Search Results

Waterholic thanks for the very interesting post. (Just FYI I edited it only to remove the color attribute from the Russell quote so it would be readable on a dark theme.) It's 2am for me as I type this so I will respond further later when I think more!

I wasn't able to reply earlier but here is another angle on the question that goes along with what Kalosyni wrote: As I see it, the core of Epicurean philosophy that gives life to all the rest of it is the "worldview" of how the world operates without supernatural forces, how there is no life after death, and so on. Those are things that don't change no matter what circumstances you may be in. The ethics, while it is what we use to make day to day decisions, is much more -- totally in fact -- co…

(Quote from waterholic) Yes I think this is an important point, and we keep circling around the same issue: If we are going to indulge in the game of attempting to articulate clearly intermediate and ultimate goals, and if we are going to reduce that goal to one word, then the word is "Pleasure" and the reason that is the one word is that that is the single faculty that Nature has given us to decide what to choose. We are essentially taking the position that we are good with Nature's choice, and…

(Quote from Don) Is not anxiety just a subset of pain?

Don, for an Epicurean god, perhaps, but for a human being? I can see why you would be tempted to take that position due to the passages which focus on how particular fears can be reduced or eliminated through particular means, but I see "anxiety" as a subset of the overall pleasure-pain doctrine and not as something unique in itself. And in fact I would see the temptation to consider it to be unique is one of the most dangerous aspects of the way some people elevate tranquility to be the goal r…

I had time to come back and make another comment: When I refer to the conflation of tranquility and pleasure as "one of the most dangerous" ideas I don't mean "dangerous" in the sense of evil or something malicious in and of itself. I mean dangerous in the hands of those who aren't thinking through the implications. What I think I observe is that there is a great tendency in the non-Epicurean intellectual world to do everything possible to take the focus off of "pleasure." I don't think that is …

Ha - another question: If anxiety must be avoided and never accepted at all costs, would anyone ever choose to have a boyfriend or girlfriend, or get married, or have children?

A very good observation on the "mole." The Epicurean gods are invulnerable (apparently) but we are not. And as long as we have vulnerabilities then the ability to sense something to worry about is extremely valuable. I suppose we have discussed that too but while it seems appropriate to reduce our experience of pain to as close to zero as possible, we would not want to "eliminate" the sense of pain itself, as it serves effectively as a requirement of human life. Stoics and those who are willing …