Posts by Matt

I have more to say on this….

I watched it…before I dive in deeper I want to make one initial comment.

It’s interesting how they are setting up the narrative as if our human existence is somehow not a part of the “objective” universe. Like a dualistic human consciousness and perception reality that is artificial and deceived by our senses. I think this is a mistake….my reality is a part of the objective reality. I’m made of the same things as the rest of the objective universe so my perception of them is true. My perception may be different than another person or animal, but my perception is true and real. All data perceived by any observation is perceived through a conscious process. So portraying objective reality as a mysterious incalculable “other” seems like an attention grabber….almost like positing multiverses….there’s no evidential proof, but it’s fun to theorize. But too much speculation can lead down a path of superstition.

I haven’t had a chance to watch this yet, but this is something that I would really enjoy discussing. I’ll jump on later.

I love all your inputs and responses my friends. Thank you.

Admin Note: This thread is currently closed.

There is no evidence that Epicurus or Epicureans practiced meditation. There are many forum members who have studied Buddhism in the past, and this thread remains here as a reminder to focus on Epicurean goals for how choices of what to do are based on the pleasure that they bring, or the relief from stress that they bring (and not as a kind of virtue/religious discipline to develop as it often becomes for Buddhists). -- October 17, 2024

**********************************************

I’m definitely not one to promote any sort of esoteric things within Epicurean Philosophy, but the brief discussion in the music thread got me wondering if anyone here practices mediation as a therapeutic discipline? Not to attain any metaphysical goal, but rather as a form of relaxation and centering?

As I said in the music thread, I listen to ambient music to detoxify my brain (to get music ear-worms out, to muffle the sound of news chatter etc.) and to relax. In the past I tried various forms of meditation, especially during my George Harrison-like Eastern philosophy journey. Usually those forms of meditation have some metaphysical goal attached to them as in Buddhism and Vedanta which now are very unappealing to me. One form from Chinese philosophy made the most sense for me. The “quiet sitting” technique that is used by Taoists and also historically by Confucians, was the most beneficial. As opposed to visualizing anything, the idea is to let go of all visualization and mental phenomena and attempt to trance out. Kind of like putting your brain into a hibernation mode to clear away noisy thoughts. This particular mediation works well for me as long as the environment is without distraction. But again, I also can do something similar with headphones listening to ambient drone.

So does anyone else do any practices?

And that’s where our need to expose this philosophy to the world comes into play. Supernaturalism brought the majority of the world into superstition and pain but the cult of Epicurus, which day by day is more and more validated by scientific and sociological evidence, brings us out of that pain.

Saying this hypothetical machine exists, it has to exist in the same universe where the natural pleasures ALSO exist, otherwise by what standard would the machine or person judge what a perfect “artificial” copy version of the pleasure is? Without the natural version as a standard? Then the person could judge whether the real thing is better. This universe is a necessity for the machine to exist. In a universe where pain is also present to contrast with pleasure. So it cannot just exist hypothetically in a paradise-like vacuum where there are no problems or pain humans experience on the regular…that would necessitate a “magical” pleasure machine to escape them. And if it does exist here the parameters must change.

It can’t be both ways for the person positing this… it has to exist in this natural universe and if it does it has to operate exactly how nature operates here. Otherwise we might as well be talking about how many feathers are on Cherubim wings as opposed to Seraphim wings….or if two headed dragons are more likely to live in mountain caves as opposed to underground caves.

I just feel like this hypothetical is in the realm of it being entirely implausible given the particular parameters. Its an idealist abstraction that doesn’t take into account reality. How reality works, how nature works, how human behavior works.

To argue against this you’d need far more detail, by the person positing this absurdity. So is this universe one where humans don’t need social interaction? Need to have sex? Need to reproduce? Need to eat? Need to work? Need to exercise? Are the effects of the machine identical to actual tactile experiences in reality? Is the effect on the brain the same? If the idea is just being posited in a vacuum then no, this question is an absurdity because it refuses to take into account reality and it’s akin to any idealist abstract hypothetical. It’s a trap…

Epicurus argues against UNNATURAL desires. Such things, though they might be saturated with pleasure, can lead to pain. This machine idea seems to be the ultimate theoretical unnatural construct. It’s a “gotcha” trap…

Instead of a machine it could be a “pleasure drug” that comes in pill form.

A pleasure machine doesn’t exist naturally, it must be made to be manifested into reality. So it already is outside of natural processes that lead to pleasure. Everything has consequences, actions and reactions in reality. So a thought experiment where there are no consequences based on observable experiences isn’t reality and is now beyond the scope of Epicurean philosophy. This line of abstract argument is for adversarial Idealist philosophers attempting to trap Epicureans…the answer for the Epicurean is don’t play the game and don’t step into the idealist arena because THAT isn’t real. The world of the pleasure machine doesn’t exist, just like the the world of pink fluffy invisible dragons that grant wishes doesn’t.

There are many unnatural unnecessary things we might desire…people say that heroin feels like the greatest pleasure, but we all know what happens when someone goes down that road. Consequences. Consequences in reality. And since hooking yourself up to a “pleasure machine” in reality must also like heroin have consequences then we must accept this machine is an UNNATURAL and UNNECESSARY desire that will lead to pain. Given the testable and observable evidence for people who have addictions to the cyber world: VR, social media, pornography, video game addiction, there is very good evidence that this machine idea is a red herring.

Given what you know of Epicurus’s philosophy, I’m going to post two examples of modern cult leaders, and then see the context of what the “cult” of Epicurus is against the backdrop of the others….

I’m less concerned with the “cult” terminology these days because the content of Epicurus’s philosophy is based on personal/individual perception of reality based on sensory experience. I’m certain you could classify Epicureans as somewhat cultic. But all that being said against the backdrop of the majority of the world historically being saturated in superstition, religion, false ideologies etc. Epicurus stands in stark contrast to other “cult” leaders, where he is trying to release society from the bondage of these ideologies. Most of those who we consider cult leaders (Sai Baba, Nithyananda, Jim Jones) are charlatans that rely on superstitious ideologies and religions. So Epicurus might be considered a cult leader to some, but given the context of his philosophy which isn’t supernatural or based in some form of inaccessible secret gnostic knowledge that only the cult leader knows or has access to, he’d be the most benign in the history of cult leaders. People that venerate him (celebrate his life, his birthday etc.) recognize that in the long history of liars and frauds, Epicurus stood out as one who tried to break the chains of the religionist and supernaturalist frauds and give freedom to the individual to see the world as it is.

I get the sense ecstatic dancing (from the video I watched) is akin to many practices that are “personal” preferences that bring about pleasure. Like doing yoga, meditation, a sport etc.

I don’t know if historical Epicureans danced regularly, but since dance is a huge part of many cultural gatherings, I can’t imagine it wouldn’t have been an accepted

practice. But especially now, doing what gives you pleasure is 100% an accepted practice, so I’d say…dance on.

Somewhat related, I’m planning on picking up Tai Chi this year. I tried it a few years ago and liked the idea, but it takes lots of time to master. Something I don’t have lots of…time. It’s also very different from the Taekwondo I was used to in my teens and 20’s. But it’s still technically a martial art and one that would fit my more philosophical side.

I had a feeling Ted Danson was going say something like he did. 😂

And usually if you are a person of notoriety like a celebrity or politician, what you post often will come back to haunt you on the front page of a news platform.

“λάθε βιώσας“ is one of those concepts that is not universal among modern Epicureans. I think that on a practical level living somewhat under the radar is not a terrible idea, but again this like all things requires prudent judgement. A person who decides to be a full blown hermit most likely cannot also live a truly Epicurean life due to lack of friends, social interaction etc. so to live unknown should not be taken to an extreme because this would certainly reduce pleasure.

But I began to think about the phrase as applied to social media and internet usage. This subject (internet usage) is really important to me and I have given it quite a significant amount of thought. Many of us have had a social media presence or currently do have one. This forum is my only presence now, but prior to this I had a rocky off and on relationship with Facebook. For me, Facebook made it easy to connect with family and friends, but often horrid toxicity (among a myriad of other social media offenses) caused the platform to feel more like a burden than not. What I have found is that I actually feel better when I’m away from platforms like that. This very specific Epicurean forum gives me feelings of pleasure, interacting with my friends and discussing subjects that are important to me. But there is just something about the other platforms that bring the worst behaviors and emotions out of people.

So thinking on this subject, I think that living unknown in cyber obscurity is not a terrible thing. Using prudent judgement to use only what platforms are beneficial and pleasurable for you, managing your time, and understand what your relationship is to the media you use.

Kalosyni absolutely, if you are sharing a real life environment with likeminded people who are pursuing individual pleasure it is important to maintain a social compact of doing “no harm” within the confines of the society you are in. However, all compacts aren’t universal even among homogenous ideologically minded people. Living in a group of people who share your mindset only amplifies your safety, it doesn’t ever permanently ensure it. No compact that I am aware of could ever work in that way. As much as we all wish it could…

For me I pursue Epicurean philosophy from a less academic but more lived perspective. Using my own experience to test the philosophy. I am a career military member and formerly a person who worked for the Judicial Branch of my home state. For me Epicurean philosophy is not theory, but application. An application that must work in all forms of life. I know of Epicurean people who live in places like Mexico, who live in particular fear of cartel violence and others who live in countries that would deem Epicurean philosophy blasphemous. For those people these online forums are their only outlet in a society that has made compacts to destroy them.

Building the Garden as you have said is one where everyone has a shared Epicurean goal…you would teach culinary activities and other types pleasurable forms of living, while others would practice medicine, law and yet still others will be law enforcement and military. But we share a common goal not to harm each other…is it a permanent assurance? No. It can’t be because no idealistic Utopia exists, but it would be a very good place to be.

My only comment is that it seems that you are interpreting very generalized and theoretical statements as somehow hostile to you personally…which is somewhat confusing, since nothing in my above statement should create “fear” or “trouble” in your mind. My statement is purely general (not directed at any particular entity) and certainly not meant to trouble anyone in the forum.

But obviously if you feel somehow uncomfortable discussing practical aspects of the philosophy that apply to a myriad of life situations, you must do whatever you must do to pursue your pleasure.

Wooooohooo! Happy New Year!

I think a lot of this has to do with the compartmentalization of all violent actions in nature in general (including all forms human violence and natural violence which exists in all forms in nature) and our perception that there is a higher abstract idea that certain forms of violence are considered legal and illegal within contractual agreements. For example the types of violent actions outlined in the US Law of Armed Conflict and the more “universal” Geneva Convention show us there are more regional ideas of what is considered “lawful” acts and “illegal” acts. However, as with any agreement like these particular ones, they apply only to those parties willing to agree to the terms and there are a great number of parties who do not recognize these compacts. Confounding any sort of universal agreements. Navigating this is difficult from 21,000 feet looking down, but on the ground dealing with individual acts of violence and self-preservation it becomes a matter of instinct and the circumstances of the moment. An Epicurean should feel no concern about self defense or self preservation.

For me, my entire career has been dealing with the philosophy of mutually assured destruction and the consequences of parties breaking agreements and treaties. I usually have a lot of time to think about this stuff because I’m immersed in it daily.