This is a thread-starter for use in discussing "methods" or "considerations" in thinking, as referenced in the Epicurean texts.
![](https://www.epicureanfriends.com/wcf/images/avatars/9f/23-9f93d8f94fca54fa8e91d055eb8208cd2ac9b0c8.jpg)
Methods Or Considerations In Thinking
-
-
This is a very rough list I made at the beginning of the year (based mostly on Sedley's work on Book 28). This list is not very well done, is not complete, and perhaps should not even be in this form. We can be sure Epicurus was aware of such distinctions, but as far as I can tell he was casual in dealing with these categories.
(1a) Observational – engaged in focus and attention (πραγματική and περὶ πράξεων):
- Φανταστικὸς Τρόπος (Image-based thinking style): creative approach, visionary mode
- Awareness of external observations
- Ἐπιβλητικὸς Τρόπος (Epibletistic thinking style): empirical approach, objective mode
- Focus on external observations
- Ὁμοιοτικὸς Τρόπος (Homoiotistic thinking style): comparative approach, affinity mode
- Focus on similarities and likenesses
(1b) Empirical – engaged in quantifiable assessment of evidence:
- Ἐπιλογισμὸς Τρόπος (Epilogistic thinking style): sensible approach, reasonable mode
- Distinguishes fundamental characteristics based on awareness of observations (experience and feelings)
(2) Logical – engaged in arriving at conclusions based on given premises or evidence (about τὰ ἄδηλα):
- Ἀναλογισμὸς Τρόπος (Analogistic thinking style): comparison approach, analogy mode
- Focus on internal observations (experience and feelings)
- Focused comparison of our experiences
- Cυλλογισμικὸς Τρόπος (Syllogistic thinking style): logical approach, reasoning mode
- Focus on logical deduction and structured argumentation
- Θεωρητικὸς Τρόπος (Theoretistic thinking style): speculative approach, conceptual mode
- Focus on possibilities and conceivability
- Διαφορικὸς Τρόπος (Differential thinking style): contrastive approach, distinction mode
- Focus on differences and distinctions
- Περιληπτικὸς Τρόπος (Perileptistic thinking style): comprehensible approach, grasping mode
- Focus on lack of possibilities and inconceivability
- Φανταστικὸς Τρόπος (Image-based thinking style): creative approach, visionary mode
-
I also want to be sure we emphasize what Bryan has produced on page 130 of the current version of his Epicurea, from Diogenes Laertius 10:32. It strikes me that the specific mention of these considerations lends them special importance in any proper analysis process:
- Circumstance
- Analogy
- Similarity
- Combination / Synthesis
-
Cassius
July 25, 2024 at 1:33 PM Changed the title of the thread from “Types Or Processes Of Thinking Mentioned By Epicurus” to “Methods Or Considerations In Thinking Mentioned By Epicurus”. -
Philodemos provides a number of examples of deductive reasoning in On Methods of Inference [https://twentiers.com/on-signs/] and seems to negate inductive reasoning:
He suggests that the following deduction is valid:
‘Since the men in our experience, in so far as and according
as they are men, are mortal,
‘Men everywhere are mortal,’Whereas the following inductive assumption is invalid:
‘Since men in our experience are mortal,
‘Men everywhere are mortal,’As Philodemos writes, "the analogical method of inference is not cogent; and on the whole if it is cogent, it must assume that unperceived objects are like those in our experience.”
However, he later asserts that "it will be sufficient for us to base our belief on probability in these matters, just as we do in regard to what is learned from trial; for example, that we shall be safe sailing in summer, since we have had experience of favorable winds in that season." If I'm reading that right, he seems to be saying that inductive reasoning tends to be inaccurate; however, it is at least functional, and, anticipating Pragmatists like William James, we can consider it true (enough).
I'll need to go back to the original Greek to identify the named methods of inference, because he seems to either accept or reject "argument from analogy", depending on the context: As he writes, "if anyone uses the argument from analogy properly, he will not fail, and we consider that our statement is true", whereas, he earlier states"the analogical method of inference is not cogent".
I find the text to be challenging, but, ultimately, it seems to me that Philodemos is providing us with examples of functional methods of inference that are not necessarily definite, only probable. Ultimately, it is up to our sensations to provide evidence to justify any given proposition.
-
I find the text to be challenging,....
It sure is, and especially since it seems to pick up in the middle, and it's sometimes hard to tell which arguments he is agreeing with, and which he is stating accurately but which are Stoic arguments that he ultimately disagrees with.
There's a lot more to get out of the book than I've gotten myself. I do think the Appendix to the DeLacy version is very helpful however, and it gives a lot of background about these issues that's not in the text.
-
Yes, On Methods of Inference is very difficult and On Nature book 28 is too. I was a bit wary to even bring up this list, because I am not ready to go back into either one just yet!
On a related note, I cannot look at my work for very long without seeing a lot of errors. This is a bit better:
-
Cassius
July 25, 2024 at 5:37 PM Changed the title of the thread from “Methods Or Considerations In Thinking Mentioned By Epicurus” to “Methods Or Considerations In Thinking”. -
Anyone have thoughts on how "analogy" differs from "similarity"?
-
Analogy compares things which are alike in relationship, cause, operation, throughput, etc. Similarity compares things which are alike in nature, shape, size, origin, and so on.
The way in which ocean liners transport people is similar to the way in which cargo ships transport goods; both vessels collect their payload from land-based ports, and carry them over water to their destination.
The way in which cargo ships transport goods is analogous to the way in which red blood cells transport oxygen. Red blood cells collect oxygen at the port (the alveoli in the lungs) and carry that oxygen through shipping channels (the blood vessels) until they reach their destination (the cells of the body).
I'm thinking out loud, don't take this too seriously!
-
I think this is well worth exploring because it's probably the front line of the way the Epicureans would have distinguished their approach to the search for truth as opposed to the use of "formal logic" by the other philosophers. Looking for and setting up "rules" that harden into inflexibility is a prescription for disaster, and I would expect that Epicurus would be looking for ways to describe a properly flexible approach that always takes into account new facts and new circumstances regardless of what "rules" of virtue or piety have been developed formally over time.
Seems to me that Frances Wright was attacking this issue also in saying something to the effect that "theory" is an enemy of truth. I'll look for that cite.
From Chapter 15 of A Few Days In Athens, Leontium speaking:
Quote“I apprehend the difficulties,” observed Leontium, “which embarrass the mind of our young friend. Like most aspirants after knowledge, he has a vague and incorrect idea of what he is pursuing, and still more, of what may be attained. In the schools you have hitherto frequented,” she continued, addressing the youth, “certain images of virtue, vice, truth, knowledge, are presented to the imagination, and these abstract qualities, or we may call them, figurative beings, are made at once the objects of speculation and adoration. A law is laid down, and the feelings and opinions of men are predicated upon it; a theory is built, and all animate and inanimate nature is made to speak in its support; an hypothesis is advanced, and all the mysteries of nature are treated as explained. You have heard of, and studied various systems of philosophy; but real philosophy is opposed to all systems. Her whole business is observation; and the results of that observation constitute all her knowledge. She receives no truths, until she has tested them by experience; she advances no opinions, unsupported by the testimony of facts; she acknowledges no virtue, but that involved in beneficial actions; no vice, but that involved in actions hurtful to ourselves or to others. Above all, she advances no dogmas, — is slow to assert what is, — and calls nothing impossible. The science of philosophy is simply a science of observation, both as regards the world without us, and the world within; and, to advance in it, are requisite only sound senses, well developed and exercised faculties, and a mind free of prejudice. The objects she has in view, as regards the external world, are, first, to see things as they are, and secondly, to examine their structure, to ascertain their properties, and to observe their relations one to the other. — As respects the world within, or the philosophy of mind, she has in view, first, to examine our sensations, or the impressions of external things on our senses; which operation involves, and is involved in, the examination of those external things themselves: secondly, to trace back to our sensations, the first development of all our faculties; and again, from these sensations, and the exercise of our different faculties as developed by them, to trace the gradual formation of our moral feelings, and of all our other emotions: thirdly, to analyze all these our sensations, thoughts, and emotions, — that is, to examine the qualities of our own internal, sentient matter, with the same, and yet more, closeness of scrutiny, than we have applied to the examination of the matter that is without us: finally, to investigate the justness of our moral feelings, and to weigh the merit and demerit of human actions; which is, in other words, to judge of their tendency to produce good or evil, — to excite pleasurable or painful feelings in ourselves or others. You will observe, therefore, that, both as regards the philosophy of physics, and the philosophy of mind, all is simply a process of investigation. It is a journey of discovery, in which, in the one case, we commission our senses to examine the qualities of that matter, which is around us, and, in the other, endeavor, by attention to the varieties of our consciousness, to gain a knowledge of those qualities of matter which constitute our susceptibilities of thought and feeling.”
Unread Threads
-
- Title
- Replies
- Last Reply
-
-
-
Roman Glass Reconstructions Available 1
- Cassius
September 5, 2024 at 8:42 PM - General Discussion
- Cassius
September 6, 2024 at 2:53 PM
-
- Replies
- 1
- Views
- 142
1
-
-
-
-
Repackaged Epicureanism from a Christian writer? 11
- Robert
September 1, 2024 at 2:13 PM - General Discussion
- Robert
September 3, 2024 at 8:36 AM
-
- Replies
- 11
- Views
- 535
11
-
-
-
-
Ancient Epicurean worldview (classes of compounds of atoms) 1
- TauPhi
September 2, 2024 at 2:44 PM - General Discussion
- TauPhi
September 2, 2024 at 5:49 PM
-
- Replies
- 1
- Views
- 184
1
-
-
-
-
A "Bread and Water" Question 2
- Cassius
September 1, 2024 at 9:06 AM - General Discussion
- Cassius
September 1, 2024 at 10:06 AM
-
- Replies
- 2
- Views
- 224
2
-
-
-
-
So You Want To Learn Ancient Greek Or Latin? 71
- burninglights
November 17, 2023 at 8:20 PM - General Discussion
- burninglights
August 30, 2024 at 8:49 PM
-
- Replies
- 71
- Views
- 9.5k
71
-