Posts by Kalosyni

This is exciting!!!

Quote

There was one submission that stood out clearly from the rest. Working independently, each member of our team of papyrologists recovered more text from this submission than any other. Remarkably, the entry achieved the criteria we set when announcing the Vesuvius Challenge in March: 4 passages of 140 characters each, with at least 85% of characters recoverable. This was not a given: most of us on the organizing team assigned a less than 30% probability of success when we announced these criteria! And in addition, the submission includes another 11 (!) columns of text — more than 2000 characters total.

Lowri834 thanks for the RSVP, and looking forward to seeing you there

For tomorrow night's discussion topic:

"Romantic Love and Friendship in Epicurean Philosophy"

I will bring up some fun questions to spur on the discussion.

This meeting is especially a great place for newer members to meet-and-great others who are studying the philosophy of Epicurus. Let us know if you are interested by posting here (or by private message).

Looking forward to seeing you there!

Quote from Bryan

We also have Philodemus On Home Economics (column 20, Tsouna translation):

"we must refer to the preconception that we possess about 'a good moneymaker,' ask in whom the content of that preconception is substantiated and in what manner that person makes money, and ascribe the predicate 'good moneymaker' [to whoever it may be in whom] those feature are attested"

In Diogenes Laertus Book X, it says of Epicurus:

"The terms he used for things were the ordinary terms, and Aristophanes the grammarian credits him with a very characteristic style. He was so lucid a writer that in the work On Rhetoric he makes clearness the sole requisite."

Now if we look at what Philodemus wrote in the example here, as refering to the preconception, then we have this formula:

1. word or phrase

2. a very specific person (or possibly also a very specific event or specific object)

3. specific actions (exact unfolding details)

So then rather than using words (or phrases) abstractly, we tie them down to clear, specific, and exact instances.

Now...if we were to go back to the beginning of this entire thread and every person goes back and explains each and every abstract word with this much clearer way of speaking...then we might have something much more beneficial. In my opinion we would all be much better off if when posting with more clarity and exactness (less abstraction...myself included).

And I am very grateful to Bryan an for finding that helpful quote by Philodemus.

So this goes for words such as "religion", "philosophy", and in a recent post the word "sacrifice"...and any other vague words here.

Let me try with the word "philosophy" (with the formula based on Philodemus)

1. philosophy

2. David Sedley

--- and the story of the Garden within "A Few Days in Athens"

3. interpretation of the writings of Epicurus (what David Sedley does)

---- a group of people who come together to study what Epicurus had to say (in "A Few Days in Athens" ...how they gathered in a school)

So this hopefully illustrates more clearly what I mean by philosophy. And the formula is based on past things (not future things).

If those who used words such as "religion" or any other words that may need clarifying, may like to try this out, to bring more clarity. (Possibly every person would have a slightly different way of rendering clarity for a particular word?)

****

Edit: I see I wasn't as clear and exact as Philodemus recommends, since I wasn't specific enough about what David Sedley does (which clarifies the word philosophy) and also didn't include enough details from "A Few Days in Athens).

In De Rerum Natura Book 4 Lucretius writes on the passion of love (Lucr. 4.1058)

I found this interesting excerpt from a JSTOR article on Lucretius:

Quote

Yet another factor in Lucretius' treatment of love is concerned in a different way with the concept of romantic love. What Lucretius is attacking is a romantic and obsessive attitude to love which may have existed in life, then and now, and which we certainly find reflected and amplified in literature. In a sense the models of fiction are always more powerful than life, so that Lucretius was right to consider them a special danger; Plato would have agreed with him. Literary models of obsessive love have ranged from Phaedra to Proust's Swann. A particular model that may be useful here is the poet-lover in Catullus' love poems. Since Catullus was contemporary with Lucretius, it is reasonable to assume that he represents attitudes with which Lucretius was familiar. Lucretius' satire on
love gains even more point if it is read as a commentary on the way of life of the Catullan lover. Some critics have claimed that Lucretius is criticizing Catullus' own words and the way of life of his circle of friends; we may at least take the Catullan lover as an example of the type Lucretius has in mind, a type that existed in Latin literature, especially in the sub-category exclusus amator, as early as Plautus and Terence.2' This type
exemplifies a rival kind of withdrawal from everyday Roman life and perhaps even an insidious popularized form of Epicureanism which Lucretius may well have been anxious to combat.

"Lucretius and Love" - Aya Betensky

The Classical World, Vol. 73, No. 5 (Feb., 1980), pp. 291-299 (9 pages)

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4349198

On Catullus, from Wikipedia:

Quote

It was probably in Rome that Catullus fell deeply in love with the "Lesbia" of his poems, who is usually identified with Clodia Metelli, a sophisticated woman from the aristocratic house of patrician family Claudii Pulchri, sister of the infamous Publius Clodius Pulcher, and wife to proconsul Quintus Caecilius Metellus Celer. In his poems Catullus describes several stages of their relationship: initial euphoria, doubts, separation, and his wrenching feelings of loss. Clodia had several other partners; "From the poems one can adduce no fewer than five lovers in addition to Catullus: Egnatius (poem 37), Gellius (poem 91), Quintius (poem 82), Rufus (poem 77), and Lesbius (poem 79)."

Regarding marriage and adultery in ancient Rome I also read on Wikipedia:

Quote

During the Republican era, marriage, divorce and adultery were matters dealt with by the families concerned. Falling marriage and birth rates in the Later Republic and early Empire led to state intervention. Adultery was made a crime, for which citizen-women could be punished by divorce, fines and demotion in social status; men's sexual activity was adultery only if committed with a married citizen-woman. Families were also offered financial incentives to have as many children as possible. Both interventions had minimal effect.

And so we need to take into consideration the historical context of the time in which Lucretius wrote De Rerum Natura.

Happy Birthday Jo.

There is a concept called the “Ladder of Abstraction” created by American linguist S. I. Hayakawa in his 1939 book Language in Action. It describes the way that humans think and communicate in varying degrees of abstraction.

From concrete at the bottom to abstract at the top:

Up and Down the Ladder of Abstraction – Choosing the appropriate abstraction level – jtoy

This thread is relevant for tonight's discussion:

Thread

VS66 - Problems With Bailey's Vatican 66

@elli has pointed out another problem with Bailey: https://www.facebook.com/groups/Epicure…55210121194609/

Let's see again another example of a translation in engllish for this E.saying LXVI.(66), which is a tiny sentence.

Ancient greek : Συμπαθῶμεν τοῖς φίλοις οὐ θρηνοῦντες ἀλλὰ φροντίζοντες.

New greek : Συμπαραστεκόμαστε στους φίλους όχι θρηνώντας αλλά φροντίζοντάς τους. (translation from ancient to newgreek is by Takis Panayiotopoulos, founding member in the Garden of Athens)

In english I…

Cassius

January 25, 2018 at 6:42 AM

Found this interesting fragment...that the rituals to the gods were not followed at Epicurus' Symposium:

Quote

Athenaeus, Deipnosophists, V p, 179B: Again, Homer tells us what we are to do before we begin to eat, namely, we are to offer as first-fruits some of the food to the gods. ... Homer also shows us the feaster at least offering libations ... all of which Plato also retains in his symposium. But with Epicurus there is no libation, no preliminary offering to the gods; on the contrary, it is like what Simonides says of the lawless woman: "Oftentimes she eats up the offerings before they are consecrated."

Source

Tonight Vatican Sayings 65 & 66!

Open to Level 03+ members (and Level 01 by pre-approval of the moderating team).

Tonight's Agenda:

1. Welcome
2. Discuss latest popular forum threads & latest podcast
3. Discussion on Vatican Sayings 65 & 66:

VS65. It is vain to ask of the gods what a man is capable of supplying for himself.

VS66. Let us show our feeling for our lost friends, not by lamentation, but by meditation.

• We will continue with the same Zoom link as previous Wednesday night meetings.
• Level 03 members - those who haven't previously attended, please let us know here in this thread if you are interested, or message me.
• Level 01 members - message me or Cassius if you are interested in attending (to be considered for approval by the moderator team).

Today it is coming up in my mind about this particular topic, that since there isn't very much remaining --- Diogenes Laertius lists that Epicurus wrote a book "On Love" (we can only hope it is laying in waiting to be digitally read amongst the chard scrolls of Herculanium) --- and so we will need to gather all the scant evidence from the extant texts and make inferences about it.

Love and the "objects" of love (and with relevance to Valentine's Day since now marketing includes every kind of relationship).

• friends
• spouse (or life partner)
• family (children, parents, siblings, etc)
• lovers (modern times = "friends with benefits" and ancient times = "hetairai")

We have this section on the forum (which I will need to study):

Philodemus On Methods of Inference

This article mentions Epicurus:

Quote

Empirical philosophy begins in Greek medicine, which formulates the first imperative to use experience as an instrument of knowledge, and initiates European thinking about methods of empirical inquiry. Antiquity’s greatest thinker on empirical methods was Galen, its greatest doctor. Many leading empirical philosophers had medical training or studied medical writings and collaborated with physicians. This began when Democritus and Epicurus drew medical empiricism into natural philosophy, but their efforts were swamped by the prestigious rationalism of Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics. The chapter also considers the empiricism of the Babylonians, and the career of empiricism under Islam.

Empiricisms of Antiquity

AbstractEmpirical philosophy begins in Greek medicine, which formulates the first imperative to use experience as an instrument of knowledge, and initiates Euro

academic.oup.com

Here is this excerpt from Diogenes Laertius Book X:

Quote

Also that in his letters he wrote to Leontion, "O Lord Apollo, my dear little Leontion, with what tumultuous applause we were inspired as we read your letter." Then again to Themista, the wife of Leonteus : "I am quite ready, if you do not come to see me, to spin thrice on my own axis and be propelled to any place that you, including Themista, agree upon" ; and to the beautiful Pythocles he writes : "I will sit down and await thy divine advent, my heart's desire." And, as Theodorus says in the fourth book of his work, Against Epicurus, in another letter to Themista he thinks he preaches to her.¹⁰ [6] It is added that he corresponded with many courtesans, and especially with Leontion, of whom Metrodorus also was enamoured. It is observed too that in his treatise On the Ethical End he writes in these

terms¹¹ : "I know not how to conceive the good, apart from the pleasures of taste, sexual pleasures, the pleasures of sound and the pleasures of beautiful form."

Source

Quote from Bryan

wow, that makes sense, well I'll be ready then!

It should be a fun discussion!

I can...or anyone else, who wants to post here some direct quotes from Lucretius, Vatican Sayings, Diogenes Laertius, etc. ...anything that touches on the special topic "On Love"...would be great!

(In our upcoming discussion, of course we will need to consider all the many meanings of the word "love").

Coming up next Monday is "First Monday Epicurean Philosophy Discussion" - Via Zoom at 8pm ET - Open to forum members.

We now see in stores all the Valentine's hype, so a fun special topic to discuss is: "What does the philosophy of Epicurus have to say about love?" And if we take the big picture view of Epicurean philosophy, let's see if there is anything which we can apply to our lives today.

We'll also have time for open discussion beyond the special topic, such as current popular forum threads or questions.

For those who haven't attended before, let us know if you are interested by posting in this thread or message Cassius or myself.

For any women out there, here is a YouTube which reflects a good understanding regarding groundless opinions (which comes up in the Letter to Menoeceus) which are neither natural nor necessary. This presents some practical ideas about common unrealistic beauty standards, which apply to all women no matter what race or nationality.

Quote from Cassius

and one to illustrate an Epicurean alternative of the same scene.

I made this last year, which by using the bride as representative of pleasure and the bridesmaids as attendants gives it a more modern twist which is likely slightly different than what Cassius was envisioning.

Quote from DavidN

As far as the question "is it a religion" to me goes. Does it take the place of a contemporary religion in your daily life? IE Does it inform your sense of morality and justice, do you draw comfort or strength from it's teachings? Do you endeavor to live as an Epicurean or is it just a discussion topic, would be the dividing line for me.

It is coming to me, that there can be lots of ways that one could decide to refer to how they feel about Epicurean philosophy...and now the idea of "life philosophy" is popping into my head...or "world view" -- and probably the benefit of deciding on a particular label is that if you want to talk about it to a friend who doesn't know anything about it, then you could use your chosen label to convey what you feel about it. And I could imagine that if one said it was a religion, then their friend would be asking different questions than if one said "life philosophy" but everyone can choose to go there or not, depending on how they feel.

And I do think you'd have two slightly divergent groups if one group says "we have a church and this is a religion" compared to "we have a life philosophy, and this is a practice group".

Some thoughts this morning...So there could be these two desires:

1. A desire to bring an internal "religious/spiritual" aspect to one's thoughts regarding the importance and application of Epicurean philosophy. This could be done on one's own. And there are as many ways to give words to this as there are individuals.

2. A desire to bring a group of people together for an "Epicurean Church".

My thoughts coming up: as soon as you move from what is internal to creating an externalization of this in a group or church setting, then you will have a few problems on your hands. 1) The problem of power vs. submission - who will lead the church and how will they do it. 2) How will the church deal with those who are not properly submitting to the leaders or goals of the church 3) How will the church remove a leader that is doing unethical actions, behaving in a overly-controlling manner, or working against the long-term goals of the church. 4) Since the idea of being "tax-exempt" came up and usually churches give monetary support to their leaders, there is the question of how does paying someone for their time affect how the leader leads a group, and how does it affect the people who are giving money to the leader (how they all relate to each other, and which further feeds into the problem of power vs. submission).

Tonight Vatican Sayings 63 & 64!

Open to Level 03+ members (and Level 01 by pre-approval of the moderating team).

Tonight's Agenda:

1. Welcome
2. Discuss latest popular forum threads & latest podcast
3. Discussion on Vatican Sayings 63 & 64:

VS63. Frugality too has a limit, and the man who disregards it is like him who errs through excess.

VS64. Praise from others must come unasked, and we must concern ourselves with the healing of our own lives.

• We will continue with the same Zoom link as previous Wednesday night meetings.
• Level 03 members - those who haven't previously attended, please let us know here in this thread if you are interested, or message me.
• Level 01 members - message me or Cassius if you are interested in attending (to be considered for approval by the moderator team).