Should Epicurean Philosophy Be Made More Accessible?

    Quote from Don

    I think the reason (which is started in the PD) is that something is no longer just is when it's no longer mutually beneficial and no longer adheres to the "basic grasp of justice" which, as I see it, is to neither harm nor be harmed.

    Ok this is going to help because I think we need to focus on this issue, which I was starting on when I called 'harm" ambiguous:

    Who gets to decide whether some is being "harmed" or not? I don't think there can be much of any absolute standard on that, and it's difficult to decide where the limit might be, given the rest of Epicurean philosophy.

    Because I think we all end up at the same position if we agree that "harm" is very subjective and relative. If we think "harm" can be defined objectively, then we're looking at an absolute standard of justice which I don't think Epicurus would allow.

    In the end, the only thing that is desirable in itself is pleasure and the only thing undesirable in itself is pain, so just at there is no objective "good" but pleasure, there is going to be no objective "bad" but pain.

    Agree or disagree?

    Somebody made the point that maybe the thread was driving from the original topic. Maybe we should step back and ask, in the process of making it more accessible, what does "it" refer to.

    Since Kalosyni is fairly new here, what in a thumbnail are we talking about more accessible? (In terms of a list of five or six key points that we think might not currently be easily accessible?)

    My initial intention of this thread was to investigate how to present Epicurean philosophy so that more people could learn and benefit. And that it would be nice to have something simplified for people who want to learn but don't have enough time to dedicate to this forum. This could take the form of an overview, possibly drawn from existing threads, nicely and simply formated for easy viewing:

    Will now cross reference this thread which was recently referred to elsewhere:

    Quote from Cassius

    Because I think we all end up at the same position if we agree that "harm" is very subjective and relative. If we think "harm" can be defined objectively, then we're looking at an absolute standard of justice which I don't think Epicurus would allow.

    Broken record that I am, I'm going back to the Greek text of the PDs. There word consistently throughout those PDs to talk about natural justice, the nature of justice, to describe the compact, etc. is βλάπτω.

    Principal Doctrines, by Epicurus

    Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, βλάπτω

    If Epicurus or the early Epicureans wanted to use a word less "ambiguous" than βλάπτω to convey another meaning, they would have. Whether we think the English translation of "harm" is ambiguous doesn't matter. We need to grapple with why βλάπτω is the word chosen to convey the "basic grasp of justice" throughout those PDs and its connection to what is δίκαιος "just, right, etc."

    Quote from Kalosyni

    Cassius and Don and Matt (and anyone else)

    I hope we can preserve and continue the discussion of ethics and justice, and continue exploring.

    We can resurrect this thread is anyone's interested:

    Thread

    Toward A Better Understanding of Epicurean Justice And Injustice (With Examples of "Just" and "Unjust")

    [ADMIN NOTE: This new thread was started so as to contain the responses to the following post, which is itself a response by Don to a post by Elayne. Please check Elayne's post in the original thread for past context. As per the title I gave the new thread, it would be good to produce some hypothetical examples of "just" and "unjust" so we can begin to see the common themes.]



    […]

    Okay, this is helpful for me to flesh out my thinking if y'all will bear with me...

    I would say this specific…
    Don
    March 21, 2021 at 9:34 PM

    Just an idea... Maybe we need to collaboratively work on creating more documents in the lexicon section... "wikipedia" type pages... where we organize by topic, using the information presented in the best posts. We could have a simple glossary and links would open to an one or two page overview of each glossary entry. So this would by-pass the complexity of multiple threads. Already there is so much here that it would fill many books.

    Yes it is hard to figure out how to organize things and it may be that conversations have to develop naturally.

    But now that we've been reminds a couple of times about the personal outline approach, I think that would be particularly helpful for you, Kalosyni, given that it helps quickly highlight fundamentals and places where questions may arise that you may not recognize:

    Personal Outlines of Epicurean Philosophy

    Preparing an outline and incorporating the resulting feedback was extremely helpful for me, and provided some good guidance in how to proceed with grasping the philosophy. I confess it was intimidating at first, as I'm quite new to studying philosophy. But the exercise was well worth it.

    (I should probably take another look at mine and see how my understanding has evolved since then....)

    For anyone who feels that studying Epicureanism (and the resources on this website) is like an "independent study college course"...then these study tips might be a way of going about it:

    Bloom's Taxonomy - remember, understand, appy, analyze, synthesize, evaluate, create:

    Higher Order Thinking: Bloom’s Taxonomy – Learning Center
    Many students start college using the study strategies they used in high school, which is understandable—the strategies worked in the past, so why wouldn’t…
    learningcenter.unc.edu
    Concept Maps – Learning Center
    What are concept maps? Concept maps are visual representations of information. They can take the form of charts, graphic organizers, tables, flowcharts, Venn…
    learningcenter.unc.edu

    Which type of study course would you prefer? (Choose only one option) 3

    1. 7-Week self-paced course with online reading material (one hour per week, total of 7 hours)) (2) 67%
    2. 7-Week Zoom-based course with discussion (one hour study and one hour discussion, per week, total of 14 hours) (1) 33%
    3. A simplified summary of key concepts (30 minutes) (0) 0%

    I was just thinking about how we may need varying study levels, which will depend upon how much time a person has available:

    -- Basic Understanding - simplified summary of key concepts (the least you need to know)

    -- Moderate - use of an outlined study guide (a thorough overview)

    -- Advanced - further study after completion of the study guide (on-going study and research)

    Quote from Scott

    I think you bring up an important point, Kalosyni. I personally plan to put a good deal of effort into understanding EP, and I've only begun. I can already see how incredibly much value there is in this philosophy, but with my brief introduction so far, it is obvious there is a LOT to figure out and understand. And there are those who will put in the time, and who have the ability to digest and work with this complex material. But those are few.


    I doubt this philosophy was so wildly successful for 7 centuries without being able to be presented in simpler form, easy to understand and remember (of course from there, individuals could continue to learn more as they were motivated, but most folks then and now would only dive in if initial content made sense and drew one in to learn more).


    If only we had more of the original content! Some of this must surely have existed. Since we don't have that (and even any we might have already or will yet find would have been prepared for presentation to ancient cultures, not to people in our modern world), I agree it would seem worthwhile today to develop basic materials that make this philosophy engaging and accessible to as wide an audience as reasonably possible.

    We are making good progress on a 7-Part Study Guide (which could also be used for a "Basics of Epicureanism Seven Week Course").

  • Cassius November 15, 2023 at 7:48 AM

    Changed the title of the thread from “Should Epicurean Philosophy Be Made More Accessable?” to “Should Epicurean Philosophy Be Made More Accessible?”.

    I am revisiting this thread without re-reading previous posts, just to say that I have been thinking again about how to make Epicurean philosophy more accessable. Some ideas:

    1) Create a "sister-site" which gives a quick overview. We already have NewEpicurean.com...however...

    ...it would be nice to have something a bit more streamlined like a regular website which is geared toward modern times and is focused on practical aspects of applying Epicurean philosophy.

    2) Get clear on the "existential" issues that Epicurus covers, and create "conversation starters" for in-person meetings.

    Quote from Kalosyni

    1) Create a "sister-site" which gives a quick overview. We already have NewEpicurean.com...however...

    ...it would be nice to have something a bit more streamlined like a regular website which is geared toward modern times and is focused on practical aspects of applying Epicurean philosophy.

    Besides https://epicureanfriends.com there are a number of sites with Epicurean resources:

Unread Threads

    1. Title
    2. Replies
    3. Last Reply

    2. Plato's Timaeus vs. On Nature, Book 14 6

      • Bryan
      • January 27, 2025 at 10:13 PM
    3. Replies
      6
      Views
      229
      6

    4. Bryan

      January 27, 2025 at 10:13 PM

    2. Epicurean Emporium

      • Eikadistes
      • January 25, 2025 at 10:35 PM
    3. Replies
      0
      Views
      120

    2. Ancient Greek Numbering System 1

      • Cassius
      • January 24, 2025 at 11:23 PM
    3. Replies
      1
      Views
      183
      1

    4. Bryan

      January 24, 2025 at 11:23 PM

    2. Pompeii Then and Now 6

      • kochiekoch
      • January 24, 2025 at 6:00 PM
    3. Replies
      6
      Views
      253
      6

    4. Don

      January 24, 2025 at 6:00 PM

    2. (Diderot) Denis - "Epicureism, or Epicurism", Vol. 5 of The Encyclopedia 5

      • Charles
      • January 24, 2025 at 6:28 AM
    3. Replies
      5
      Views
      2.1k
      5

    4. Don

      January 24, 2025 at 6:28 AM