Posts by Kalosyni

I am a little late in joining this discussion, and may or may not say much more.

I object to using the word tranquility for the following reasons:

Translating the ancient Greek concept of ataraxia as strictly "tranquility" is considered somewhat inaccurate because "tranquility" implies a passive, serene, or meditative state of inner peace . By contrast, ataraxia is a highly active, unshakeable state of mental resilience.

Using the word tranquility misses the true essence of the term for several reasons:

• The Etymology is Negative: The word is formed using an alpha-privative (a prefix meaning "without") attached to the Greek verb tarassein, meaning "to disturb, trouble, or agitate". It literally translates to "un-troubledness" or "imperturbability" rather than a positive state of calm.
• Dynamic Resilience vs. Static Quiet: Tranquility evokes images of a quiet, peaceful room or a silent lake . Ataraxia , as used by Hellenistic philosophies like Epicureanism and Stoicism , is a robust, dynamic equilibrium that allows an individual to remain steadfast even when facing external chaos or extreme emotional triggers.
• Active Engagement: To the ancient Greeks, ataraxia wasn't about completely removing oneself from the world (which tranquility implies) . It was about actively managing and overcoming unfounded anxieties and destructive passions so you can live a flourishing life, often referred to as eudaimonia.
• Absence of Disturbance: The closest equivalent is "imperturbability" or "unperturbedness". It describes a condition where the mind refuses to be shaken or agitated by the fear of death, gods, or future pain.

*********

Ideas of some kind of a "perfect telos" cannot get one to the happy life. This is creating an abstraction beyond "honey is sweet, and snow is white" and it is dancing around with Plato's perfect forms.

The pleasant and pleasurable life is made complete by: 1) following what nature provides (the inborn sense of feeling pleasure and pain), and 2) applying prudence when making choices as to what to do and what to avoid (choosing what leads to longterm health of the body and happiness of the soul) and 3) discarding "empty" and futile opinions which lead to great pains, and 4) developing a mental state of resiliency (not disturbed by fears of death or the gods)

When one applies all these practices, the happy life is made complete now --- and this will be the blessedness of living like a god among men.

I just posted this:

Blog Article

Contemplation Through the Lens of Epicurean Philosophy

Contemplation Through the Lens of Epicurean Philosophy

Epicureanism is about much more than savoring our meals. Epicurean philosophy calls us to engage the mind in rational thinking, but are we missing some important aspects of rational contemplation that might bring forward new insights toward living life more fully and pleasurably?

Here are some thoughts on various philosophical and life issues to contemplate and reflect on during the study of Epicurean philosophy. Note that I did not add…

Kalosyni

June 26, 2026 at 8:48 AM

This thread can be used for comments or thought on personal contemplation through the lens of Epicurean philosophy.

I just see that this is in the news:

Quote

Among the new material ⁠presented on Thursday were 70 columns of text from "On Vices, Book 1", attributed to the Epicurean philosopher Philodemus.

Nearly 1.5 metres (5 ft) of readable text across 20 columns was also recovered from a document dated to 200-300 BC — the oldest Herculaneum scroll yet unwrapped — exploring ethics, arts and human behaviour.

https://www.reuters.com/science/complete-text-carbonised-herculaneum-scroll-unlocked-first-time-2026-06-25/

Quote from Todd

I think the best approach would be to understand why they have this belief in the first place (which you have not stipulated) and approach it from there, rather than attacking the life-vs-death logic directly.

This question could come up when considering whether to have children or to not have children. If the state of living is more valuable on a philosophical level, then you might be pressured to have children because of that. But if "life" vs "not life" on a philosophical level are equal, then it would be equally acceptable to choose not to have children.

From the Letter to Menoeceus, it seems to me that the philosophical attitude regarding the value of life vs death are equal:

[126] "But the many at one moment shun death as the greatest of evils, at another (yearn for it) as a respite from the (evils) in life. (But the wise man neither seeks to escape life) nor fears the cessation of life, for neither does life offend him nor does the absence of life seem to be any evil."

And, if you are already alive, then the idea is to not shun this life.

Patrikios - Here is are some comparisons to textual references in Epicurean philosophy, mapped according to some of the points in Post 1 above (although some of these may be more loosely related)...

Cultivate Gratitude

“The wealth demanded by nature is limited and is easy to procure; but the wealth demanded by vain ideals extends to infinity.”
— PD 15

“Do not spoil what you have by desiring what you have not; remember that what you now have was once among the things you only hoped for.”
— VS 35

Practice Mindfulness (being fully present now)

“The future is neither wholly ours nor wholly not ours, so that neither must we completely expect it nor despair of it as if it would not come.”
— PD 14

“Accustom yourself to think that death is nothing to us…”
— Letter to Menoeceus, §124–125

Embrace Continuous Learning

“Let no one delay the study of philosophy while young nor weary of it when old; for no one is either too early or too late to secure the health of the soul.”
— Letter to Menoeceus, §122

Find a Sense of Purpose

“We must study the things which produce happiness, since when happiness is present, we have everything; when it is absent, all our actions are directed toward attaining it.”
— Letter to Menoeceus, §122–123

Nurture Relationships

“Of all the things that wisdom provides for the happiness of the whole life, by far the greatest is the possession of friendship.”
— PD 27

“Friendship dances around the world proclaiming to us all to awaken to blessedness.”
— VS 52

Help Others

“Every friendship is desirable in itself; but it had its beginning in usefulness.”
— PD 23

Nourish Your Body

“Plain fare offers the same pleasure as a luxurious table when once the pain of want is removed.”
— Letter to Menoeceus, §131

Quote from Cassius

Its purpose is to test your life-affirmation;

In other words, it is a test for your appreciation of whether you really find your life desirable, in that if you do you will want the opportunity to live life as long and energetically as possible.

Quote from Cassius

Vatican Saying 38: "He is of very small account for whom there are many good reasons for ending his life."

The implication here is that "externals" are not important, but does this end up taking on a "stoic" flavor, especially as an aspect of "eternal return" is accepting what has happened no matter how bad.

Trying to understand "eternal recurrence" and found this from Google:

Quote

Nietzsche’s concept of eternal recurrence is a thought experiment that asks you to imagine living your exact life over and over for eternity. Every joy, pain, and choice will repeat in the exact same sequence. Its purpose is to test your life-affirmation; if you can embrace this repetition joyfully, you have achieved ultimate acceptance of your fate.

The Core Thought Experiment

Nietzsche first introduced the concept in The Gay Science as a hypothetical scenario delivered by a demon:

• The Premise: A demon tells you that you will have to live your life over and over again for eternity, with absolutely nothing new happening—every joy and every sorrow, every sigh and every thought must return to you in the same sequence.
• The Litmus Test: Nietzsche asks: “Would you throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or would you have experienced a single immense moment when you would have answered him: ‘You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine?’”

The Ultimate Goal: Affirmation and Amor Fati

Rather than a literal cosmological theory, eternal recurrence serves as a psychological tool for radical life-affirmation:

• Radical Responsibility: If your life is going to repeat infinitely, you can no longer brush off mistakes, regrets, or sufferings as temporary blips. You are forced to own every action and consequence.
• Amor Fati: This is Latin for "love of fate." Nietzsche challenges you to not merely endure life, but to love it so profoundly that you would not change a single detail of it, even the worst sufferings.

Why Nietzsche Created It

• Rejection of the Afterlife: Christianity and traditional religions devalued this earthly life by promising a perfect, painless afterlife. Eternal recurrence forces you to focus entirely on the present world and find meaning in the "here and now".
• The Counter-Nihilism: Without God, life can feel meaningless (nihilism). Eternal recurrence provides the ultimate counter-weight: if this life is all you have, and it will repeat forever, you must make every single moment matter infinitely.

How to Apply It

In practice, eternal recurrence is a guide for making decisions. Before you take an action, speak a word, or make a choice, ask yourself: “Is this a choice I would be willing to make and live with an infinite number of times?” It pushes you to eliminate mediocrity and live with absolute intention, vitality, and passion.

Display More

This brings up more questions for reflection that are not found in Epicurean philosophy.

This may need it's own thread, but currently this section of the forum is set up so that no new threads can be added.

Does Principal Doctrine 24 & 25, describe how "principled action" is arrived at?

(24) "...And if among the mental images created by your opinion you affirm both that which awaits confirmation, and that which does not, you will not escape error, since you will have preserved the whole cause of doubt in every judgment between what is right and what is wrong."

(25) "If on each occasion, instead of referring your actions to the end of nature, you turn to some other, nearer, standard, when you are making a choice or an avoidance, your actions will not be consistent with your principles."

First we would need to consider what does "being principled" mean?

A possible first step of defining it:

Quote

(From Google)

Being a deeply principled person means consistently aligning your thoughts, choices, and actions with a clear, consciously chosen set of ethical standards. It is defined by having unshakeable core values and the integrity to maintain those truths, even when it is costly, inconvenient, or unpopular.

Defining traits of deeply principled individuals include:

• Unwavering Integrity: Maintaining total alignment between words and actions. Principled people act according to their character rather than changing their behavior based on the audience.
• Moral Courage: Standing firm in one's convictions rather than taking the easy way out or giving in to peer pressure.
• Sense of Fairness and Justice: Treating others with respect, honesty, and empathy, while advocating for equality and ethical standards.
• Self-Awareness and Responsibility: Taking ownership of personal actions, accepting the consequences of decisions, and continuously reflecting on personal growth.
• Consistency over Perfection: While a principled person strives to do what is morally right, they are recognizable through consistent, everyday choices rather than the illusion of flawlessness.

Happy Twentieth Everyone! Wishing everyone a beautiful day filled with all the things that make life wonderful!

And tomorrow is Summer Solstice!

Here is a good video explaining LLM's:

Martin do you have any input on the comparison between prolepsis and LLM's?

All posts mentioning the gods have been moved (and general prolepsis comments by Bryan have been copied and exist in both threads. Also, Titus' AI query exists in both threads).

New thread split off to discuss prolepsis of the gods:

Thread

Prolepsis and the Epicurean Gods (discussion split from earlier thread started by Titus)

Admin Edit: This thread is for discussion on the nature of the gods spurred on by a section below: "An especially interesting case: the gods" (A number of posts have been moved or copied depending on the content).

For discussion on LLM's please visit this thread.

**********

Today, I had a short but interesting talk with Chat GPT:

Titus: Is there a connection between large language models and Epicurean prolepsis? Could Epicurean prolepsis be interpreted as what LLMs are processing?

Yes, there is a…

Kalosyni

June 12, 2026 at 2:25 PM

Happy Birthday! Buck23

Very interesting! ...

Quote

Teaching is not my professional background. My job is that of being a compliance officer. And all my Stoic practice was mainly cultivated through adult discussion groups and mentoring adult students at the College of Stoic Philosophers. I wasn’t sure how to begin when it came to working with teenagers. So, I did what I do at work: I created a manual.

The manual had the traditional framework: there was a section on Logic, Physics, and Ethics; the four cardinal virtues: Practical Wisdom, Courage, Justice, and Temperance; the three disciplines: Judgment, Assent, and Action; and sections on Daily Practice and Community. On the first day, I opened the class with an introduction covering a high-level theory of Stoicism. Almost immediately, I could see their attention slipping. The concepts were too abstract, too distant from their day-to-day lives and concerns.

... So, I pivoted.

Quote from Cassius

We very much need articles addressing the nature of "good manners" both in general and here on the forum. We know that Epicurus did not hesitate to use mocking wordss against his philosophical enemies, and we know that he strongly advised "frank speech" in ways that are direct but constructive.

I don't think that the use of mocking words against philosophical enemies is constructive, and it goes against suavity. (I like to think that Diogene Laertius got that aspect of Epicurus wrong).

Also....VS79. The man who is serene causes no disturbance to himself or to another.

This is interesting regarding the word "suavity" (from Google):

The shift from describing sensory or spiritual sweetness to describing human manners occurred gradually between the late 16th century and the mid-18th century, solidifying into its modern definition by the early 19th century.

The evolution happened in distinct stages, heavily influenced by changing social structures and the French language.

1. The Transition Stage (Late 1500s–1600s)

During the Renaissance, writers began applying the concept of "sweetness" metaphors to human speech and interactions. Rather than just describing heaven, a person’s voice or disposition could have a pleasing, gentle quality.

• 1640s: The derivative word suaviloquy emerged, meaning "sweetness of speech". At this stage, the word still implied a natural, gentle disposition rather than calculated, sophisticated social etiquette.

2. The Influence of French Court Culture (Late 1600s–1700s)

The true catalyst for the modern meaning was the French word suavité. In the French court, suavité evolved to mean a refined, polished, and agreeable social presence. As English high society began obsessively mimicking French etiquette—spearheaded by figures like Philip Stanhope, the 4th Earl of Chesterfield, who popularized the concept of modern etiquette in the mid-1700s—the English definition of "suavity" shifted from internal kindness to external behavior.

3. The Solidification of "Suavity of Manners" (Late 1700s–1815)

By the late 18th century, the exact phrase "suavity of manners" became a standard idiom in the English language to describe a gentleman or lady who possessed sophisticated, worldly, and smooth social graces.

• 1780s–1800s: Historical biographies and legal records from the late Georgian era routinely praised notable figures, politicians, and educators for their "suavity of manners" to denote high breeding and an ability to charm others in public life.
• 1815: Lexicographers note that by this year, the modern definition of "suave" and "suavity"—meaning smooth or urbanely agreeable—became established as a meaning, eclipsing the original "sweetness" definition.

***

The word "suavity" underwent a linguistic process known as semantic pejoration—where a positive word gradually takes on negative, condescending, or untrustworthy connotations.

A shift to a negative description occurred during the mid-to-late 19th century, directly following its peak as a compliment in Victorian high society.

The transition from a genuine virtue to a red flag happened in two distinct phases:

1. The Victorian Backlash (1850s–1880s)

By the middle of the 19th century, the industrial revolution had given rise to a massive new middle class. To climb the social ladder, people heavily studied etiquette books to mimic the "suavity of manners" used by the aristocracy.

Because anyone could now memorize these smooth manners, society began to view extreme suavity with suspicion. Writers, social critics, and the public realized that a highly polished exterior could easily be a mask for deception, greed, or manipulation.

• The "Slick" Professional: During this era, novelists began attributing "suavity" to villains, hypocritical politicians, untrustworthy lawyers, and swindlers to emphasize how their charm was being used to lower their victims' guard.
• The "Bland" Critic: By 1880, dictionary definitions began incorporating terms like "blandly agreeable" to describe suavity. In the Victorian lexicon, "blandness" implied a total lack of spine, authentic character, or moral conviction.

2. The 20th-Century Link to Insincerity (1900s–Present)

By the early 20th century, the modern negative nuance was completely cemented. Today, labeling someone's behavior as "suavity" or calling a man "suave" is often a double-edged sword or a backhanded compliment. It subtly implies:

• Superficiality: The charm is artificial, practiced, and lacks genuine warmth or depth.
• Calculated Intent: The smooth behavior is being deployed intentionally to get something—whether it is a salesman closing a deal, a politician hunting for votes, or a seducer breaking hearts.
• Unctuousness: Much like the word oily or slick, it suggests a personality that is a little too perfect, making it feel slimy and inherently untrustworthy.

Quote from Kalosyni

We've talked about creating "meaning" in the past (over in other threads...I'll need to see where those are and add links.

There is a whole sub-form on "meaning"...

Answering the "Quest For Meaning" In Epicurean Terms

This thread can be used to discuss the similarities and differences between modern ideas of creating well-being and joy, vs. Epicurean philosophical ideas.

The following is from a search using Google:

A life of well-being and joy is built on a balance of physical health, meaningful connections, and personal fulfillment. Rather than a single path, it combines daily habits and long-term practices that nourish your mind, body, and spirit.

Here is a list of the foundational elements that have been found to lead to lasting joy according to modern psychology:

--- Mind & Emotion

• Cultivate Gratitude: Actively appreciating the present helps shift your focus from what you lack to what you already possess.
• Practice Mindfulness: Grounding yourself in the "now" prevents anxiety about the past or future, and lets you savor everyday pleasures.
• Embrace Continuous Learning: Expanding your knowledge base or learning a new hobby stimulates the brain and provides deep fulfillment.
• Find a Sense of Purpose: Engaging in work or hobbies that give your life meaning, or pursuing your passions, drives intrinsic happiness.

--- Connection & Meaning

• Nurture Relationships: Building close bonds with friends, family, and a support network gives you a sense of belonging and buffers against stress.
• Help Others: Engaging in community service or simply being kind and motivating others increases your own happiness and empathy.

--- Health & Body

• Prioritize Rest and Sleep: Allowing your body and mind to recharge is essential for emotional regulation, stress reduction, and overall wellness.
• Stay Physically Active: Moving your body—whether through structured exercise or simply spending time walking in nature—releases endorphins that elevate mood.
• Nourish Your Body: Fueling yourself with healthy, balanced foods provides sustained energy and supports mental health.

--- Lifestyle & Environment

• Establish Financial Peace: Creating a financial plan and budget reduces long-term anxiety and provides security.
• Engage in the Arts and Play: Participating in creative outlets or simply experiencing arts, culture, and play boosts contentment and helps process emotions.
• Spend Time in Nature: Getting fresh air and stepping outside has been proven by psychologists to increase happiness and lower stress.

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

Epicurean philosophy is much more abstract. It does bring forward the importance of friendship. But it allows each person to decide for themselves what brings pleasure.

We've talked about creating "meaning" in the past (over in other threads...I'll need to see where those are and add links.

Quote from TauPhi

Some people are perfectly fine with sacrificing the struggle of their own creativity because AI can write/paint/sing/play faster and better. Those people don't seem to see the point in slow betterment of their limited human potential since they have been presented with the opportunity of godlike simulacrum. Why to struggle with inferior human quality when you can effortlessly obtain godlike results?

Two interesting ideas: calling what AI produces as "godlike" and "godlike simulacrum". I hadn't thought of it that way, nor do I now. I simply see it as an interesting phenomenon, some of which I occassionally find is good/pleasing to me.

Deeper questions that each person may answer differently for themselves: How does AI creativity make you feel? Does using AI cause bad (or painful) consequences or does it sometimes bring pleasure? Is there such a thing as AI that is "done well"? What about wider consequences for the environment and society? And now we are seeing everyone say "not in my backyard" about data centers.

Also, consider this: that there is a large amount of purely human-made art that is "bad" art -- but who decides what is "bad" art? For myself I have two categories: 1) "interesting" art, of a type that is "a curiosity" (and that which I personally consider "bad" and also which makes me feel unpleasant emotions (I'm using the word "interesting" as sarcasm here). 2) "good" art, of a type that I find is skillfully rendered according to my own personal standards and it also gives me pleasure to experience it (and of course this is very subjective).

Happy Birthday! Stas and phscha

From Lucretius, 3-228 to 2-323:

Quote

Heat prevails in the mind when the creature is enraged, grows hot, and fire sparkles from its glowing eyes. Much vapor is cold, and the companion of fear, it excites horror in the body, and shakes the limbs; but air is of a calm and mild quality, it resides in a quiet breast, and a serene countenance. But those have most heat whose hearts are fierce, and whose angry mind are soon inflamed into passion. of this sort, in the first place, is the distracted Fury of lions, who, roaring, often burst their very breast, and are unable to contain the torrent of Rage that swells within. The cold temperature of the deer has more of vapor, and sooner incites a chillness in the limbs,which causes a trembling motion through the whole body. But the nature of the ox consists more of soft air, nor does the smoky firebrand of anger (that spreads a shade of black darkness over the mind) too much inflame him, nor is he stupefied by the darts of chilling fear, but his nature is placed between both, between the fierce lion and the deer."

The mind of man is formed of the same principles; though the discipline of philosophy may polish and correct some, yet it leaves behind the marks of the original nature of the mind, nor are we to think that the seeds of vice can be wholly rooted out. One man, we see, runs more rashly into passion, another is more disposed to fear, and a third is apt to be more merciful than just; It is impossible but the various tempers of mankind, and actions that follow them, must differ in many other instances, the reasons of which are at present out of my power to explain; nor can I find words to express that variety of figures by which the seeds are distinguished, and from which this variety of disposition is produced. This, however, may justly be asserted on this occasion: that the traces of original nature which cannot be corrected by the rules of reason are so very small that nothing hinders us from leading a life worthy of the Gods.

And for a comparison, this is an interesting article:

From Grumpy Old Man to "Irritable Male Syndrome"

What some call "irritable male syndrome" may be better understood as a meaningful response to stress, loss, aging, or unmet needs.

www.psychologytoday.com

Quote

One reality often overlooked in conversations about men’s mental health is this: Many men are raised with the implicit understanding that anger is the one culturally acceptable emotion they’re allowed to express. Sadness, fear, vulnerability, and grief are often discouraged—or worse, mocked. It should come as no surprise, then, that when life becomes heavier, anger and irritability are frequently the emotional languages men bring with them into later adulthood.

Fatigue, low mood, and reduced tolerance for stress can be understood not as signs of pathology, but as natural responses to cumulative stress, shifting roles, physical changes, and the felt decline of vital energy. Importantly, irritability is not the exclusive domain of older men; it appears across genders, cultures, and developmental stages.

...

Rather than asking whether IMS is a real condition, a more productive question might be: What are these experiences trying to tell us?

Instead of treating irritability, fatigue, and low stress tolerance as symptoms to be eradicated, we might view them as signals—messages from a system that deserves attention rather than correction. Aging, after all, is not a disorder. It is a developmental stage, complete with its own challenges, losses, and opportunities for meaning.