1. New
    1. Member Announcements
  2. Home
    1. Get Started - Activities
    2. Posting Policies
    3. Community Standards
    4. Terms of Use
    5. Moderator Team
    6. Site Map
    7. Quizzes
    8. Articles
      1. Featured Articles
      2. Blog Posts at EpicureanFriends
  3. Wiki
    1. Wiki Home
    2. FAQ
    3. Classical Epicureanism
    4. Physics
    5. Canonics
    6. Ethics
    7. Search Assistance
    8. Not NeoEpicurean
    9. Foundations
    10. Navigation Outlines
    11. Key Pages
  4. Forum
    1. New Activity
    2. New Threads
    3. Welcome
    4. General Discussion
    5. Featured
    6. Activism
    7. Shortcuts
    8. Dashboard
    9. Full Forum List
    10. Level 3+
    11. Most Discussed
  5. Podcast
    1. Lucretius Today Podcast
    2. Episode Guide
    3. Lucretius Today At Youtube
    4. EpicureanFriends Youtube Page
  6. Texts
    1. Overview
    2. Diogenes Laertius
    3. Principal Doctrines
    4. Vatican Sayings
    5. Lucretius
    6. Herodotus
    7. Pythocles
    8. Menoeceus
    9. Fragments - Usener Collection
    10. Torquatus On Ethics
    11. Velleius On Gods
    12. Greek/Latin Help
  7. Gallery
    1. Featured images
    2. Albums
    3. Latest Images
    4. Latest Comments
  8. Calendar
    1. Upcoming Events List
    2. Zoom Meetings
    3. This Month
    4. First Monday Zoom Meetings
    5. Wednesday Zoom Meeting
    6. Twentieth Zoom Meetings
    7. Zoom Meetings
  9. Other
    1. Featured Content
    2. Blog Posts
    3. Files
    4. Logbook
    5. EF ToDo List
    6. Link-Database
  • Login
  • Register
  • Search
This Thread

Welcome To EpicureanFriends.com!

"Remember that you are mortal, and you have a limited time to live, and in devoting yourself to discussion of the nature of time and eternity you have seen things that have been, are now, and are to come."

Sign In Now
or
Register a new account
  1. New
  2. Home
  3. Wiki
  4. Forum
  5. Podcast
  6. Texts
  7. Gallery
  8. Calendar
  9. Other
  1. Forum
    1. New Activity
    2. New Threads
    3. Welcome
    4. General Discussion
    5. Featured
    6. Activism
    7. Shortcuts
    8. Dashboard
    9. Full Forum List
    10. Level 3+
    11. Most Discussed
  1. EpicureanFriends - Home of Classical Epicurean Philosophy
  2. Forum
  3. Physics - The Nature Of The Universe
  4. Physics - General Discussion and Navigation
  • Sidebar
  • Sidebar

Isonomia

  • Mathitis Kipouros
  • August 17, 2021 at 9:00 AM
  • Go to last post
Regularly Checking In On A Small Screen Device? Bookmark THIS page!
  • 1
  • 2
  • Mathitis Kipouros
    03 - Member
    Points
    1,149
    Posts
    156
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    84.2 %
    • August 17, 2021 at 9:00 AM
    • #1
    Quote from Cassius

    To the extent you are saying that it seems likely to you that advanced beings would take interest in lesser beings as a matter of pleasure to themselves, I think Epicurus would also say "of course" and he would point to his position on isonomia and on infinite numbers of worlds with life on them and he would say of course there are highly advanced beings who do exactly like that, just like we do ourselves, but on a far more advanced scale that would seem to most of us as being "godlike." The isonomia view would I think allow for an infinite progression / spectrum of advancement above us.

    I read about Isonomia in DeWitt and did not understand it, it seeming suspiciously platonic. I left it for later and haven't gotten to it. How important is this concept? Could you ellaborate on what it is and what is it useful for?

    Thanks.

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,674
    Posts
    13,917
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • August 17, 2021 at 9:53 AM
    • #2

    You probably need to look directly at the Vellius statement in "On the Nature of the Gods" as that is all there is - and there is not much.

    I personally don't see it as Platonic however - I see it as absolutely the practical inference from the fact that here on earth we "never" see "only one thing of its kind." Extraplolating that out to the rest of the universe, which we presume absent evidence to the contrary is analogous to Earth, then that turns into something we expect to find everywhere.

    Now I think were you are heading there is to a discussion of Philodemus' "On Methods of Inference" and I highly recommend the DeLacy translation (free on internet everywhere) and especially his appendix which attempts to unwind the full story of Epicurean reasoning from observation to conclusions.

  • Mathitis Kipouros
    03 - Member
    Points
    1,149
    Posts
    156
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    84.2 %
    • August 17, 2021 at 11:23 PM
    • #3

    Wikipedia doesn't seem to help much:

    Isonomia (ἰσονομία "equality of political rights,"[1][2] from the Greek ἴσος isos, "equal," and νόμος nomos, "usage, custom, law,"[1]) was a word used by ancient Greek writers such as Herodotus[3] and Thucydides[4] to refer to some kind of popular government. It was subsequently eclipsed until brought back into English as isonomy ("equality of law").

    Isonomia - Wikipedia

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,674
    Posts
    13,917
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • August 18, 2021 at 6:15 AM
    • #4

    Yes I think DeWitt says that is one of the few and maybe only occurrences of this (at least in the Epicurean texts) so it's hard to be sure what it means. Presumably we could reconstruct it if we rigorously thought about the basic Epicurean physics and all the issues involved in infinite universe, eternal time, limited number of shapes and methods of combination, application of analogies of what we see here to the rest of the universe, etc.


    We know they thought about dust moving in a beam of light. I could see them contemplating things like "what happens when you take a jar of ocean water and shake it continuously without stopping? (I presume the particles get distributed somewhat evenly if not perfectly so.) And from that kind of thinking all sorts of analogies are possible.

  • Mathitis Kipouros
    03 - Member
    Points
    1,149
    Posts
    156
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    84.2 %
    • August 18, 2021 at 8:50 AM
    • #5

    I'm deeming it, for now, as an unuseful abstraction. The more I read about it, the more it seems like a magical ideal. But I'm open to being corrected.

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,674
    Posts
    13,917
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • August 18, 2021 at 8:56 AM
    • #6

    Oh I don't think it is "magical" at all - I think they saw it (and I see it) as purely an extrapolation of what we see here, along the lines of the analogies I used. I bet you'll get more comfortable with seeing it as an extrapolation when you tackle Philodemus "On Methods of Inference." I suspect they saw isonomia as a great example of their extrapolation process.

    But as to how useful it is, it's probably most useful in thinking about life throughout the universe, and the nature of the gods, neither of which are probably at the top of "immediate problems" list.

    Some people I respect strongly reject the science of eternal and infinite universe, and they don't see any issue arising from that rejection. Isonomia is probably in that category as well. If a person isn't bothered by those issues then I see no problem -- BUT

    I think that Epicurus saw them as crucial to "connecting" with "common-sense" questions that most laymen ask, and I think that way myself. So I see this as one of those issues that is relevant and important depending on you're talking to, and I doubt it makes sense to try to require either camp to see things the way the other camp does.

  • Cassius August 19, 2021 at 7:16 AM

    Moved the thread from forum General Discussion And Navigation to forum Epicurean Physics - General Discussion and Navigation.
  • Joshua
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    14,783
    Posts
    1,874
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    95.8 %
    • August 20, 2021 at 11:21 PM
    • #7

    Reading more on isonomia, I can see this as the under-pinning logic that gets us from one observed world, to many conjectured worlds, as one example. In that case, it is a species of inductive argument: "the inference of a general law from particular instances".

    There's a quote in one of Arthur Conan Doyle's stories where Sherlock Holmes says that if a logician were presented for the first time with a drop of water, he could infer the existence of a Pacific Ocean and a Niagara Falls without ever having seen either.

    Isonomia would be an even more direct line of argument; someone presented for the first time with a Niagara Falls could very reasonably infer the existence of a Victoria Falls.

    If you hold as a premise that "nature never furnishes only one thing of a kind", then the argument becomes deductive and the conclusion stands or falls exclusively on the merit of that premise.

    So the obvious question that imposes is this; do we accept or reject the premise? Does nature ever furnish only one thing of a kind? Bearing in mind, of course, that each kind of atom always occurs in refulgent quantity.

    (Some atoms are unstable and do not, evidently, occur in nature. It requires a particle accelerator to produce them and they only "survive" for a fraction of a nanosecond. But the potential to produce them is always there.)

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,674
    Posts
    13,917
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • August 21, 2021 at 5:28 AM
    • #8

    Joshua just to be clear from what you wrote, which was excellent,let me confirm: while they are clearly related, do you see 1 isonomia, and 2 nature never makes a single thing of a kind, as separate and distinct arguments?

  • Joshua
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    14,783
    Posts
    1,874
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    95.8 %
    • August 21, 2021 at 1:10 PM
    • #9
    Quote

    Joshua just to be clear from what you wrote, which was excellent,let me confirm: while they are clearly related, do you see 1 isonomia, and 2 nature never makes a single thing of a kind, as separate and distinct arguments?

    That is an excellent question, for which I don't have an easy answer!

  • Mathitis Kipouros
    03 - Member
    Points
    1,149
    Posts
    156
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    84.2 %
    • August 22, 2021 at 6:06 PM
    • #10

    Why is isonomia important to us? How is it useful? How does it helps us understand nature better?

    And also, when you talk about many worlds Joshua you main many configurations similar to earth in this universe? Or other universes similar to our own? (Why would nature allow only one kind of universe like ours)...

    Sorry for the apparently stubborn and foolish question, but I think it reinforces for me that this is a concept I don't need at all, but, again, I'm very open to have my mind changed.

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,674
    Posts
    13,917
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • August 22, 2021 at 7:34 PM
    • #11

    You asked Joshua but if you'll pardon my making a comment:

    Quote from camotero

    Or other universes similar to our own?

    That's why it's always necessary to be clear in terminology. As for me I refuse to depart from the traditional terminology, and for me "universe" will always mean "everything that exists." Others may way to talk about multiverses and multiple universes but I'm too old for that ;)


    Quote from camotero

    Why is isonomia important to us? How is it useful? How does it helps us understand nature better?

    And my answer to that, from what I believe was probably Epicurus' perspective, is that many people would conclude (if they believed that this earth was the only inhabited place in the universe) that that would mean there is something "special" about us, leading directly to a likely conclusion of divine action to explain that "specialness". Taking the position that life is naturally occurring means it's likely to naturally occur in an infinite number of places (given the view that the universe is infinite in size) so those views go hand in hand.

    And to the extent we're talking about isonomia as a spectrum of complexity from extremely primitive to something we would call "godlike" that also provides a general overview to why humans should not be considered to be the highest form of life in the universe, and leads us to think about what is higher, which is something that seems to be an important part of Epicurean philosophy and helps explain why we should not, in fact, generally be satisfied with living in a cave on bread and water.

  • Godfrey
    Epicurist
    Points
    12,127
    Posts
    1,700
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    85.0 %
    Bookmarks
    1
    • August 22, 2021 at 8:51 PM
    • #12

    Coincidentally this paper discussing isonomia showed up in my feed. I've only skimmed it as it's pretty academic, but what I gather is that isonomia refers to opposites and the idea that DeWitt is referring to is that in an infinite universe, if something exists, then so must it's opposite.

    Apparently this relates to the pre-Socratic writer Alcmaeon's theory of health (ἰσονομία, equilibrium of opposite forces in the body) and disease (μοναρχία, domination of one excessive force).

    Files

    Alcmaeon_of_Croton_on_Human_Knowledge_th.pdf 531.86 kB – 2 Downloads
  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,674
    Posts
    13,917
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • August 22, 2021 at 9:21 PM
    • #13

    This is the Dewitt section - I forgot this was so long!


  • Mathitis Kipouros
    03 - Member
    Points
    1,149
    Posts
    156
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    84.2 %
    • August 22, 2021 at 9:28 PM
    • #14
    Quote from Cassius

    think about what is higher, which is something that seems to be an important part of Epicurean philosophy and helps explain why we should not, in fact, generally be satisfied with living in a cave on bread and water.

    A platonic red flag was raised in my mind when I read this: This may put you on track to disregard your pleasure by searching for "something higher". I'm pretty sure you didn't mean it the way I'm putting it but I think it's important to clarify it for future reference.

  • Mathitis Kipouros
    03 - Member
    Points
    1,149
    Posts
    156
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    84.2 %
    • August 22, 2021 at 9:34 PM
    • #15
    Quote from Cassius

    And my answer to that, from what I believe was probably Epicurus' perspective, is that many people would conclude (if they believed that this earth was the only inhabited place in the universe) that that would mean there is something "special" about us, leading directly to a likely conclusion of divine action to explain that "specialness".

    I see what you say but I still think that you can get to that conclusion from the materialism and naturalism of the Philosophy; I don't need isonomia for that. I would even go as far as saying that there being other places where life like outs exist doesn't automatically discard the possibility of a supernatural intervention, these supernatural gods could've very well decided to create others "as special as we are".

  • Online
    Cassius
    05 - Administrator
    Points
    101,674
    Posts
    13,917
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    100.0 %
    • August 22, 2021 at 9:42 PM
    • #16

    Well supernatural intervention is ruled out from the basic physics and is extrapolated by extension to the universe as a whole as a fundamental to which there can be no violation, so that's what rules out supernatural no matter how far out you get.

    Now as to beings who have superior technology to us that is of course possible and even probable -- but it's never "supernatural."

  • Mathitis Kipouros
    03 - Member
    Points
    1,149
    Posts
    156
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    84.2 %
    • August 22, 2021 at 9:57 PM
    • #17

    I just re read the text from DeWitt you pasted... re reading it now a second time helps in understanding it a bit better (the text, not the concept), but it's still pretty dense, obscure and convoluted for me, and it doesn't help me see isonomia as something different than pure logic and without practical application.

    Perhaps I'm too early in my studies to be able to grasp the practical implications and/or usefulness of such a concept.

  • Don
    ΕΠΙΚΟΥΡΕΙΟΣ (Epicurist)
    Points
    39,333
    Posts
    5,486
    Quizzes
    9
    Quiz rate
    92.8 %
    • August 22, 2021 at 11:18 PM
    • #18

    It concerns me a little that Dewitt explicitly states "[isonomia] is lacking in extant Epicurean texts," but then goes on to weave this elaborate complex explanation of what Epicurus meant by isonomia, how important it is, etc. If it is "lacking in extant Epicurean texts," where does DeWitt get the justification for all this? How do we know Cicero got it right with his one mention?

    Quote from Cicero

    Moreover there is the supremely potent principle of infinity, which claims the closest and most careful study; we must understand that it has the following property, that in the sum of things everything has its exact match and counterpart. This property is termed by Epicurus isonomia, or the principle of uniform distribution. From this principle it follows that if the whole number of mortals be so many, there must exist no less a number of immortals, and if the causes of destruction are beyond count, the causes of conservation also are bound to be infinite.

    That's it. That's all I can see in Cicero's text. And Dewitt even takes issue with Cicero's interpretation, but there's so little to go on and the term "is lacking in extant Epicurean texts" I'm thinking it's esoteric enough that, *if* Epicurus found it to be a helpful concept, it wasn't uppermost in his mind.

    All I can see is that, basically, it says if something *can* exist in the universe, it probably exists in abundance due to the infinite nature of the universe.

    It seems to me Dewitt is off and running on one of his "I have a tiny snippet of information, and I can build and extrapolate on that to infinity and beyond."

  • Godfrey
    Epicurist
    Points
    12,127
    Posts
    1,700
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    85.0 %
    Bookmarks
    1
    • August 23, 2021 at 1:34 AM
    • #19

    From Cicero’s statement as well as from Alcmaeon, I don't see isonomy implying a hierarchy of beings. I read it as "equalities of opposites" (mortal/immortal, creation/destruction, good/evil, light/dark...).

    This seems valid to a point, but it seems like at some point it could just turn in to sophistry or Platonism where one might name a random thing and then claim that another random thing is it's opposite, leading to endless logical nonsense. Come to think of it, the principle of isonomy requires that since there is an infinite amount of common sense in the universe, there must also be an equally infinite amount of idiocy in the universe ||

    I wonder if this is what led Pyrrho down his path of not knowing?

  • Godfrey
    Epicurist
    Points
    12,127
    Posts
    1,700
    Quizzes
    3
    Quiz rate
    85.0 %
    Bookmarks
    1
    • August 23, 2021 at 3:04 AM
    • #20
    Quote from Cassius

    The isonomia view would I think allow for an infinite progression / spectrum of advancement above us.

    Quote from Cicero

    From this principle it follows that if the whole number of mortals be so many, there must exist no less a number of immortals

    First, I think that the Cicero quote is more accurate as to the meaning of isonomia: it sounds to me like it deals with opposites and not a progression or spectrum.

    Second, I don't agree with Cicero's conclusion that there must be an infinite number of immortals: this seems like a juxtaposition of a Platonic ideal with a living reality. To me it's no more valid than saying "if the number of mortals be so many, there must exist no less a number of rocks." Ah, logic....

    So the problem, I think, is determining what the "exact match and counterpart" of a mortal (a mortal defined as a living human being, subject to dying?) is, and if this would have been a useful idea for Epicurus. Although the idea of a spectrum of beings makes perfect sense to me, I don't understand that as isonomia. But of course I could be confused about that :/

    • 1
    • 2

Unread Threads

    1. Title
    2. Replies
    3. Last Reply
    1. Analysing movies through an Epicurean lens 3

      • Like 1
      • Rolf
      • May 12, 2025 at 4:54 PM
      • General Discussion
      • Rolf
      • May 12, 2025 at 10:10 PM
    2. Replies
      3
      Views
      85
      3
    3. Godfrey

      May 12, 2025 at 10:10 PM
    1. ⟐ as the symbol of the philosophy of Epicurus 47

      • Like 1
      • michelepinto
      • March 18, 2021 at 11:59 AM
      • General Discussion
      • michelepinto
      • May 12, 2025 at 8:57 PM
    2. Replies
      47
      Views
      7.7k
      47
    3. Eikadistes

      May 12, 2025 at 8:57 PM
    1. Is All Desire Painful? How Would Epicurus Answer? 24

      • Like 1
      • Cassius
      • May 7, 2025 at 10:02 PM
      • General Discussion
      • Cassius
      • May 10, 2025 at 3:42 PM
    2. Replies
      24
      Views
      936
      24
    3. sanantoniogarden

      May 10, 2025 at 3:42 PM
    1. Pompeii Then and Now 7

      • Like 2
      • kochiekoch
      • January 22, 2025 at 1:19 PM
      • General Discussion
      • kochiekoch
      • May 8, 2025 at 3:50 PM
    2. Replies
      7
      Views
      1.1k
      7
    3. kochiekoch

      May 8, 2025 at 3:50 PM
    1. Names of Bits of Reality 4

      • Thanks 2
      • Eikadistes
      • May 8, 2025 at 12:12 PM
      • General Discussion
      • Eikadistes
      • May 8, 2025 at 1:31 PM
    2. Replies
      4
      Views
      261
      4
    3. Eikadistes

      May 8, 2025 at 1:31 PM

Latest Posts

  • Analysing movies through an Epicurean lens

    Godfrey May 12, 2025 at 10:10 PM
  • ⟐ as the symbol of the philosophy of Epicurus

    Eikadistes May 12, 2025 at 8:57 PM
  • Introductory Level Study Group via Zoom - Interest Level and Planning

    Cassius May 12, 2025 at 8:56 PM
  • May 20, 2025 Twentieth Gathering Via Zoom Agenda

    Kalosyni May 12, 2025 at 5:32 PM
  • Episode 280 - Wrapping Up Cicero's Arguments On Death

    Cassius May 11, 2025 at 10:58 AM
  • Ancient Greek Gods and Goddesses Positive Attributes

    Cassius May 11, 2025 at 7:10 AM
  • Is All Desire Painful? How Would Epicurus Answer?

    sanantoniogarden May 10, 2025 at 3:42 PM
  • Happy Birthday General Thread

    Cassius May 10, 2025 at 4:08 AM
  • Welcome LukeTN!

    Cassius May 9, 2025 at 9:34 PM
  • Pompeii Then and Now

    kochiekoch May 8, 2025 at 3:50 PM

Similar Threads

  • Are You Epicurean Or Hieronymian?

    • Cassius
    • October 1, 2019 at 2:08 PM
    • Ethics - General Discussion
  • Carl Sagan, the 4th dimension, episode 20 of Lucretius Today, physics

    • Mathitis Kipouros
    • August 14, 2021 at 11:41 AM
    • General Discussion
  • Practical exercises: PD4

    • Godfrey
    • July 13, 2021 at 8:06 PM
    • Practical Exercises In Applied Epicurean Philosophy
  • Long and Sedley, Hellenistic Philosophers, "Gods"

    • Don
    • November 25, 2020 at 5:41 PM
    • Gods Have No Attributes Inconsistent With Blessedness and Incorruptibility
  • Twentieth Skype Call (10-20-2020)

    • Cassius
    • October 20, 2020 at 9:47 PM
    • Twentieth Gathering Via Zoom for Level 03 Members and Above

Tags

  • Isonomia

EpicureanFriends - Classical Epicurean Philosophy

  1. Home
    1. About Us
    2. Classical Epicurean Philosophy
  2. Wiki
    1. Getting Started
  3. Frequently Asked Questions
    1. Site Map
  4. Forum
    1. Latest Threads
    2. Featured Threads
    3. Unread Posts
  5. Texts
    1. Core Texts
    2. Biography of Epicurus
    3. Lucretius
  6. Articles
    1. Latest Articles
  7. Gallery
    1. Featured Images
  8. Calendar
    1. This Month At EpicureanFriends
Powered by WoltLab Suite™ 6.0.22
Style: Inspire by cls-design
Stylename
Inspire
Manufacturer
cls-design
Licence
Commercial styles
Help
Supportforum
Visit cls-design
  • Everywhere
  • This Thread
  • This Forum
  • Forum
  • Articles
  • Blog Articles
  • Files
  • Gallery
  • Events
  • Pages
  • Wiki
  • Help
  • FAQ
  • More Options
foo
Save Quote