Posts by Kalosyni

This video is on the Death Cafe website, and brings up some "heavy" thoughts:

Quote from Cassius

For me, there is no way that Epicurean philosophy can be understood properly without always keeping in mind this core idea: that we are mortal and that we need to "live like we are dying" - because we are.

I think that there are many ways to expand upon this, because we are also animals who have a life expectancy depending on our health. So we need to take that into consideration. If a doctor visit reveals matastesized cancer then that person is going to make different choices than a person who has potentially 50 more years to live.

It costs money to do things like travel and going sky-diving (or other activities of choice) and so it's a balance between enjoying one's health and vitality (being active and doing things) and considering one's life expectancy. But when you realize what is most important to you, then you can determine the "opportunity cost" involved. And we only have so much time, so we have to make peace with that as well, since it is possible to have lots of projects that we want to finish, but that we may not actually be able to finish them all.

Quote

In microeconomic theory, the opportunity cost of a choice is the value of the best alternative forgone where, given limited resources, a choice needs to be made between several mutually exclusive alternatives. Assuming the best choice is made, it is the "cost" incurred by not enjoying the benefit that would have been had by taking the second best available choice.^[1] The New Oxford American Dictionary defines it as "the loss of potential gain from other alternatives when one alternative is chosen." As a representation of the relationship between scarcity and choice,^[2] the objective of opportunity cost is to ensure efficient use of scarce resources.^[3] It incorporates all associated costs of a decision, both explicit and implicit.^[4] Thus, opportunity costs are not restricted to monetary or financial costs: the real cost of output forgone, lost time, pleasure, or any other benefit that provides utility should also be considered an opportunity cost.

Source: Wikipedia

Regarding the quote from Lucretius, Book 3 :1053 - that is a description of a person who is "lost" and feels restless, anxious, and bored. And that individual definetly needs to take a metaphorical drink of wormwood (rimmed with honey!). The wormwood is bitter and so is the contemplation on one's own death. And this type of person is going to likely need to "take the treatment" multiple times.

Perhaps talking and eating cake at a "death cafe" meeting.

Here's what is happening on the r/Epicureanism on Reddit...found their introductory description:

Quote

Welcome to r/Epicureanism!

I’m sure you have a few questions. The foremost is probably “What the hell is Epicureanism, and why should I subscribe?” I’ve put together this introductory post to make the case for you becoming a follower of both this subreddit and the philosophy.

What is Epicureanism?

Epicureanism is an ancient philosophy based on the teaching of Epicurus of Samos (341-270BC). He based his thinking on a few simple physical principles and built from them an all encompassing philosophy. At its simplest Epicureanism can be summed up as the belief that ‘Pleasure is good, pain is bad.’ It is a misinterpretation of this which has led to Epicureans being painted as depraved pleasure seekers.

Epicurus taught that pleasure is good and should be pursued, but that not all pleasures were worth getting. If a pleasure requires a lot of pain to reach, or gives pain in the long run, then it is foolish to go for it. On the other hand not all pains are to be avoided if they give pleasure in the long run. So while Epicureanism is a form of Hedonism it is a lot more contemplative than Hedonism is usually assumed to be. The careful weighing of the outcomes of our actions reveals which pains and pleasures we should introduce into our lives.

This sort of pleasure-calculation is only valuable however if we agree with Epicurus that pleasure is good and pain bad. How did he reach this conclusion?

What exists?

Epicurus was part of a tradition in Classical Greece of quasi-scientific thinkers. He based his notion of physics on those of the Atomists Leucippus and Democritus. All that existed, they and Epicurus taught, were atoms and the void they move in. All things that we can sense are productions of the movement and compounding of atoms.

Epicurus took this belief and applied it to the human soul. The mind is simply a product of atoms acting within us. On death these atoms disperse and the mind is thus broken up. There is not immortal soul which continues after death. This means that all our concerns should be with the life we lead before death.

While Epicureans in the ancient world were, and still often are, called atheists Epicurus did believe in gods. These gods were made of atoms, exist within the universe, and take no interest in humanity. They live lives of complete tranquillity. This position, and the unusual nature of the Epicurean gods, does lend itself to atheism but is not a requirement of the philosophy. A theistic interpretation of Epicureanism is entirely possible.

What should we do?

There were, and are, many answers to the question of how we should live our lives. A philosophy which aims to be complete must offer us guidance.

Epicurus asked what motivates humans, all living things really. What makes us want to do something? Pleasure. What makes us not want to do something? Pain. We like pleasure. Since we are going to disappear on death we should focus on the things which make us happy. What is the point of living a virtuous life if it makes you miserable? You end up just as dead in the end.

Epicurus therefore rejected the idea of being beholden to society. He withdrew with his followers to a school called the Garden where they studied how to live the good life.

The Good Life

Epicurus separated our desires into categories. There are those that are:

Natural and Necessary – These are those that are required by life. Food, shelter, and the necessities of survival.

Natural, but unnecessary – These are those things that nature has shaped us for but that we can survive without. We might like drinking wine, but water serves just as well.

Unnatural desires – These are the ones that must be cultivated before we even desire them at all. Addiction to cigarettes would be an example, but so would any overly refined desire.

For Epicurus our focus should be in filling those desires which are natural and necessary. We cannot avoid eating if we wish to live so we should take pleasure in simple fare that removes the pain of hunger. If you take pleasure in just removing the pain of hunger then you will not be disappointed when you don’t receive a three Michelin star meal

But it is natural to desire delicious food. It is in the realm of desires which are natural but not necessary that we have to train ourselves. We might want that world class chef to cook our meal but it is unlikely we will have it every day. We have to get used to not having it, but should it appear on our table we should take pleasure from it.

Obviously unnatural desires should be scorned. Why? Because their removal causes pain. Can you guarantee that you will always have an adequate supply of your drug of choice? Anyone who has suffered a caffeine headache might warn people away from that addiction.

This division of desires will tend towards the simple life. Epicureanism will not lead to riotous orgies (at least not all the time) but nor will it lead to asceticism. Pleasure is still good, you just have to take care with which ones you introduce to your daily life.

What else?

A short summary like this will never do credit to Epicureanism. The members of the subreddit have brought together a huge number of articles and posts which you should read. There are great overview articles on Epicureanism here, here, and here.

In the sidebar you'll find links to some useful Epicurean websites that have interesting articles and the surviving Epicurean texts.

If you have any questions ask them here or make a self-post. The members of the sub are friendly. Epicurus placed huge importance on friendship.

Quote

“Of all the means to insure happiness throughout the whole life, by far the most important is the acquisition of friends.”

I’ll leave you with the message written over the entrance to the Garden which welcomed new members.

Quote

Stranger, here you would do well to tarry; for here our highest good is pleasure.

Display More

For the First Monday of October, we will have a new member Zoom meet-and-greet and Epicurean philosophy discussion!

Let us know if you are interested here, or send me a private message.

When announcing/advertizing an in person meet-up, I am thinking that it would be important to state the basic underlying ideas of Epicurean physics in a paragraph with just a few sentences.

This will make it more clear as to whom would want to join. There is no need to appeal to those who on the one hand have religious belief that God created the universe and is concerned about humans (and feel that everything is according to God's plan). And on the other hand there are those who might have a "new-age/visionary/magical" take on the universe (and which might include things such things as belief in multiverses, or other ideas such as healing at a distance and taping into the vibrations of the universe, etc).

This basic paragraph should say: that matter at its most basic level of atoms and void is "semper existentia" (always existing).

And it also should say: that we observe phenomenon and then look for causes, and we don't jump to any conclusions too early - and most importantly we only look at what is part of current life and actual circumstances grounded in reality, and with a pragmatic approach.

This also brings up the question: that we seek to understand natural physics because we seek pleasure and the most pleasant life. But like the chicken and the egg which came first? (Over in another thread I started wondering if Epicurus invested more time into natural physics compared to ethics. But for the record, I am back to my original focus of seeing the ethics as being the primary importance).

Just thinking that anyone who ends up chasing theories like multiverses will end up so distracted that they may never make it over to study the ethics aspects of Epicurean philosophy.

Creating Seven Steps...a thread which I started some weeks ago, almost fell back in the vast ocean of this forum. By chance found it again, spurred on by the recent very good posting by Titus - which you can read his very good thoughts on ethics over on his personal outline thread:

Post

RE: Titus' personal outline

(3) The nature of how to live.

This could also be seen as a continuation of the Epicurean Philosophy Navigation Chart to expand the Ethics. A preliminary list of topics that are important to me:

1. Awareness of becoming and passing away, consciousness of life and death in respect to the nature of the universe, processuality of life

2. Pursuing/Focussing the natural desires which

a.) is Nature's yardstick for happiness

b.) leads to self-sufficiency and autarky

c.) reveals life as an inexhaustible…

Titus

September 21, 2023 at 4:46 AM

I definitely would like to include what Titus has written into the mix here in this thread and possibly for further development on materials - I really want to move forward the idea that I have for either a "7 Steps" or maybe a "Handbook on Epicurean Ethics".

Some further thoughts reflecting on the above article on "self-centeredness". I think a better description of "self-centeredness" is a habit of focusing only one oneself. Everyone naturally has this trait because it is a self-preservation instinct. But some people have more of this than others. Also, in our current modern times, with the internet, digital books, and digital music we can easily entertain ourselves (by ourselves) without the "hassle" of negotiating with whom and what to do. So we can keep feelings of loneliness at bay, but at the expense of interacting with other people. And imagine how many people use their spare time in this way, so that very few people are available or looking to make new friends.

I bring this up because perhaps some of us need to remind ourselves to take a break away from self-centered activities and reach out to others - and as PD27 says:

"Of all the things which wisdom acquires to produce the blessedness of the complete life, far the greatest is the possession of friendship."

Wishing you all a Happy Twentieth!

Vatican Saying 23: "Every friendship is an excellence in itself, even though it begins in mutual advantage."

The following article brings up the idea that to reduce loneliness you need to work on reducing self-centeredness.

Quote

Research conducted over more than a decade indicates that loneliness increases self-centeredness and, to a lesser extent, self-centeredness also increases loneliness.

The findings by researchers at the University of Chicago show such effects create a positive feedback loop between the two traits: As increased loneliness heightens self-centeredness, the latter then contributes further to enhanced loneliness.

“If you get more self-centered, you run the risk of staying locked in to feeling socially isolated,” said John Cacioppo, the Tiffany and Margaret Blake Distinguished Service Professor in Psychology and director of the Center for Cognitive and Social Neuroscience.

Quote

In this view, evolution has shaped the brain to incline humans toward certain emotions, thoughts and behavior. “A variety of biological mechanisms have evolved that capitalize on aversive signals to motivate us to act in ways that are essential for our reproduction or survival,” the UChicago co-authors wrote. From that perspective, loneliness serves as the psychological counterpart of physical pain.

“Physical pain is an aversive signal that alerts us of potential tissue damange and motivates us to take care of our physical body,” the UChicago researchers wrote. Loneliness, meanwhile, is part of a warning system that motivates people to repair or replace their deficient social relationships.

Quote

Evolution of loneliness

The finding that loneliness tends to increase self-centeredness fits the evolutionary interpretation of loneliness. From an evolutionary-biological viewpoint, people have to be concerned with their own interests. The pressures of modern society, however, are significantly different from those that prevailed when loneliness evolved in the human species, researchers found.

“Humans evolved to become such a powerful species, in large part due to mutual aid and protection and the changes in the brain that proved adaptive in social interactions,” John Cacioppo said. “When we don’t have mutual aid and protection, we are more likely to become focused on our own interests and welfare. That is, we become more self-centered.”

In modern society, becoming more self-centered protects lonely people in the short term but not the long term. That’s because the harmful effects of loneliness accrue over time to reduce a person’s health and well-being.

“This evolutionarily adaptive response may have helped people survive in ancient times, but in contemporary society may well make it harder for people to get out of feelings of loneliness,” John Cacioppo said.

When humans are at their best, they provide mutual aid and protection, Stephanie Cacioppo added. “It isn’t that one individual is sacrificial to the other. It’s that together they do more than the sum of the parts. Loneliness undercuts that focus and really makes you focus on only your interests at the expense of others.”

Loneliness contributes to self-centeredness for sake of self-preservation

Study finds positive feedback loop between behaviors

news.uchicago.edu

Homemade Cheese, In Ancient Roman Style:

Quote

Here's something that people made and ate more than two millennia ago, but familiar to all of us. Art historian and chef Nancy De Lucia Real shares a simple cheese recipe that Romans would have eaten in Gaul (modern-day France), cited in writer Pliny's Latin text, "Natural History" written in 77 AD, that says the best cheeses came from the villages near what is now the city of Nîmes in southern France. You don't need to go all the way to Europe to try this Roman staple -- this cheese is easily replicated at home.

Homemade Cheese

Makes one 4-inch round cheese

Since this traditional recipe uses organic whole milk and vinegar for coagulation, the resulting cheese is extremely fresh and without artificial additives. It will keep, covered in an airtight container and refrigerated, for 2 to 3 days.

1 gallon organic, whole milk

½ cup white, distilled vinegar

1-1/4 teaspoons salt

Pour the milk into a 10 to 12-quart saucepot and heat, stirring constantly, until almost boiling.

When milk begins to smoke and almost boils, remove the saucepot from heat.

Immediately stir in the vinegar; let stand 10 minutes.

Meanwhile, line a strainer with cheesecloth, and set it over a large pot or bowl (bowl should be placed inside the sink).

After 10 minutes, pour the milk-vinegar mixture into the cheesecloth set over strainer. The solids (curds) should separate from the yellowish liquid (whey).

Stir the salt into the whey in bowl and then pour it over the curds in the strainer.

Let the curds continue to drain in the strainer for one hour.

Discard the liquid or whey.

After the cheese has finished draining, tighten the cloth around the cheese.

Loosen the cheesecloth and, using a soup spoon (or one that is slightly larger), gently scoop out the cheese and transfer it to a glass or porcelain bowl measuring 8 to 9 inches in diameter.

Pat the cheese into a ball and cover it with plastic wrap.

Store the fresh cheese in the refrigerator until ready to serve.

Homemade cheese keeps refrigerated in an airtight container for 2 to 3 days.

Variation: You can experiment with different varieties of cheese by adding ground black pepper, dried, red chili peppers, or your favorite herbs.

Display More

Recipe: Homemade Cheese, in the Ancient Roman Style

This simple cheese recipe would have been made and eaten by Romans more than two millennia ago.

www.kcet.org

Currently filed under the Ethics section of the forum...Please see this thread on Philodemus on frank speech:

Post

Philodemus - On Frank Speech

A big part of classical Epicurean practice in the original Garden through the time of Philodemus and beyond to even Oenoanda appears to be the one on one consultation or counseling between student and teacher to correct mistaken views and actions. Philodemus outlines this practice and its implementation and importance in On Frank Speech. That is a major component that is lost in our current moment, not to say that we don't help each other hone our understanding, but there are no teachers with…

Don

September 16, 2023 at 10:49 AM

I don't recall there being anything in the early extant texts (PDs etc) that gives reference to "frank speech" and in Lucretius honey is put onto the cup of wormwood (which would be to emphasize a pleasant way of speaking).

Wishing you a Happy Birthday Bryan !!

Quote from Don

A big part of classical Epicurean practice in the original Garden through the time of Philodemus and beyond to even Oenoanda appears to be the one on one consultation or counseling between student and teacher to correct mistaken views and actions. Philodemus outlines this practice and its implementation and importance in On Frank Speech.

Is it not true that we have no evidence of what was happening in the original Garden regarding special consultation or counseling?

And perhaps Philodemus could have developed the ethical aspect much further than Epicurus, and all while remaining true to the core doctrines. I am wondering if perhaps during Philodemus' time there may have been less emphasis on natural physics/science and more emphasis on ethics...but yet I don't know if that is true or not.

Quote from Kalosyni

It does seem that it would be good for us to be on the same page with how we understand Epicurus...and the question of what was philosophy to Epicurus?

Can we take a guess as to the philosophy of Epicurus, and in his ancient school at the Garden, about what percentage of time would a student spend on "book learning" (in that time scroll reading) of natural physics/science and what percentage of time on understanding the role of pleasure and developing prudence? And what percentage of time was not spent on study but on actual enjoyment of life (and also brings up the question of work and how that would fit in to the schedule. Perhaps as a student you "paid" to attend by copying scrolls which were then sold to bring in money for the school, just guessing on that possibility).

But my point is that I now think that a much larger portion of the time was spent on natural physics/science.

In addition to what was said, perhaps this question: Is philosophy the love of knowledge or is it the love of wisdom?

And can we say that the goal in ancient times was to discover the best way to live a good life?

(And in comparison, that there are other goals in modern philosophy).

A question toward the very end came up: "What is philosophy" in which Joshua and I gave "two different sides of the same coin" and so I just want to post further on that because there is both modern and ancient views - how we as modern people define "philosophy" vs how Epicurus defined philopsophy.

Perhaps with my background of the study of art and psychology I am very much at a disadvantage compared to others here on the forum who have a background of the study of history, or law, when it comes to philosophy and grasping what it is understood to be (or defined).

It does seem that it would be good for us to be on the same page with how we understand Epicurus...and the question of what was philosophy to Epicurus?

The first two translations in post 4 seem to say that is it better to speak in oracles. And the third one says something very different: that is it better to be frank and straightforward than to speak in oracles - so this one would need a very close examination of the Greek words used.

VS29 -

"Employing frankness in my study of natural philosophy, I would prefer to proclaim in oracular fashion what is beneficial to men, even if no one is going to understand, rather than to assent to [common] opinions and so enjoy the constant praise which comes from the many." - Inwood and Gerson

VS29 -
"Speaking freely in my study of what is natural, I prefer to prophesize about what is good for all people, even if no one will understand me, rather than to accept common opinions and thereby reap the showers of praise that fall so freely from the great mass of men." - St. Andre

Thoughts:

I would interpret this as saying that Epicurus was saying a lot more than just "pleasure" is a natural guide. And I think "oracular fashion" means he was being very specific about what is beneficial and good.

We ran out of time last night in our Wednesday night discussion, so didn't really get much on this one. Curious for thoughts by Onenski, Joshua, and kochiekoch ...and anyone else.

VS28 - One must not approve of those who are excessively eager for friendship, nor those who are reluctant. But one must be willing to run some risks for the sake of friendship. - Inwood and Gerson

Thoughts:

If you are too eager you aren't paying attention to the risks. If you are too reluctant then your fears are getting in the way.

TauPhi you had a good interpretation last night in our study meeting...I am trying to remember what you said?