Best Way to Introduce Teachings?

Quote from Daniel Van Orman

It is an abstract ideal - driven by emotions rather than nature.

Yes Daniel, that is a reminder of something important -- that ideas/abstractions generate emotions every much as strong (or more) than physical feelings. So it is not enough to say that something "is an abstraction so therefore it isn't real" -- Abstractions may not have physical reality independent from us, but they can certainly generate strong feelings nevertheless.

Quote from Daniel Van Orman

There is much they have in common - we have just been discussing what major differences they have. I think there is far more common than not.

I have long been an admirer of some of the work of John Stuart Mill -- I am less familiar with Bentham. But certainly in general to the extent they are both aimed after "happiness" they have much in common. The old saying "the devil is in the details" applies.

Quote from Daniel Van Orman

In my mind, the ideas fit together perfectly. If one places "greats happiness for the greatest number" at the center

Yes, that IF in that statement is the big hurdle.... and that IF is really at the center of much of the rest of the issue. Who has the "right" to enforce their view of the greatest happiness of the greatest number on everyone else who disagrees?

I was going to make the point that you finished with, Cassius. Who determines the greatest happiness?

If I take the approach that I as an individual will act to maximize happiness for the most people, how can I do that? "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", and as you mentioned above, Daniel, (I'm quoting from memory so correct me if I'm wrong) an action can be immoral even if the intention was moral.

I believe the Epicurean answer to the greatest happiness for the greatest number is to get more people to follow Epicureanism

I've said elsewhere and this discussion of and England-based philosophy is a good place to repeat it that the British "stiff upper lip" approach seems to continually get in the way of their good sense and lead them to stoic-like views.

To be charitable, maybe they were under more pressure than other places to conform to Christianity or Christian/Humanist idealism, but for whatever the reason they do not seem to have been able to keep Epicurean views unpolluted from Stoicisms. (I do need to exempt Frances Wright from that generalization!)

Here is a comment about scholarship in England made by DeWitt in the intro to his book - I wish I could read Italian - maybe michelepinto could tell me if he has read Bignone and likes him!

Cassius, The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas is a short story. You can buy it for $1.99 online or download a free PDF that pops up in a Google search. I read it in a collection of LeGuin's short fiction titled The Unreal and the Real. She was a Taoist, which sometimes comes out in her fiction.

I suppose to a certain extent it's all just a question of what you think is important enough to focus on persuading people about.

I personally think it is much more satisfying/pleasureable to me to focus on showing people the truth about how nature operates, and that based on those truths we property (according to nature) focus on the happiness of ourselves and our friends rather than trying to "save the world" which is not a goal that is likely to be attained at any rate.

Quote from Cassius

Here is a comment about scholarship in England made by DeWitt in the intro to his book - I wish I could read Italian - maybe michelepinto could tell me if he has read Bignone and likes him!

I did not read this, still.. is very big.
I read the translation of Epicurus's writing in Italian by Ettore Bignone. They are good but too old. It is difficult to understend them now if you do not know already Epicurus.

Wow thank you for that picture Michele! All sorts of nice surprises today (combined with the Italian song!)

Michele:

Hiram wrote:

I found a synopsis in Italian, put it through google translate, and got this: "First published in 1936, this essay soon became a classic of Aristotelian exegesis. The basic thesis of Bignone, still persuasive, is that the philosophical formation of Epicurus unfolded through a very close comparison only with the dialogic works (now lost) of the young Aristotle, who at the time was still a Platonic all-round student. In essence, Epicurus could not know the most important Aristotelian treatises (such as the "Metaphysics", the "Physics", the "Ethics"), which would have constituted for him a far more solid and articulated dialectical shore." https://www.ibs.it/aristotele-perduto.../e/9788845259944.

ibs.it

L' Aristotele perduto e la formazione filosofica di Epicuro - Ettore Bignone -…
L' Aristotele perduto e la formazione filosofica di Epicuro - Ettore Bignone - Libro - Bompiani - Il pensiero occidentale | IBS

This seems hard to believe: "In essence, Epicurus could NOT know the most important Aristotelian treatises........?" He is suggesting that Epicurus was not aware of THE MOST IMPORTANT works of Aristotle? That seems hard to understand.... Perhaps a Google translate issue?

No this is correct. The thesis of Bignone is that Epicurus knows some of Aristotele's work. And most scholarsbelieve that.
As I said I did not read it.

Thanks Michele. I guess we don't even really know the points that Bignone was making in his book, so it probably doesn't make sense to try to speculate about what his real intent in the book was without reading it. Presumably he didn't write his book just to show that Epicurus had only some of Aristotle's work -- that would be a pretty narrow topic! Presumably he was making all sorts of points about what Epicurus taught, and what Aristotle taught, for purposes of better understanding both, so I would think we'll just have to dig into the book to find out.