Nicely done. The only line I'd amend is:
--Don't teach Epicurean philosophy publically
Don't teach Epicurean philosophy publically (unless invited)
What "Live Unknown" means to me (Lathe Biosas)
-
--Don't get involved in politics (political activites or political debates)
I remain unconvinced that Epicurus thought that being a good Epicurean meant always refraining from political activity, or that he did not recognize the dependency of a society (the polis; Latin civitas) in which the Garden could flourish on politics. Although, Kalosyni's cautions on the matter are well-taken.
Though the book Theory and Practice in Epicurean Political Philosophy. Security, justice and tranquility by Javier Aoiz & Marcelo Boeri remains, sadly beyond my budget (maybe I need to set up a targeted savings plan), I have read their “Cicero and his Clamorous Silences” (https://www.academia.edu/82815606/CICER…MOROUS_SILENCES). A few excerpts below:
+++++++++++
The opponents of Epicureanism in antiquity successfully established a cliché that has remained to this day: the theoretical and practical disinterest of Epicurus and the Epicureans in political communities. The best proof of their success is the transformation of the expressions «live unnoticed» (λάθε βιώσας) and «do not participate in politics» (μὴ πολιτεύσεσθαι) into famous Epicurean slogans.
Nevertheless, Philodemus, like Lucretius and in accordance with Epicurus’ views, in no way condemns the activity of any politician.
The normative or regulative function of the Epicurean political model is embodied in the preconception of the just.
Nor did Epicurus’ conception of justice and law alienate him from his city. Epicurus shares in the rejection of two figures who represent contempt for the laws of the polis: the tyrant and the Cynics.
Indeed, among Epicurus’ friends there were politicians who were influential and close (even very close) to Epicureanism, such as Idomeneus, a prominent politician of Lampsacus, and Mithres, Lysimachus’ minister of finance, who provided financial aid to the Garden.
+++++++++++
The bottom line seems to be that Epicurus supported and relied on the norms and institutions of the Athenian polis – and they necessarily derive from political activity, even if Epicurus himself did not actively participate in politics – at least formally. Today, we also so depend and rely – and so may need to respond politically when necessary if those societal laws, contracts and norms are threatened.
+++++++++++
I also found a Google translation of their essay “¿Cuán apolíticos fueron Epicuro y los epicúreos? La polis griega y sus ilustres ciudadanos epicúreos” (https://www.academia.edu/77829847/_Cu%C…_epic%C3%BAreos) – “How Apolitical were Epicurus and the Epicureans?: the Greek Polis and their Illustrious Epicurean Citizens”. (https://www.scielo.br/j/trans/a/nSSz…qNMPQb/?lang=es)
A few excerpts from that translation:
“In this article we argue that the fact that there were prominent citizens of different Greek cities who adhered to Epicureanism, felt themselves Epicureans and were recognized as such, shows that slogans such as “live hidden” and “do not participate in politics”, which suggest a complete apoliticism on the part of Epicurus and the Epicureans, distort the true meaning of staying away from contingent politics.”
“If, as the title of this article somewhat rhetorically describes, there were prominent citizens of different Greek cities who adhered to Epicurean doctrines, who felt themselves Epicureans and who were recognized as such by their fellow citizens, it does not seem reasonable to infer (from the slogans mostly present in the indirect tradition) a complete apoliticism on the part of Epicurus and the Epicureans nor a “hidden living”. We maintain that there are reasons to suppose that these slogans do not adequately describe the character of Epicurus himself and his practical life (committed to relations of kinship and friendship, philanthropy, the rites of the city, and its legal provisions in the purchase, sale and inheritance of property, etc.), nor that of his followers.”
“It is natural to think that the way of life of those who adhered to Epicureanism over several centuries did not follow a single pattern. Social class, gender, political community and historical context must have led to different modalities of belonging or adhering to Epicureanism.”
“Nor did Epicurus' conception of justice and laws separate him from his city. Epicurus shares the rejection of two figures who represent contempt for the laws of the polis: the tyrant and the cynics (DL X 119).”
“The wise Epicurean, unlike the cynic, is concerned with property and the future; He considers that the property and security of the polis constitute a legitimate means of reinforcing tranquility and minimizing fear.”
+++++++++++++
In sum, it may be a necessity of prudent choice – at least under some circumstances – to forgo the “close” pleasures, and endure some unpleasantness – in order to secure the political environment (laws, contracts, regulations, civic norms) that allows for there to be continued pleasant life at all, where one has at least some hope of neither promoting harm nor being harmed. Just as one might endure the pain of surgery and subsequent physical therapy in order to thereafter enjoy a continued pleasant life. This is the way that I look at my own occasions of political and social activism over the years: I did not particularly enjoy those activities – and they were often both mentally and physically stressful – but they seemed, in the broader view and longer run, to be the prudent choice; and now seem to me to be the prudent Epicurean choice.
-
I remain unconvinced that Epicurus thought that being a good Epicurean meant always refraining from political activity, or that he did not recognize the dependency of a society (the polis; Latin civitas) in which the Garden could flourish on politics. Although, Kalosyni's cautions on the matter are well-taken.
Pacatus I think you will be very pleased with the vigorous way Dr. Boeri argues the thesis of his book in our upcoming podcast with him. May be a few more days but should be released "soon."
-
In my perusal of past threads, I came on this post by Cassius – which I reproduce in full:
+++++++++++++
Here's my answer: By no means did the classical Epicureans take the position that we should "never" be involved in politics. Look at the example of Cassius Longinus, and there are others as well.
The caution I always make is that people are individuals and have different programming for pleasure and pain, and by no means do everyone take pleasure and pain in the same things.
Given that difference, I do not think it is possible to take a *Philosophic* position that one view of pleasure or pain is *philosophically* approved by nature for everyone. That is also in my view the clear meaning of the last ten of so, principal doctrines as to justice, which are all about pointing out that there is no "absolute" justice.
I think Epicurean philosophy is hugely helpful in deciding how to evaluate politics and how to take political positions, but I also think that just like in the Roman Civil War it is possible for Epicureans to be on opposite sides of many important issues, so we should be careful not to overstep our bounds and say that Epicurus would endorse only one set of political positions. The clear (to me) import of the doctrines on Justice tells us to expect that people are going to take different positions about how they want to live, so applications of Epicurean philosophy to politics needs to take that into account.
So in my view too the prohibition here on discussing politics is no so much because there are not Epicurean implications, but because here, and at this stage of trying to organize people to discuss and promote the basics of Epicurean philosophy, we really don't want to be drawn into day-to-day disputes that would demoralize and divide and weaken us before we even get started.
No doubt in the future such divisions will occur, as you can already see them on other websites and commentators, some of which are overtly "leftist" and some of which are not (and quite the opposite in fact). But for now, and for here, we want to focus as a group on learning the basics before we go off as individuals pursuing our individual views of pleasure and pain, much as we would, if we were at a convention, divide up into groups to go to restaurants of various types.
+++++++++++++
While I agree with this wonderful post completely, I will add just this caveat:
Under the rubric of “the agreement to neither harm nor be harmed” as the root of Epicurean natural justice, I do not think that one can assent to ideologies or political movements (or parties) that embrace causing harm as a means of securing their own social/political power, without violating Epicurean philosophy on that score. And I think that Epicureanism stands on stronger ground ethically all around than idealist philosophies such as the Stoics or Kantians (or religious/theological “divine command” theories).
LATE EDIT: I should have said "expansion" perhaps, instead of "caveat" given this clear statement by Cassius : "I think Epicurean philosophy is hugely helpful in deciding how to evaluate politics and how to take political positions."
-
Do we have a picture of Fragment 551?
-
'De Bono Vitae Humilioris' is an anonymous poem from Codex Vossianus Q 86 published in 'Anthologia Latina'. Translation comes from John Colin Dunlop's 'Selections from the Latin Anthology: Translated into English Verse' (1838). It is considered to be an Epicurean poem praising 'Lathe Biosas' lifestyle. The date of creation is unknown but it's suspected to be around 1st century AD.
Small are my treasures, my domain is small;
But quietude makes that blameless little, great:
My tranquil mind no tremors agitate—
Heedless if men my days should slothful call.
Go! Seek the camp—ascend some curule throne—
All the vain joys that sway the bosom taste!
Mean though I am, by no distinctions graced,
Still, (while I live,) I call the hours mine own.Est mihi rus parvum, fenus sine crimine parvum,
sed facit haec nobis utraque magna quies.
pacem animus nulla trepidus formidine servat
nec timet ignavae crimina desidiae.
castra alios operosa vocent sellaeque curules
et quicquid vana gaudia mente movet.
pars ego sim plebis, nullo conspectus honore,
dum vivam, dominus temporis ipse mei.Relevant links:
Isaac Vossius - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.orgCodices Vossiani Latini — Brill
Latin Anthology - Wikipedia
Laudator Temporis Acti: Dominus Temporis Ipse Mei -
Thank you - never heard of that - very interesting!
-
I looked up "curule" and found a wikipedia entry on it!
Here is the first paragraph:
QuoteIn the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, the curule chair (sella curulis, supposedly from currus, "chariot") was the seat upon which magistrates holding imperium were entitled to sit. This includes dictators, magistri equitum, consuls, praetors, curule aediles, and the promagistrates, temporary or de facto holders of such offices.
-
I'm mentioning it here because I don't want to pollute Joshua 's post on translation of Lucretius as it is shaping to be something special, but for those interested, Joshua mentioned 'The Satires of Juvenal' at the end of his first post. Take a look at satire X (starting at page 260 in Joshua's link). You'll find a lot of Epicurean influences in this satire including, once more, the theme of 'lathe biosas'.
Satire X is not strictly Epicurean as the gods there are painted as the 'standard' ones but I think you'll find a lot of interesting points there, nonetheless.
Direct link to Joshua's post:
