Search Results

Check out what came in on interlibrary loan this afternoon! I'll share thoughts etc on this thread. Stay tuned...

Skimming through on a Friday night. Reading the actual text translations and a little commentary. First impressions: Fascinating but fragmentary. Still enough continuous text to be understandable in parts. Jury still out on idealist vs realist debate; have to dig in on that Overall organization of Philodemus's On Piety: 1. Arguments for the gods 2. Observance of cult and ritual (This section was especially interesting and unexpected) 3. Harms and benefits from the gods 4. The origin of atheism a…

I think it's also important to look at the actual word that Philodemus uses in his title: ΕΥCΕΒΕΙΑ (eusebeia) http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/h….04.0057:entry=eu)se/beia Yes, the convenient single word English translation is "piety" but LSJ also gives the fuller "reverence towards the gods or parents, piety or filial respect." Related to http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/h…9.04.0057:entry=eu)sebh/s I get the sense that it implies an obligation (providing what is due to someone, e.g., taxes to the empero…

This doesn't affect the content of the treatise but looking through the introductory material I came across this: The author and title in the physical scroll are designated at the end only by: Φ--- Π--- That's it. Just the first letters are left. The title is taken to be Π[ΕΡΙ ΕΥΣΈΒΕΙΑΣ] since the extant line right before the title and author lines describes the treatise as a ΛΟΓΟΣ logos (treatise) on ΕΥΣΈΒΕΙΑ (piety). BUT! Obbink says it's just as likely that the author of On Piety is Φ[ΑΙΔΡΟΥ]…

Okay, so I literally have Obbink's work of On Piety right in front of me, reading through text and commentary up through Column 26 tonight... And I can't make heads or tails of this first section on the arguments for the existence of the gods. I'm getting the impression that even Obbink doesn't fully understand but uses literal translations and other means to obfuscate that fact. I'm being a little hyperbolic, but not much. As I understand the text, the primary goal here is not to lay out a syst…

(Quote from Cassius) A little of both. The papyrus is in bad shape in a lot of places; however, there's enough continuous text to confidently reconstruct a substantial portion of the author's work. One issue is that there's a lot of technical, philosophical jargon in the original text. With the fragmentary nature of the papyrus, there's a lack of context for these terms. If we had the whole papyrus and a larger body of Epicurean texts there wouldn't be any question what is meant by similarities,…

προσευχεσθαι γαρ εν τωι Περί [Βιων] οικείον είναι [ημεί]ν φησίν. I promised something on prayer yesterday, so to fulfill my self-imposed obligation , here's what Epicurus said about prayer according to column 26 of On Piety. The original is above and is mostly intact in the papyrus. For he says in the On Ways of Life, προσευχεσθαι is οικείον for us. προσευχεσθαι [proseukhesthai] means "prayer", specifically to offer prayers or vows; offer prayers or worship. The word can be broken down into pros…

Taking a quick trip through some columns in the book tonight and wanted to share one line from column 47, ll.1340-1350: (Paraphrase) To be sure, people in general honor or believe in something divine like a god who is benevolent, kindly, propitious, etc.; whereas we Epicureans all regard our doctrines as the true cause of our own tranquility (αταραξιας ataraxia)." I liked the sound of this, but there's actually a lot going on here in the original Greek. I'll post a little more tomorrow. **** Fro…

In looking through Obbink’s work, I found mention of some important words in the original Greek text and thought they might shed some light on some of the extant writings of Epicurus where we have questions. Then again maybe not. So, here it goes. For this entry, we’re looking at prolepsis which is mentioned only twice in On Piety. Column 45, Line 1300 Obbink (starting around line 1280, emphasis added and notes added as parenthetical statements for clarity): And they (Epicurus and the kathegomen…

(Quote from Cassius) This is why I'm so excited about the work of Dr Lisa Feldman Barrett. Her explanation of infants and children forming concepts of concrete and abstract "things" strikes me as that "repeated exposure" idea of prolepses. But those concepts are not immutable. I go back to Philodemus's On Anger where he writes about the ability to control our anger by the exercise of "putting-before-the-eyes" of the consequences of our anger before we're actually angry. This fits nicely with Bar…

(Quote from Cassius) You're welcome. I've been having a lot of pleasure doing it, so I'm glad it's helpful.

I’m going to return to columns 26-36 that discuss the Epicureans participation in the rites and festivals of ancient Greece. However, columns 36 to 59 talk about the benefits and harms from gods. This topic also appears in the Letter to Menoikeus 124 where the hoi polloi think of the gods bestowing benefits on those they like and harms on those the gods dislike. I originally thought this was an empty opinion; however, it seems, from this section of On Piety, that Epicurus and the kathegemones (“…

(Quote from Cassius) Just to be clear, "virtue-hating and all-harassing mouth" is Philodemus's description of the comedy writers. So, he's contrasting, for example, the depiction of Socrates in Aristophanes' Clouds with the fact that Epicurus never got lampooned by the comedy playwrights because Epicurus was so exemplary a citizen of Athens.

(Quote from Cassius) I'm still not sure we're together. Philodemus is describing the comedy playwrights themselves as hating virtue and harassing everybody. Philodemus's tone "momentarily rises in vehemence" (as Obbink notes). The Epicureans are in no way taking a share in this description. Philodemus is disgusted with the comedy writers (whether in reality or just to make a point isn't clear). In some ways Philodemus is equating the political persecution of philosophers and intellectuals with t…

Column 71 has some interesting points: “They [i.e., people manipulated by philosophers ro rulers by means of the poets’ false tales about the gods] will suppose that the gods are terrifying tyrants, and most of all because of their own bad consciences they will expect great misfortunes from them. Thus, as far as we are concerned, on account of the belief which they do no have, they would accomplish nothing [i.e., no proper conception of the gods]. But those who believe our oracles about the gods…

That's a good question. One point is that he seems to be equating the political charges and comedic portrayals of philosophers, especially Socrates (as the extreme case) but also others that were exiled or punished. My take is that Philodemus seems to feel that comedy playwrights shouldn't be "slandering" philosophers as if philosophers should be respected and immune from lampoon. It seems that he's also implying that Socrates may have brought this on himself by being so public in his questionin…

(Quote from Don) As I promised myself, I found that "psychosomatic dispositions" in Column 44 translates the word διαθέσεις (diatheseis). http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/h…D33%3Aentry%3Ddia%2Fqesis So, yes, it does just mean someone's bodily or mental "disposition" so there's no word that's being translated "psychsomatic". Obbink just included that as a modifier to clarify the translation of διαθέσεις. Interestingly, it does include the sense of arranging things in order. So, column 44 encourages u…

To get a little better insight into Obbink's translation, I looked in my copy of Tsouna's The Ethics of Philodemus to see where it might be quoted. Surprisingly, I found something helpful both in itself and in making me dive back into specific servings of On Piety one being col 25. First, Obbink references two other works in regards to column 25: P. Oxy. II 215 col 1,4-24. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…yrhynchus_215?wprov=sfla1 [The first part talks about those people who sacrifice only because…

The following are excerpts and notes from columns 27-36 of Obbink's Philodemus On Piety which outline the participation of Epicurus himself and the early Epicureans in religious festivals and other rites and practices. Obbink also shared more detailed notes in his book, so I may try and share some of those pages in later posts. For now, the material below has proved quite interesting... Quoted in col. 27, On Piety: Epicurus, On Gods (Περί θεών): as being both the greatest thing and that which ex…

Obbink's notes on Matro