Posts by Kalosyni

Just an fyi...today I am in the process of updating the trophy system, so you will all see some new ones popping up

Is this chart of any use?

A Comparison Chart on “The Goal of Life” – NewEpicurean

It seems that this hypothetical could be made more simple and clear. And there could be multiple ways to do so. For example:

"Would you rather be Epicurus, living in pain on your deathbed surrounded by friends knowing that you have made great contributions toward understanding the nature of the world and helping others understand it as well"

or

"Live your last week on earth pain-free but all alone on a mountain as a shepherd, and then have a very quick death from a sudden heart attack from eating too much sheep cheese, AND leave no legacy."

The original hypothetical as stated in post 1, sheds light on the natural desire for good health (and why so many picked the shepherd), since the wording of the hypothetical was such that the shepherd was not in pain.

We cannot control what kind of death we will have, or if we will be surrounded by friends or die alone. AND this question: How much can we control what kind of legacy we leave, since a portion of that process occurs by chance?

Another good article, the full article has lots of good details.

Quote

Ancient Greeks enjoyed a varied diet of vegetables, legumes, and fruit as the mainstay. But, being a coastal country with many islands, fish and seafood were an important part of the diet and animal husbandry and hunting brought meats and game to the menu. However, the consumption of fish and meat varied in accordance with the wealth and location of the household.

List of the Various Foods Enjoyed by Ancient Greeks

Ancient Greek foods were similar to the foods we know today, except the variety was limited. Learn about ancient Greek foods and how they evolved.

www.thespruceeats.com

On ancient Greek diet:

Quote

Greeks of that time were very fond of fish, perhaps even more than we are today. For lunch, they would routinely dine on any fresh fish that was available, including sea bream, mullet, sardines, and eels.

There was always an assortment of legumes from which to choose, including lentils, beans, chickpeas, peas and broad beans to accompany the fish.

The eternal European staple of bread was always part of the midday meal, accompanied by cheese, olives, eggs, nuts, and fruit.

https://greekreporter.com/2022/08/04/ancient-greeks-were-gourmands-with-a-preference-for-fish/

Tonight at 8pm, we will cover Vatican Saying 26 & 27, please join us. (Post here in this thread if you need to get the Zoom link).

VS26. You must understand that whether the discourse be long or short it tends to the same end.

VS27. In the case of other occupations the fruit (of one's labors) comes upon completion of a task while (in the case) of philosophy pleasure is concurrent with knowledge because enjoyment does not come after learning but at the same time (with) learning.

Thank you everyone for your contributions. I will digest these suggestions and add in some of them. It does seem that everyone has their way of slicing and dicing, so there really isn't one "right" formula. Anyone can contribute here...and/or create individual personal outlines over in that section (since I may not add in everything that has been suggested).

Forum Member Outlines of Epicurean Philosophy

Epicurean Philosophy Happy Hour is coming up Monday evening 8pm - open to all forum members. Let's celebrate summer with an opportunity to share about happy memories or enjoyable experiences (if you feel like it would be enjoyable to do so). Then we'll follow that with open discussion on Epicurean philosophy.

Thanks for the RSVPs so far!

Any other RSVPs?

Quote from Kalosyni

8. Study natural science and practice the Epicurean ethics together with those of like mind.

This would also include application of "canonics".

And perhaps for modern day Epicureans this would also include studying climate change so as to understand the rate in which climate is changing (for the sake of understanding safety).

Edit Note: See post 10 below for an updated version.

**************************************************

I am in the process of brainstorming...and would especially appreciate any ideas for "steps" or descriptions (and maybe it needs more than 7 steps?) from Joshua, Don, Godfrey, Martin, TauPhi, Onenski, and kochiekoch.

The following "Seven Steps to the Ethics of Epicurus" is a work in progress:

1. The nature of the world, the soul, death, and god(s) - The basis of everything is atoms and void and nothing comes from nothing - there are no supernatural elements or forces, no afterlife, and no angry gods. Death is natural and not something to dread.

2. Pleasure is the guide of life. Pleasure is good and pain is evil. But at times the painful is chosen if it prevents a worse pain or leads to a greater pleasure or to the health and happiness of the soul. The virtues are useful when they lead to pleasure and health.

3. Choices and avoidances according three categories -- natural & necessary for health of the body and the soul; natural but not necessary (a variation of sensation); unnatural and unnecessary.

4. Friendship

5. Safety

6. Justice

7. The gods are blissful beings who are to be emulated

8. Study natural science and practice the Epicurean ethics together with those of like mind.

Quote from Cassius

I can't believe even the staunchest ancient Epicurean really thought that **everything** Epicurus said was blindingly unique. We all know much of what Epicurus taught he learned from starts others had made, such as Democritus. So it's only natural that smart people do regularly hit on similar thoughts. The uniqueness of Epicurus comes through in certain particular ways, and it's probably most helpful for us to think about those particular ways and the reasons for them. That's the obvious way to sniff out when someone who's talking - for example - about "virtue" is speaking as an Epicurean or Stoic or whatever.

It does seem that having a basic knowledge of all the ancient philosophies could be helpful.

Perhaps...the uniqueness of Epicurus is deconstructing and replacing the "perfect" and the "ideal" and properly placing pleasure (together with the removal of pain) as the best guide to a good life. If you think about it, it is only the wealthy who can try to buy perfection (or vain opinions) in the lifestyle that they pursue. (And then sometimes others who erroneously envy the wealthy). But the necessary pleasures required by nature are easy to procure.

Quote from Don

He references the similarity to VS54:

54. Do not pretend to love and practice wisdom, but love and practice wisdom in reality; for we need not the appearance of health but true health.

There is also the reference to health in the Letter to Menoeceus, in the opening:

"Let no one put off the love and practice of wisdom when young, nor grow tired of it when old. For it is never too early or too late for the health of the soul."

You can view a modelling of the architecture, which shows it was a stoa:

A good article covering ancient skepticism -- There were two distinct traditions or movements of skeptical thought: Pyrrhonian and Academic.

Quote

While ideas that can loosely be called skeptical may be found from very early in Greek philosophy, skepticism as an organized method of thinking in Greco-Roman antiquity appears in the post-Aristotelian period. There are two distinct traditions or movements of skeptical thought: Pyrrhonian and Academic. The hallmark of ancient Greco-Roman skepticism, in both traditions, is suspension of judgement, brought about by the juxtaposition of equally persuasive opposing views on any given question. In the Pyrrhonist version, but not the Academic, this is claimed to have a practical benefit: ataraxia or tranquility. In both traditions, however, skepticism is understood not merely as a topic of theoretical reflection, but as something to be lived. The Pyrrhonian tradition claimed inspiration from Pyrrho of Elis (c. 360–270 BCE), who is usually considered the first Greek skeptic. However, the exact nature of Pyrrho’s thinking is very hard to reconstruct, given the scarcity of the evidence. Pyrrho’s direct influence seems to have been short-lived. But shortly after Pyrrho another skeptical movement arose in the Academy, the school founded by Plato. The first head of the Academy to take the school in a skeptical direction was Arcesilaus of Pitane (316/5–241/0 BCE). Whether Pyrrho was an influence on him is a disputed question. But some aspects of Socrates’ activity, as Plato portrays him, might seem to encourage skepticism, and Arcesilaus is said to have acknowledged this influence. The skeptical Academy lasted for roughly two centuries, its other major figure being Carneades of Cyrene (214–129/8 BCE). By the early 1st century BCE the skepticism of the Academy seems to have moderated considerably, and it was at this point that the Academy itself, as an institution, came to an end. But in reaction to this softening of the skeptical attitude came a new skeptical movement led by Aenesidemus of Cnossos (dates uncertain, but active in the early first century BCE), repudiating the Academy and instead identifying itself with Pyrrho. This later Pyrrhonian movement continued for roughly three centuries. We know the names of a few Pyrrhonists. But the only complete Pyrrhonist works we have are the extensive surviving writings of Sextus Empiricus (probably late 2nd or early 3rd century CE). Because Oxford Bibliographies for Pyrrho of Elis and The Academy already exist, this bibliography is somewhat weighted toward the later Pyrrhonist tradition stemming from Aenesidemus.

It says: "In both traditions, however, skepticism is understood not merely as a topic of theoretical reflection, but as something to be lived."

And this is what would be different from Epicureanism -- as it seems that theoretical reflection is at times contained within Epicureanism?

Quote from Don

So, I don't think πενία should be interpreted as abject poverty or living on the edge of starvation and similar scenarios.

Your translation of this brings up a reminder regarding translations. Cassius are we going to assemble a recommended translation at some point on VSs and PDs?

Thanks Don, turns out that we covered this in last night's Zoom (but I had forgotten you had posted your translation on it) and so hoping kochiekoch, TauPhi, Martin, Cassius take note of this thread. (and Onenski also).

Quote from Don

Parcus has a connotation of frugality and thriftiness. I can see Epicurus hammering that home, that we don't need great wealth to find pleasure, to be happy.

It reads from this that we can think of the goal of nature is to live a pleasant life -- and this would be more like quiet pleasure rather than over-the-top pleasure (which requires wealth).

It is surprising to me that 67 percent of all Americans believe in heaven - and indicates that many people believe that some aspect of the soul continues on after death.

Using Cassius' new outline on Lucretius we can read about the Epicurean understanding of the soul:

Lucretius - Editions And Topical Outline - Epicureanfriends.com

www.epicureanfriends.com

Here is an interesting article:

Excerpt:

Quote

Story Highlights

• 74% believe in God, 69% angels, 67% heaven, 59% hell, 58% the devil
• Nearly three in 10 do not believe in hell or the devil
• Belief greatest among frequent churchgoers, Protestants, Republicans

The percentages of Americans who believe in each of five religious entities -- God, angels, heaven, hell and the devil -- have edged downward by three to five percentage points since 2016. Still, majorities believe in each, ranging from a high of 74% believing in God to lows of 59% for hell and 58% for the devil. About two-thirds each believe in angels (69%) and heaven (67%).

Belief in Five Spiritual Entities Edges Down to New Lows

Americans' belief in five religious entities -- God, angels, heaven, hell and the devil -- have all edged down since 2016, continuing a longer-term trend.

news.gallup.com

Hi Everyone,

Next Monday is the first Monday of September, and we will be having another Epicurean Philosophy Happy Hour.

I'd like to start with some social discussion such as "How was your summer?" and "Did you go on any vacations?" or "What was a memorable summertime event or experience?" - since we know that the mental pleasure of memory is greatly enhanced by telling others about our happy memories. And then after that open it up to Epicurean philosophy topics.

Everyone, please RSVP here in this thread if you think that you will likely be attending -- It's Labor Day, and can imagine that some of you may have some holiday plans and so may not be able to attend...so an RSVP will help us out.

(Feel free to bring a beverage of some kind to sip on during the Zoom).

Asclepiades welcome to the forum

Quote from waterholic

2. The description of Epicurus as quite a despotic figure with a strong will to dominate feeble minded and expand his influence by any means necessary, including missionary work.

The origin of this is from Martha Nussbaum?

Quote from Cassius

(2) the issue of "dogmatism" vs "skepticism" in Epicurus is definitely there, and dedicated skeptics are definitely going to have a problem with Epicurus.

When reading and studying the Epicurean maxims, there are two ways to "listen" to them:

1) as if they were a kind of "ultimatum" and "absolute" (this is an incorrect way in my opinion).

-or-

2) something to contemplate and to apply as needed in the manner of a "medicine" or a therapeutic -- for example, "death is nothing to us" is not some kind of "absolute truth" but a way of thinking after applying reason...and likewise for other maxims.

Quote from waterholic

1. A frequent parallel or comparison with Christianity

I do not like this aspect of DeWitt myself, and I know that there are others here on the forum who also feel the same way.

Quote from waterholic

I have been reading the book very slowly and I suddenly realised that if this had been my first introduction to the philosophy of Epicurus, I might have given it a pass

I personally think that it is intermediate/advanced reading, because it seems to me that you need to know a little bit already (and it's for people who have time for reading long and "wordy" explanations).

As a study method, I personally think sticking with studying and discussing the extant texts is the best way to go for both beginning and intermediate students of Epicurus.