The Letter to Menoikeus - A New Translation with Commentary

Phenomenal, Don! Thank you for sharing your work. This is an incredible tool.

Don I am going to feature this on the front page. Also OK to feature on Facebook and elsewhere, correct?

Too late! Bullet downrange Don

It’s very much worthwhile and a huge help for the Garden. ☺️

I think Matt probably observed that I waited about ten seconds between posting that "It's ok to post on Facebook right Don?" question before I posted it to Facebook -- without waiting for Don's answer I am glad I guessed right!

Principle Doctrine #41, sort of deriving from a mashup of Lucretius and Lucian, which sometimes gets me in trouble, but applies whenever we have something important and useful to post about Epicurus, but we're not sure whether to post it:

"It's easier to get forgiveness than permission - and most of the time, if it helps strike a blow for Epicurus, better not to wait to ask for either."

I have only read the introduction so far, Don, and (feeling slightly the sharp nip of Philodemus' words), can feel myself confident in pronouncing my own:

We're lucky to have this.

Thank you for your hard work.

Don your new layout works quite well and the verse links in the text are great! I was able to find verse 131 and the maza recipe very quickly.

This quote from the maza article seems to have some relevance to Epicurus' dietary habits:

"The Ancient Greeks prided themselves on a simple, hearty diet, believing it the source of their strength and, to some degree, their superiority. The varied cuisines of other peoples like the Persians were looked down upon as decadent, diet seen as evidence of moral character (“you are what you eat”). Maza has few ingredients, does not require much preparation, and is quite filling: thus, it checks off all the criteria of an ideal Greek staple."

At least according to this, the references that Epicurus makes to diet seem to be much less to do with radical asceticism and more to do with mainstream Greek culture. Another strike against interpreting him as a minimalist

Don I just noticed that you had posted this here without using the file base feature that Nate uses for his collection of the PDS. It's not emissary to use it, and we definitely want this thread in addition, but you might find the file base feature of keeping track of revisions at a single link useful.

It also keeps track of the number of downloads which is nice.

But you can achieve most of the same effect by just editing the first post here in this thread as you post updated revisions.

Verse 134 catches my eye:

Because of this, it is better to follow the stories of the gods than to be enslaved by the deterministic decrees of the old natural philosophers, because necessity is not moved by prayer;

φυσικῶν "of the inquirers into nature, natural philosophers esp. of the Ionic and other pre-Socratic philosophers"

τῇτῶνφυσικῶν εἱμαρμένῃ "the decrees of the old natural philosophers" i.e., determinists, those decreeing fate is all-powerful

Is there anything more to it than Epicurus simply criticising believe in fate and therefore criticising giving up on deciding one's own destiny? (Consequently, emphasising the importance of artisting one's own life)

Is there any given evidence that these philosophers drove their own agendas by declaring what the fates are? If yes, is there anything comparable to it nowadays?

One could also think of it as a critique of the argument: "This is science!" (and therefore truth - trust me, not your senses). Do you think this is appropriate or does it overstretch the argument?

Quote from Titus

One could also think of it as a critique of the argument: "This is science!" (and therefore truth - trust me, not your senses). Do you think this is appropriate or does it overstretch the argument?

At first thought i don't have much info to offer on the other points but I definitely agree that this is part of Epicurus' attitude. Any kind of argument from "authority" where people are supposed to accept a conclusion that they cannot themselves understand as opposed to what their own senses tell them is going to be highly scrutinized. The Epicureans were confronting their own contemporary arguments about the application of "science" and "mathematics" on the implications of issues such as the size of the sun and the nature of the stars, and separating what can be proved from what goes too far is always tricky.