable experiences should undergird all our choices and rejections. That's Epicurus's answer, as I see it, to the question of "what is that to which everything else points?". We should aim at that goal/telos. That's the definition of the "Greatest Good" - simply that thing that you base your "conduct of life" on. I don't see it as a logic problem or some kind of…

Wow That's a lot to work through. For now... (Quote from Cassius) Atoms don't have free will. Humans do. Therefore, humans can decide to what goal they wish to direct themselves. Is there a goal other than pleasure that you would suggest? I want to ask more questions about your post, but I'll leave it at that to get/keep the ball rolling.

(Quote from Cassius) Ah! But Epicurus based his answer on nature (babes and animals), not devious logic. So, my first inclination is to say "Who cares what the other philosophers argue?" I think that's what he meant about needlessly prattling on about the Good. His argument was "look to nature." That'll tell you what the Chief Good is.

(Quote from Nate) Good question. How do you parse his calling "practical wisdom" as the "greatest good" in light of this thread so far?

(Quote from Cassius) Yes.