Easy is due to the eu- prefix on the verbs in lines 3 & 4 of the Tetrapharmakos
Don are you aware of any other reference stating "easy" other than the tetrapharmokos ?
Easy is due to the eu- prefix on the verbs in lines 3 & 4 of the Tetrapharmakos
Don are you aware of any other reference stating "easy" other than the tetrapharmokos ?
in the cases of schadenfreude, déjà vu, or a cappella
Who gets to decide what these words actually mean? Who do we all accept is the authority?
Easy is due to the eu- prefix on the verbs in lines 3 & 4 of the Tetrapharmakos
Don are you aware of any other reference stating "easy" other than the tetrapharmokos ?
Line 3: euktēton εὔκτητον
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, ε , εὐκρα_τό-μελι , εὔκτητος
Line 4: euekkarterēton εὐεκκαρτέρητον
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, ε , εὐδρομ-ία , εὐεκ-καρτέρητος
Compare euekkritos
Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, ε , εὐδρομ-ία , εὐέκ-κρι^τος
in the cases of schadenfreude, déjà vu, or a cappella
Who gets to decide what these words actually mean? Who do we all accept is the authority?
This question is similar to the whole "Eskimos have a hundred words for snow" myth. The Inuit may have individual words for different types of snow, but English can still convey the meaning. It just takes more words. The may be one word in Inuktitut for it, but English can still say "packed snow that can be used to track an animal etc."
As to "who gets to decide", the authority at the present is the LSJ for ancient Greek that's available on Perseus.
The Thesaurus Linguae Latinae (TLL) is the most authoritative dictionary of ancient Latin. It is the only lexicon to cover all surviving Latin texts from the earliest times down to AD 600. Another is the Lewis and Short.
These dictionaries take into account scholarship, context, historical linguistics, and other factors to convey the range of meaning inherent in the words.
There are basically two schools of thought, one representing a prescriptive approach to language and embodied by the Académie Française, and the other, a descriptive approach to language typified by the Oxford English Dictionary.
I prefer the OED approach myself, which is much more in accord with the Lucretian view of language--a view that sees it as naturally and gradually developing and changing over time. In this view there is no authority. The Oxford English Dictionary is unusually thorough, running to twenty volumes in print, but its purpose is to record and document words rather than to narrowly define them. When a new word comes into common usage and has staying power, the OED will generally record it. The Académie Française will often reject them, and propose a different usage that is more properly French.
Asking whether words have meaning is to me rather like asking if a thing has value. The value of something is settled by what someone will trade for it. The meaning of words is settled by what people will commonly understand by them.
Another excerpt of interest from Epicurus, On Nature, book 14, column 24 (using Les Epicuriens, Google Translate on the French, and the papyrus transcription):
...we must count ourselves fortunate in this, too - that all who are engaged in such trivialities may have some sort of remedy by which it is possible, simply to attain at times calmness (κα̣τα̣στάσεις katastaseis) in the contemplation of nature, to get rid of their inborn ([σ]υμφύτου; French: connaturel) [trouble; ταραχ]ῆς], which even later [missing 1 column].
[ἀ-]
γ̣απητ[ὸν] καὶ τοῦτ[ο], τὸ
δὴ πάντα τὸν συνε̣[χό]με-
νον̣ [ταῖς] τοιαύταις περι-
εργ[ε]ίαις ἔχειν οἱονὶ φάρ-
μακ̣ον δι' οὗ κα̣τα̣στάσεις
ἁ̣πλ[ᾶς ἔστι]ν ἐν τῆι περὶ φύ-
σε[ως θεωρί]αι ἀπαλλαγή-
σε[σθαι τῆς σ]υμφύτου ἑαυ-
τα̣[ῖς ταραχ]ῆς ἣ καὶ ὕσ̣τε-
10ρον̣ [ ̣ ̣] ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ η̣πο ̣ ̣ σιτ ̣ ̣
γε [ ̣ ̣] ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ὥστε ̣ ̣ ̣ υ̣ ̣
[ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣] ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ τοιού̣[τοι]ς ̣ ̣
[ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣] ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ον̣ [ ̣ ̣ ̣] ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣
[ -ca.?- ]
Compare to Fragment 116. I summon you to sustained enjoyment and not to empty and trifling virtues, which destroy your confidence in the fruits of what you have.
ἐγὼ δʼ ἐφʼ ἡδονὰς συνεχεῖς παρακαλῶ καὶ οὐκ ἐπʼ ἀρετὰς κενὰς καὶ ματαίας καὶ ταραχώδεις ἐχούσας τῶν καρπῶν ἐλπίδας.
This is where I wish we had more detailed info on the Vatican sayings:
VS08. The wealth required by Nature is limited and is easy to procure; but the wealth required by vain ideals extends to infinity
"Required?"
Is this one of the sayings that comes from Epicurus himself or one that certainly does not?
Questions questions questions.....
Being an advocate for Epicurus in the modern world, like in his time, is not for the faint of heart or for those who can't stand controversy.
Pouring more salt into the wounds of translation issues...Here we see the complexity of translation (I found this here).
Bailey: 15. The wealth demanded by nature is both limited and easily procured; that demanded by idle imaginings stretches on to infinity.
**Ο TΗΣ ΦΥΣEΩΣ ΠΛΟΥTΟΣ ****ΚAΙ ΩΡΙΣTAΙ ****ΚAΙ EΥΠΟΡΙΣTΟΣ**
**EΣTΙΝ Ο ΔE TΩΝ ΚEΝΩΝ ΔΟΞΩΝ ****EΙΣ AΠEΙΡΟΝ EΚΠΙΠTEΙ. **
“The riches of nature are defined and easily procurable; but vain desires are insatiable.” Yonge (1853)
“Nature's wealth has its bounds and is easy to procure, but the wealth of vain fancies recedes to an infinite distance.” Hicks (1910)
“Nature's wealth at once has its bounds and is easy to procure; but the wealth of vain fancies recedes to an infinite distance.” Hicks (1925)
“The wealth demanded by nature is both limited and easily procured; that demanded by idle imaginings stretches on to infinity.” Bailey (1926)
“Natural wealth is limited and easily obtained; the wealth defined by vain fancies is always beyond reach.” Geer (1964)
“Nature's wealth is limited and easily obtained; the riches of idle fancies go on forever” O'Connor (1993)
“Natural wealth is both limited and easy to acquire. But wealth [as defined by] groundless opinions extends without limit.” Inwood & Gerson (1994)
“Natural wealth is both limited and easily obtained, but vanity is insatiable.” Anderson (2004)
“The bounty of nature is not only easy to extract as a resource; it also has its own limits set [by nature] [so that one cannot run into excess insofar as he is attuned to nature;] but the opulence of hollow fancies plunges precipitously into a space that has no limits.” Makridis (2005)
“Natural wealth is both limited and easy to acquire, but the riches incited by groundless opinion have no end.” Saint-Andre (2008)
“Nature's wealth is restricted and easily won, while that of empty convention runs on to infinity.” Strodach (2012)
“Nature's wealth is both limited and easy to procure; but the wealth of groundless opinions vanishes into thin air.” Mensch (2018)
“Nature’s wealth is both well-defined and readily obtained; but the wealth founded on empty beliefs is endlessly elusive.” White (2021)
Nor Bailey. He simply references PD15:
XV. The wealth demanded by Nature is both limited and easily procured; that demanded by idle imaginings stretches on to infinity. (Bailey)
ὁ τῆς φύσεως πλοῦτος καὶ ὥρισται καὶ εὐπόριστός ἐστιν, ὁ δὲ τῶν κενῶν δοξῶν (kenōn doxōn "empty beliefs/ principles/ doctrines") εἰς ἄπειρον (apeiron - one of the words Epicurus used to describe the extent of the universe) ἐκπίπτει.
Nor Bailey. He simply references PD15:
XV. The wealth demanded by Nature is both limited and easily procured; that demanded by idle imaginings stretches on to infinity. (Bailey)
ὁ τῆς φύσεως πλοῦτος καὶ ὥρισται καὶ εὐπόριστός ἐστιν, ὁ δὲ τῶν κενῶν δοξῶν (kenōn doxōn "empty beliefs/principles/doctrines") εἰς ἄπειρον ἐκπίπτει.
I am curious Don how would you translate it?
As literal as possible:
ὁ τῆς φύσεως πλοῦτος "The wealth of nature..."
καὶ ὥρισται* καὶ εὐπόριστός ἐστιν, "is the best and easily procured...
ὁ δὲ τῶν κενῶν δοξῶν (kenōn doxōn "empty beliefs/principles/doctrines") εἰς ἄπειρον ἐκπίπτει. "But that of empty opinions runs onto infinity."
*πλοῦτος ploutos. Ex., plutocracy. Wealth, riches.
**ὥρισται is, according to LSJ, a contraction of ὁ ἄριστος (o aristos) from which we get aristocracy. So, it literally means "best, finest; best in its kind, and so in all sorts of relations, serving as Sup. of ἀγαθός (agathon "good"). I'm wondering if the "limited" translation is from the idea of oligos as in oligarchy as in rule by a few or limited number. If I've misunderstood ὥρισται I am more than open to correction!
PS. There is ὁριστός from ὁρίζω (horízō, “separate, delimit”) but ὥρισται with its sense connected to "the good" seems to me to make sense here.
I would be curious to get Eikadistes 's take.
PS: I found it interesting that the predicates in the first phrase are ὥρισται ooristai and εὐπόριστός euporistos. The first appears to be a feminine plural and the second appears to be masculine? So, do they apply to ploutos (it would appear given the ending of the euporistos) or to "nature" physeos? This is where my Greek knowledge begins to break down
Per LSJ:
εὐπόρ-ιστος , ον, (πορίζω)
A.easy to procure or secure, Id.Ep.3p.63U., Sent.21, Fr.469, Dsc.Eup. Praef.: Sup., ἀμπεχόνη, οἰκία, Ph.2.424, cf. Phld.D.1.15; feasible, Cic.Att.7.1.7; εὐπόριστα (sc. φάρμακα), τά, common, family medicines: title of work by Dsc., Orib.Eup.Praef. (called περὶ ἁπλῶν φαρμάκων in codd. of Dsc.Eup.); also, ordinary food, opp. game out of season, Plu.Luc.40, Pomp.2. II. Act., providing one's subsistence with ease, Ptol.Tetr.155.
QuoteDisplay More-GAUNT-
All places that the eye of heaven visits
Are to a wise man ports and happy havens.
Teach thy necessity to reason thus:
There is no virtue like necessity.
Think not the King did banish thee,
But thou the King. Woe doth the heavier sit
Where it perceives it is but faintly borne.
Go, say I sent thee forth to purchase honor,
And not the King exiled thee; or suppose
Devouring pestilence hangs in our air
And thou art flying to a fresher clime.
Look what thy soul holds dear, imagine it
To lie that way thou goest, not whence thou com’st.
Suppose the singing birds musicians,
The grass whereon thou tread’st the presence
strewed,
The flowers fair ladies, and thy steps no more
Than a delightful measure or a dance;
For gnarling sorrow hath less power to bite
The man that mocks at it and sets it light.
-BOLINGBROKE-
O, who can hold a fire in his hand
By thinking on the frosty Caucasus?
Or cloy the hungry edge of appetite
By bare imagination of a feast?
Or wallow naked in December snow
By thinking on fantastic summer’s heat?
O no, the apprehension of the good
Gives but the greater feeling to the worse.
Fell sorrow’s tooth doth never rankle more
Than when he bites but lanceth not the sore.
I was thinking of this exchange in Richard II in relation to 'ataraxia under duress'. John of Gaunt is Bolingbroke's father, and has dutifully argued for his own son's banishment--a service to the king which he comes to bitterly regret. One senses that his advice is as much for himself as for his son. But Bolingbroke is having none of it. "Who can hold a fire in his hand by thinking on the frosty Caucasus?"
Display MoreAs literal as possible:
ὁ τῆς φύσεως πλοῦτος "The wealth of nature..."
καὶ ὥρισται* καὶ εὐπόριστός ἐστιν, "is the best and easily procured...
ὁ δὲ τῶν κενῶν δοξῶν (kenōn doxōn "empty beliefs/principles/doctrines") εἰς ἄπειρον ἐκπίπτει. "But that of empty opinions runs onto infinity."
*πλοῦτος ploutos. Ex., plutocracy. Wealth, riches.
**ὥρισται is, according to LSJ, a contraction of ὁ ἄριστος (o aristos) from which we get aristocracy. So, it literally means "best, finest; best in its kind, and so in all sorts of relations, serving as Sup. of ἀγαθός (agathon "good"). I'm wondering if the "limited" translation is from the idea of oligos as in oligarchy as in rule by a few or limited number. If I've misunderstood ὥρισται I am more than open to correction!
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E1%BD%A4…%84%CE%BF%CF%82
PS. There is ὁριστός from ὁρίζω (horízō, “separate, delimit”) but ὥρισται with its sense connected to "the good" seems to me to make sense here.
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E1%BC%84…2#Ancient_Greek
I would be curious to get Eikadistes 's take.
I agree with this expression of KD15.
VS08. The wealth required by Nature is limited and is easy to procure; but the wealth required by vain ideals extends to infinity
"Required?"
Yeah, I don't see *required* in the Greek. It literally just says "is" ἐστιν.
Display More QuoteDisplay More-GAUNT-
All places that the eye of heaven visits
Are to a wise man ports and happy havens.
Teach thy necessity to reason thus:
There is no virtue like necessity.
Think not the King did banish thee,
But thou the King. Woe doth the heavier sit
Where it perceives it is but faintly borne.
Go, say I sent thee forth to purchase honor,
And not the King exiled thee; or suppose
Devouring pestilence hangs in our air
And thou art flying to a fresher clime.
Look what thy soul holds dear, imagine it
To lie that way thou goest, not whence thou com’st.
Suppose the singing birds musicians,
The grass whereon thou tread’st the presence
strewed,
The flowers fair ladies, and thy steps no more
Than a delightful measure or a dance;
For gnarling sorrow hath less power to bite
The man that mocks at it and sets it light.
-BOLINGBROKE-
O, who can hold a fire in his hand
By thinking on the frosty Caucasus?
Or cloy the hungry edge of appetite
By bare imagination of a feast?
Or wallow naked in December snow
By thinking on fantastic summer’s heat?
O no, the apprehension of the good
Gives but the greater feeling to the worse.
Fell sorrow’s tooth doth never rankle more
Than when he bites but lanceth not the sore.
I was thinking of this exchange in Richard II in relation to 'ataraxia under duress'. John of Gaunt is Bolingbroke's father, and has dutifully argued for his own son's banishment--a service to the king which he comes to bitterly regret. One senses that his advice is as much for himself as for his son. But Bolingbroke is having none of it. "Who can hold a fire in his hand by thinking on the frosty Caucasus?"
I had thoughts of ataraxia under duress watching this interview with David Hogg. He addresses the idea specifically (using calm not ataraxia, of course) starting around 0:58.
Thinking about the larger context:
It possible that the "calm" within Epicureanism is refering to the feeling which arises when one thinks about "when death is, I will not be" and the "gods do not punish" (they are not the cause of thunder and lightening and they are not involved with humans).
So it is not a "mind-over-matter" like in Hinduism or Buddhism, but rather reasoning through those two things (death and the nature of the gods).
Is there any other practices in Epicureanism besides these two, that would lead to a feeling of "calm"?
Thinking about the larger context:
It possible that the "calm" within Epicureanism is refering to the feeling which arises when one thinks about "when death is, I will not be" and the "gods do not punish" (they are not the cause of thunder and lightening and they are not involved with humans).
So it is not a "mind-over-matter" like in Hinduism or Buddhism, but rather reasoning through those two things (death and the nature of the gods).
Is there any other practices in Epicureanism besides these two, that would lead to a feeling of "calm"?
[37] "Hence, since such a course is of service to all who take up natural science, I, who devote to the subject my continuous energy and reap the calm enjoyment of a life like this" ~ Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus
ἐγγαληνίζω τῷ βίῳ, "spend life calmly"
from γαληνίζω ,
A.calm, still, esp. waves or winds, Hp.Vict.3.71, E.Fr.1079.
2. intr., become calm, prob. in Hp. Morb.Sacr.13; to be calm or tranquil, Alex.178.6, Ph.1.354; “τὸ γαληνίζον τῆς θαλάττης” Arist.Pr.936a5:—so in Med., Xenocr. ap. Orib.2.58.98.
Hence, since such a course is of service to all who take up natural science, I, who devote to the subject my continuous energy and reap the calm enjoyment of a life like this" ~ Epicurus,
So sounds like "calmness" coming through the practice of studying natural science?