Search Results

This discussion (split from here: What do you mean from the "Golden Mean" of Aristotle? ) reminds me of two other recent things that have been in my mind: (1) i was discussing with someone a new sort of 'self-help' book that the person was reading, which focuses on what I perceive to be psychological self-help techniques geared toward reaching goals. My comment was to ask whether that person had first identified their real goals, as is makes sense to me that is usually would be appropriate to cl…

(Quote from smoothiekiwi) You are absolutely right, we cannot ever forget that, and so we have to use this place as a start, not an endpoint, and move forward into organizing our local real worlds to find (or make from scratch!) Friends who are Epicureans or at least Epicurean-friendly.

(Quote from Don) I thought we already had it here somewhere, but apparently not. That has been remedied: I had forgotten that DeWitt marshals in support of this argument his interpretation of VS42, so this article places that in issue too. I have always thought that DeWitt's argument on VS42 makes sense, so it will be interesting to get comments on that too. epicureanfriends.com/wcf/fileb…the-summum-bonum-fallacy/

Thanks for this deep analysis! I'll just leave the point as is at the moment, because I am not nearly as qualified as DeWitt or even Don to parse the Latin and Greek. I will repeat that I do see differences between "good" and "goal" and I can imagine all sorts of confusion arising from those distinctions. I am reminded of the phrase in Book Two of Lucretius - " ...GUIDE of life, divine pleasure." (ipsaque deducit dux vitae dia voluptas) I am particularly not willing to say that I think DeWitt is…

As a categorical answer for philosophical debate, I agree with you. And as a statement of the *guide* of life I would agree even more. But as a practical and discrete definition of "greatest good" that an average person can apply, I don't think that the single word is sufficient to convey the full meaning that Epicurus would convey if he were here to explain it in greater detail. And I am not yet convinced that he would even attempt to do so, beyond providing the example that he then used to sho…

As I wake up this morning I think it is important to address Don's argument about "Why the hesitancy?" I am sure I have said written many times in the past, and will in the future, that pleasure is the greatest good. So why the hesitancy now? It's not just a matter of wanting to agree or disagree with DeWitt, that's for sure. I think what we are sensing as we drill down on the question is that we need to figure out why Epicurus seemed to be treating this question carefully, which even Torquatus …

Another way of stating the issue: If you are going to ask the question "What is the greatest good?" The answer is "pleasure." But you also have to consider "Should you be asking that question?"

Just in case someone reading this thread is not thoroughly familiar with these passages that are critical to this conversation: First Epicurus quoted by Plutarch: (Quote) Second Torquatus in Book One of On Ends, implying that he himself (Torquatus) disagrees with Epicurus as to what kind of proof is necessary: (Quote)

Yes we may be tilting windmills so I am not inclined to add much more at the moment, other than that I have never had a good feeling about the Tetrapharmakon and I would not accept its wording as being from Epicurus or authoritative. At very best it is a very loose version of the first PDs, and "God only knows" who wrote it and whether it was written as a good or bad example of Epicurean thought (I understand the associated fragments were substantially targeted at combatting errors, but I gather…

Another thought to add: I think DeWitts translation of the same span of time argument makes sense, but not so much his conclusion as to what it means. VS42. The same span of time embraces both the beginning and the end of the greatest good. Doesn't Epicurus say that Pleasure is the alpha and Omega of the blessed life, which is a fairly similar statement? To me, Dewitts translation makes sense as part of the same argument we are having now about "the good.". It's not a statement that life is the …

(Quote from Nate) Those are very helpful cites. I am thinking that the issue is not so much the adjective but the noun. In other words IF we could agree on what "good" means, and that there is more than one, then we could pretty well establish that of all of them, pleasure would be at the top. But are we really clear on what "good" means, and whether there are more than one "goods" or a "single good?" I'm still remembering a comment that Kevin G made recently that the Stoics held Virtue to be a …

(Quote from Nate) I think we crossposted and I did not see this initially. I think you're probably right that we cannot identify a "good" higher than pleasure, but now I am concerned that I do not know what "good"" really is! And that reminds us of course of the statement that we would not have the ability to conceive the good without the pleasures of sex etc...... Diogenes Laertius: [06] They say that he wrote to many other women of pleasure and particularly to Leontion, with whom Metrodorus wa…

Although I think she carried this too far, I think we need to consider what Wright said in Chapter 15: (Quote) Note - this isn't the only deep part -- most all of Chapter 15 is deep and related to this issue.

Note on this passage from Wright: Maybe I am feeling inadequate, or I want to flatter us in this discussion, or something, but whenever I read that paragraph, and especially now in regard to this current discussion, I see this argument as"DEEP" and very possibly brilliant. It's not something that someone can pick out from a couple of readings of Diogenes Laertius at twenty years old, no matter how smart someone is. We've been studying Epicurus for quite some time, reading lots of commentators an…

Just to be clear about Wright, here I think is the heart of what we need to be concerned about: "...Certain images of virtue, vice, truth, knowledge, are presented to the imagination, and these abstract qualities, or we may call them, figurative beings, are made at once the objects of speculation and adoration. A law is laid down, and the feelings and opinions of men are predicated upon it; a theory is built, and all animate and inanimate nature is made to speak in its support; an hypothesis is …

My answer to that question to Don is that some (but not many) don't have the mental capacity to see the full extent of the philosophy. Also it may be a reference to the reality that some people are sickly and die almost from birth, and never develop the capacity through no fault of their own. And this also touches on "how long do you have to live in order to live a full life?" But that "full life" is probably another one of those conceptual traps like "the good."

(Quote from Godfrey) I'll repeat this more clearly below but it seems to me that the issue is that while WE can agree on this, using Epicurean terminology, this terminology differs greatly from all non-Epicurean terminology and so is very confusing unless we constantly restate our context. (Quote from smoothiekiwi) Yes, another occasion on which I can say "I hate that word" ("hedonist") this is where Elli's curse on the use of "isms" terminology rings the most true. (Quote from Don) Again as cit…

This thought just occurs to me: Do we think that Cicero's Torquatus was mistaken to frame the discussion the way he did? If so, do we think; 1 ) Cicero intentionally or negligently misrepresents the Epicurean argument by doing this? 2) Cicero was accurately reporting the way Epicureans were arguing in 50 BC? I ask that because if we begin to have a consensus that this form of argument was an error in talking to Cicero (who certainly did not agree with Epicurean definitions) then we might profit …

SInce all of us have unlimited time to read every possible article on this subject (joke!), here is the Packer article that DeWitt is referencing. I read it when I first found it several years ago, but don't remember much about it. I seem to remember that she questions Torquatus' illustration of the best and worst lives because she thinks that the description of the best life is too active, which is a position I disagree with, so I don't cite the article very often. But it's possible that the re…

(Quote from Kalosyni) Kalosyni I read that article and it is directly on point as to Ciceros motives. It does a good job of collecting examples of Cicero's hostility. It does not really go further than that (that he was hostile) however so it doesn't help much with what Epicurus actually held. In fact the article raises an issue that I agree with (that Epicurus probably did not think the sun was only a foot wide) but then (to my reading) did not follow through with more discussion, which I gathe…