Here is a good article, about happiness and sex, "It's not sex that makes you heathier and happier--it's what you do before and after":
I am wondering if VS41 and 42 should be read together as one unit?
"One must laugh and seek wisdom and tend to one's home life and use one's other goods, and always recount the pronouncements of true philosophy. At the very same time, the greatest good is created and the greatest evil is removed." (Saint-Andre translation)
I realize sex and reproduction are not the same question but I would analyze them largely together.
There were birth control methods back in time, read about them here -- but ease and availability of the modern use of birth control (and for a time there was legal abortion in the USA -- Roe vs. Wade passed in 1973 but was overturned June 2022) -- the pill created the freedom to enjoy sex without concern for pregnancy.
Here is a good article on enjoying the sensual quality of sex through tantra:
Lucretius is supportive of sex as a way to satisfy the claims of the body, but he is critical of romantic love. I'll be at more liberty to comment when I get home from work.
The mores of the time of ancient Greece were such that prostitutes were legal and were taxed. So if a man developed a romantic attachment to a prostitute it would lead to problems, since he could never be assured of her love (as she would have other clients, and perhaps was pitting him to try to make him jealous).
it makes things difficult outside of one night stands which as you move from early 20s to early 30s become less desirably it seems for most.
Just want to mention that "one night stands" -- may or many not bring more pain then pleasure, it depends on both parties fully understanding the terms of the encounter. And before considering a "one night stand" one should contemplate this guidance:
PD5: "It is not possible to live joyously without also living wisely and beautifully and rightly, nor to live wisely and beautifully and rightly without living joyously; and whoever lacks this cannot live joyously."
I wanted to make a new topic about another question as well. It seems so many young people (18-50) are just not having sex. Men but also women increasingly as well. I couldn't find the exact quote but it's something like "I can't distinguish the Good without sex, food etc.." Why do you think young people are leaving sex behind despite increasing secularization?
I found this very good article about the trend of less sex (in California), which brings up lots of reasons why (and also briefly mentions an increase in depression).
There are other reasons which the article doesn't fully address: perhaps modern sex-education (which likely occurs in California) increases the fear of sexually transmitted diseases...The awareness of disease is so prevalent and the fear of disease is so great that no one wants to risk it. And perhaps there is a higher incidence of sexually transmitted diseases going around.
Also, maybe technology (cellphones/internet) is subduing the mind-body connection so that people are less aware of sensations of the body.
Epicurus didn't know about the bodily chemicals of dopamine and seratonin, but yet he was referring to the good feelings that arise with food, sex, etc. One can only determine for themselves if they don't need sex -- so this is a subjective feeling that is up to each individual. If it is too difficult to find a romantic partner and to do so safely, then one must find other physical enjoyments.
List of human life issues for which there are Epicurean philosophical remedies (there are specific Principal Doctrines and Vatican Sayings (etc) which address these issues).
There are Epicurean remedies for the following:
--anxiety that arises when realizing we are mortal and will one day die.
--anxiety that arises when we notice a drive to preserve our life for as long as possible.
--anxiety and fear that arises when we are sick and experience pain in the body (understanding the nature of pain).
--problems which arise when we pursue pleasure without proper understanding - that we must remember to do so in a manner which takes into account the long-term results.
--problems which arise due to an incorrect understanding of pleasure - prevention of problems by understanding the nature of pleasure and its limits and its maximum (natural boundaries) thereby opening up our ability to see all of our options for doing what is necessary for the long-term happiness of the soul.
--being dominated by the groundless opinions of others - recognition that pleasure and avoidance of pain is a natural drive and the contemplation of what is necessary for happiness for the body and the mind gives a guide for making the best choices, and that pleasure and a pleasant life is readily available (we don't need to be rich to attain it).
--incorrect understanding of pleasure - physical pleasures are of the nature to be in movement (with a beginning, middle, and end), but the mental pleasures have longer stability as we contemplate the goodness of being alive (pleasure is attainable when our lives are safe and secure, and we think on our good memories and future anticipations of good things and good friendships).
(This may need some revision, and perhaps I missed something?)
************
November 11, 2023
Two additional points:
--anxiety from religious fears
--fear that arises from lack of knowledge
Another thing to consider, since in modern times we have a much more complete understanding of the natural world and phenomenon, as compared to the ancient world, is that our current scientific understanding surpasses what ancient Epicureans believed. Yet, the ethics aspects of how to live a happy life still applies. So I don't have to believe all (regarding the nuances of natural physics) of what Epicurus taught to still see myself as "being an Epicurean", because I still see myself as understanding the world as being natural not supernatural, and also that pleasure is a guide of life.
JMGuimas welcome to the forum! Let us know here in this thread if you have any questions 
Also, during the meeting I mentioned how the wearing of Epicurus rings might have been a way to identify oneself with the Epicurean philosophy. Joshua, toward the end of the meeting you found something regarding cups and rings which you read to us...can you post a link for that?
Last night we had a good meeting, and a total of eight of us! I brought up the following two questions which you can read in the following thread. If you missed the meeting, but would like to weigh in on the discussion topic, please feel free to do so:
Last night at our Zoom meeting I brought up the discussion question of "What makes someone an Epicurean?" and also followed that with "Would you consider yourself an Epicurean?" ...and we had lots of interesting thoughts shared on these two questions.
Here are a few of the points (of what I can remember) which came up regarding whether someone considers themselves to be an Epicurean:
-- a person adopts that label for themselves
-- the study and implementation of the philosophy of Epicurus
-- feeling agreement with all [or most] of the philosophy of Epicurus
-- regular attendance at 20th meetings
-- belief in specific things, such as a materialist view of the universe (Cassius has a good list in the preceeding post in this thread).
There isn't a strict line that would prohibit one to consider themselves as such. Epicurus isn't alive to say who is and isn't an Epicurean.
Occasionally we notice that there are some people who "are Epicurean" without knowing about Epicurus. So that brings up the idea regarding the importance of a philosophical lineage, and the following point by Cassius:
My own first question is "Does the person call himself an Epicurean?" Epicurean philosophers have always acknowledged a debt to the person of Epicurus himself as the founder of the school. So if the person doesn't explicitly talk about Epicurus, that is probably a bright line that would eliminate that person from being considered to be a part of the Epicurean school, no matter how many admirable personality traits or interests we can identify in them.
Joshua, Godfrey, kochiekoch, Onenski, TauPhi, Lowri834 -- if I missed any good points, please add them to this thread, thanks.
And also, everyone else is welcome to weigh in on this topic as well
Eoghan Gardiner sorry to hear you can't make it, hope to see you on a Zoom sometime in future.
Novem welcome to the forum!
Thanks for the invitation Kalosyni! It would be great to chat with you all in a meet but unfortunately I also have a conflict at that time
You're welcome, and perhaps sometime in the future we may have a meeting earlier in the daytime (perhaps on a weekend...since an earlier time such as 2pm ET would also allow for some of our European members to attend). Hope your daylight savings time transition turns out okay. Looking forward to seeing your continued posts on the forum.
Thanks for the invite though! Maybe one day I’ll be able to.
You're welcome, and hope to see when you can
Just a reminder that this next Monday is our First Monday Epicurean Philosophy Discussion - 8pm ET - via Zoom - meet-and-greet and discussion! If you haven't yet attended a Zoom and you are interested in attending, let us know here in this thread or private message me, and I will get the link to you.
We'd enjoy getting to meet some of you who have been posting lately -- burninglights -
@Blank_Emu43 - Jo. ...and others who have been visiting Lowri834 Plantpierogi
And European time zone members (wanted to include you though realize it may be inconvenient time) Titus Peter Konstans Eoghan Gardiner
fyi - with Zoom there are some of us who choose to use voice only, so it isn't a requirement to use video.
Will be sending a private message with Zoom link to our regulars.
And then after reading that we can reflect upon PD32: "With regard to those animals that do not have the power of making a covenant to not harm one another or be harmed, there is neither justice nor injustice; similarly for those peoples who have neither the power nor the desire of making a covenant to not harm one another or be harmed."
This an interesting read (link to full article follows):
Studying chimpanzee behavior may offer insight into our own species.
"We can better understand where we come from and what makes us human. We can better understand which kind of behaviors and adaptations were present in the last common ancestor between humans and chimpanzees, and have a better idea of the sociality and behavior of ancient hominin species," Lemoine said, referring to extinct species on the human lineage.
"It also teaches us what we have in common with our closest living relatives, how similar we are with wild animals, and that we only differ from our cousins in degree and not in nature," Lemoine added.
I think there are elements of "resilience" with Epicurean philosophy, but yet in the modern psychology it seems that people use resilience as a way to put up with all the nonsense of unnecessary desires (such as desires for fame and status, etc.).
From the Letter to Menoeceus (Saint-Andre translation):
Third, keep in mind that some desires are natural whereas others are groundless [note]; that among the natural desires some are natural and necessary whereas others are merely natural; and that among the necessary desires some are necessary for happiness, some for physical health [note], and some for life itself. The steady contemplation of these facts enables you to understand everything that you accept or reject in terms of the health of the body and the serenity of the soul — since that is the goal of a completely happy life.
I would understand "serenity of the soul" as being the same as a healthy mind (a mind not filled with fear or anxiety), and within this healthy mind arises a feeling of ataraxia. So ataraxia is not something you do, but it is a feeling which is a result of wise living.
