Search Results

Kalsoyni asked me about that and every other translation I can find (Bailey, Hicks, Yonge, Epicurus Wiki) focuses on prodigal and sensuality. If it is correct that "sleeping" or "idleness" should be in here, that places a much different spin on the advice and will be very helpful in fighting back the slant that "tranquility' means that Epicureans just want to lay around and do nothing. It would almost be a mirror of VS63 warning against opposite extremes of luxury and frugality. Also: VS11. For …

An admonition against sleeping or idleness would remind me of this from Jefferson's letter to William Short: (Quote from Thomas Jefferson to William Short)

Don is this commentary from Bailey about the section we are examining? As usual Bailey spins hard for minimalism...

Thank you Elli! So it looks like you would disagree with both the standard English translations (Bailey for example) and with Peter St. Andre and his reference to sleep or slothfulness.

Elli so you do not see any possibility too that a reference to sleeping or slothfulness would not also be a reference to someone "out of limits" in the sense of VS63 referring to errors of seeking too much or too little? I think I understand your point as to the limits of dictionaries and the associations that come when languages are used natively, so the only other point to clarify would be that the words used do not in some way mirror VS63 in referencing sleep or inaction as a mirror image of …

Just for the record Don and I crossposted and we had not seen each other's posts first. It's fascinating to have access to someone who is both a native Greek speaker and well read in Epicurus of whom to ask these questions!

This probably doesn't help the discussion much, but I think it is a good idea to look for parallels in other texts, as we have done in VS63 and VS11, and I would add to those this from Torquatus in Book 1 of On Ends. I have underlined below the part that I see these same two errors (which using Elli's terms could be seen as failure to adhere to the limits and go overboard in either luxury or minimalism). So it seems to me that it is reasonable to look for such contrasts being made, even if we do…

One more quick thought -- We (at least I) don't often express the problem of excessive minimalism or excessive frugality as a problem of being "out of limit," but I would say when you think about it yes it's exactly the same issue involved in pursuing certain desires for excitement beyond their natural limit. It makes sense to me that there is a natural limit of how long we can live, and how much action and pleasure we can try to engage in, and also a natural limit as to how little action we can…

Just for the record too, I guess we could consider asking Peter St Andre directly about his thoughts. I have never had any communication with him in the past so I am not aware whether he is reachable or not.

(Quote from Elli) Elli I wonder here if you are saying that "limits" apply more to "desires" than to "feelings"? That would be an interesting direction to go, with desires being intellectual and requiring intellectual limitation (?)

Thanks Tau Phi, good to see that there is anoher variation out there in the "standard" versions.

I am sure that *I* am more confused so I am glad you have not let it go. Looking for the word in other settings would seem to be the best approach.

As someone totally ignorant of Greek I will just interject here that in my view, since no pleasure is bad in itself, the emphasis should always be on the "limitless" or "without limit" aspect in a discussion of why a particular pursuit at a particular time might be ill advised. I personally do not think the words fame, power, money, or any of the similar types of pleasures where it is tempting to pursue them as ends in themselves would ever be labeled as negative in and of themselves by Epicurus…

Important caveat to post 59: While I am comfortable dogmatically stating that the absence of pain is pleasure, and the total absence of pain is the greatest pleasure, and that there is nothing bad in any pleasure or virtue in itself except the *unlimited* pursuit of that activity, I would never walk up to the man on the street or stand on the street corner and shout that out like a street preacher. To me it is necessary to always say - except when we are certain to be speaking to people who know…

(Quote from Don) I would say yes, but that is a subsidiary point, and should never be used to dilute the effect of the prior more fundamental statement that "no pleasure is a bad thing in itself." Just as Epicurus did, you start with the basic that no pleasure is bad in itself, and then state that sometimes some pleasures bring more pain than pleasure, and that *for that reason alone* some pleasures are not choiceworthy. You lead with the theorem and then give an application of it, but to me it'…

I agree that there is a distinction to be made between desire and choice and avoidance and pleasure and it's probably time to go back into that subject, because I am not sure we ever clarified it, and I agree that would help. How does "desire" differ from "choose to pursue" or even just "choose?"

Good to have you Peter! Just to clarify the "edit" in the post, I removed the "color" attribute in the text so that it would be readable on dark themes.

Those are great Elli! I see those as very similar to: The sun IS the size that it appears to be!!

A series of post originall in this thread have been split into a new thread entitled: Modern Neuroscience And The Katastematic / Kinetic Debate