Yes we ought to get some good info out of Philodemus about the meaning of "natural."

Cassius

Yes, "deviant" certainly is a weird word here. I'd suggest that what he's after is the oikonomia that requires a techne because it goes beyond (deviates from) the natural (Epicurean) bounds, i.e. with its maximizing aim. That kind of oikonomia seems to match that last line of the Tsouna quote: "On the other hand, 'more' corresponds somehow to 'the measure of wealth' but never amounts to the open-ended goal of traditional οἰκονομία, namely, to amass as many riches as possible through decent and lawful means."

Still, a strange word choice.

Now I have to go watch some baseball.

I just came across this paper:

Horace, Ofellus and Philodemus of Gadara in Sermones 2.2

This paper examines Horace's portrayal in Sermones 2.2 of Ofellus, the poet's rustic spokesman whose recent loss of property provides the opportunity…

www.academia.edu

Good analysis of Epicurean themes in Horace. Still reading but seems solid. One basic thread is the encouragement to be satisfied with little - to take pleasure in little - if circumstances change and little, ie, only the basics, is all you have.

It makes 100% sense to me that we should take pleasure in little if little is all we have. Seems to me that it's very hard to quibble with that.

The tougher rhetorical issue seems to me to be "Is it inherent within the expression of that thought that little is 'good enough' and therefore we should not act to seek more than little?"

I think a lot of people jump to that conclusion, perhaps influences by Stoic and many other sources of ideas, but I do not at all think that conclusion is necessarily implied, and I get the idea that most of the ancients and all of the Epicureans would think such a suggestion to be absurd, because it is natural for all life to pursue as much pleasure as is open to it to obtain without undue hardship.

I write this because Don if you see anything in that article or Horace which bears on that subject please bring it up. Epicurus makes it plain in the letter to Menoeceus that we do not set our sites on "little" but on "pleasure" , and I bet there are other instances of the same thought out there in other texts.

When Horace said "Seize the day" he didn't say "Seize little" or "Seize only what will keep you alive."

Okay, "seize the day" has been so in-grained in modern Western popular culture to equate with FOMO (Fear of missing out) or constantly seeking new thrilling experiences that I feel obliged to urge everyone to take a look at Horace's original.

Wikipedia actually has a nice article:

Carpe diem - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

To me, I prefer the more literal "Pluck the day" or "Harvest the day".

Compare Greek καρπός (karpós, “fruit”) and κείρω (keírō, “to cut off”), English harvest, sharp, shear.

"Seize" always has such a frenzied feel to it. Seizing, grasping, clutching... And that's not what the original means.

I envision Horace plucking a ripe peach from a tree and sinking his teeth into its perfect, juicy flesh.