Posts by Kalosyni

Most often the three charities (graces) are referenced through our modern lens of art appreciatioin for various art work such as frescoes in Pompeii, Sandro Botticelli’s painting “Primavera”, Raphael, Lucas Cranach the Elder, Peter Paul Rubens, Francois Boucher, and Robert Delaunay’s “Les Trois Grâces”.

As for an ancient Greek mythological and historical understanding, there is much more to them, and which may be relevant, as they presided over various pleasures of life and "they were conceived as the goddesses who gave festive joy and enhanced the enjoyments of life by refinement and gentleness."

Quote

THE KHARITES (Charites) or Graces, were three goddesses of grace, beauty, adornment, joy, mirth, festivity, dance and song.

A number of younger Kharites presided over the other pleasures of life including play, amusement, banqueting, floral decoration, happiness, rest and relaxation.

The Kharites were attendants of the goddesses Aphrodite and Hera. One named Kharis (Charis) was the wife of Hephaistos (Hephaestus) and another, Pasithea, was married to Hypnos (Hypnus) the god of sleep.

Hesiod distinctly mentions three Charites, whose names are Euphrosyne, Aglaia, and Thalia, and this number as well as these names subsequently became generally established, although certain places in Greece retained their ancient and established number.

...

In the early times the Charites were represented dressed, but afterwards their figures were always made naked, though even Pausanias (ix. 35. § 2) did not know who had introduced the custom of representing them naked. Specimens of both dressed and naked representations of the Charites are still extant. Their character is that of unsuspicious maidens in the full bloom of life, and they usually embrace one another. Their attributes differ according to the divinities upon whom they attend; as the companions of Apollo they often carry musical instruments, and as the companions of Aphrodite they carry myrtles, roses, or dice, the favourite game of youth.

Display More

Quote

The parentage of the Charites is differently described ; the most common account makes them the daughters of Zeus either by Hera, Eurynome, Eunomia, Eurydomene, Harmonia, or Lethe. (Hesiod. Theog. 907, &c.; Apollod. i. 3. § 1 ; Pind. Ol. xiv. 15; Phurnut. 15; Orph. Hymn. 59. 2; Stat. Theb. ii. 286; Eustath. ad Hom. p. 982.) According to others they were the daughters of Apollo by Aegle or Euanthe (Paus. ix. 35. § 1), or of Dionysus by Aphrodite or Coronis. The Homeric poems mention only one Charis, or an indefinite number in the plural, and from the passage in which Pasithea is mentioned, it would almost seem as if the poet would intimate that he was thinking of a great number of Charites and of a division of them into classes. Hesiod distinctly mentions three Charites, whose names are Euphrosyne, Aglaia, and Thalia, and this number as well as these names subsequently became generally established, although certain places in Greece retained their ancient and established number. Thus the Spartans had only two Charites, Cleta and Phaënna, and the Athenians the same number, Auxo and Hegemone, who were worshipped there from the earliest times. Hermesianax added Peitho as a third. (Paus. ix. 35.) Sostratus (ap. Eustath. ad Hom. p. 1665) relates that Aphrodite and the three Charites, Pasithea, Cale, and Euphrosyne, disputed about their beauty with one another, and when Teiresias awarded the prize to Cale he was changed by Aphrodite into an old woman, but Cale rewarded him with a beautiful head of hair and took him to Crete. The name Cale in this passage has led some critics to think that Homer also (Il. xviii. 393) mentions the names of two Charites, Pasithea and Cale, and that kalê should accordingly be written by a capital initial.

The character and nature of the Charites are sufficiently expressed by the names they bear: they were conceived as the goddesses who gave festive joy and enhanced the enjoyments of life by refinement and gentleness. Gracefulness and beauty in social intercourse are therefore attributed to them. (Horat. Carm. iii. 21, 22; Pind. Ol. xiv. 7, &c.) They are mostly described as being in the service or attendance of other divinities, as real joy exists only in circles where the individual gives up his own self and makes it his main object to afford pleasure to others. The less beauty is ambitious to rule, the greater is its victory; and the less homage it demands, the more freely is it paid. These seen to be the ideas embodied in the Charites. They lend their grace and beauty to everything that delights and elevates gods and men. This notion was probably the cause of Charis being called the wife of Hephaestus, the divine artist. The most perfect works of art are thus called the works of the Charites, and the greatest artists are their favourites. The gentleness and gracefulness which they impart to man's ordinary pleasures are expressed by their moderating the exciting influence of wine (Hor. Carm. iii. 19. 15; Pind. Ol. xiii. 18), and by their accompanying Aphrodite and Eros. (Hom. Od. viii. 364, xviii. 194; Paus. vi. 24. § 5.) They also assist Hermes and Peitho to give grace to eloquence and persuasion (Hesiod. Op. 63), and wisdom itself receives its charms from them. Poetry, however, is the art which is especially favoured by them, whence they are called erasimolpoi or philêsimolpoi. For the same reason they are the friends of the Muses, with whom they live together in Olympus. (Hes. Theog. 64; Eurip. Herc. fur. 673; Theocrit. xvi. in fin.) Poets are inspired by the Muses, but the application of their songs to the embellishment of life and the festivals of the gods are the work of the Charites. Late Roman writers describe the Charites (Gratiae) as the symbols of gratitude and benevolence, to which they were led by the meaning of the word gratia in their own language. (Senec. De Benef. i. 3 ; comp. Diod. v. 73.)

The worship of the Charites was believed to have been first introduced into Boeotia by Eteoclus or Eteocles, the son of Cephissus, in the valley of that river. (Paus. ix. 35. § 1; Theocrit. xvi. 104; Pind. Ol. xiv.) At Orchomenos and in the island of Paros a festival, the charisia or charitêsia, was celebrated to the Charites. (Eustath. ad Hom. p. 1843; Apollod. iii. 15. § 7.) At Orchomenos they were worshipped from early times in the form of rude stones, which were believed to have fallen from heaven in the time of Eteocles. (Paus ix. 38. § 1; Strab. ix. p. 414.) Statues of them are mentioned in various parts of Greece, as at Sparta, on the road from Sparta to Amyclae, in Crete, at Athens, Elis, Hermione, and others. (Paus. i. 22. § 8, ii. 34. § 10, iii. 14. § 6, vi. 24. § 5.) They were often represented as the companions of other gods, such as Hera, Hermes, Eros, Dionysus, Aphrodite, the Horae, and the Muses. In the ancient statues of Apollo at Delos and Delphi, the god carried the Charites on his hand.

Source:

https://www.theoi.com/Ouranios/Kharites.html

Welcome to the forum EpicuriousDavid

As far as an online course, we started preparing material but haven't finished it. (I will see what I can find with regard to some of what was being worked on and post soon).

In the meantime, I would recommend this video (by Cassius) for an overview:

Quote from Cassius

the debates about pleasure that were well known to the ancient Greek philosophers but not to us today. If you don't know the argument that pleasure cannot be the highest good because it is a "process" or "not complete" or is "becoming rather than being." then you're likely to misinterpret references to that issue, thinking that Epicurus has some totally different meaning in mind.

...take the time to learn why Epicurus was addressing "the limit of pleasure" or "absence of pain"...

It's true that the idea of "a telos" is not something that your everyday person goes around thinking about.

Pleasure is often thought of as being "in process" and "changing". But as I see it, Epicurus taught that necessary desires are easy to fulfill, so there isn't any need to worry or feel troubled about not having something you really need, when you understand that what you need is easily available.

Quote from Cassius

And unfortunately "trying it out" is impossible if you don't know what "it" is. If someone were to infer that "absence of pain" means meditation, for example, and they thought that by meditation they could "try out" Epicurean philosophy, they may find meditation pleasurable but they be not a step further in understanding Epicurus.

I had in mind the opening paragraph of Letter to Menoeceus:

"We must then meditate on the things that make our happiness, seeing that when that is with us we have all, but when it is absent we do all to win it."

Of course the word happiness used here is actually refering to eudiamonia: "well-being" and "good-spirits". So then my idea of testing things out is in reference to how it affects well-being and good-spirits. Before studying Epicureanism I tried meditation, but it wasn't helping to improve my well-being nor was it bringing me good-spirits. Of course it is possible that someone else may actually have a different result with meditation which brings them well-being and good-spirits. But over-all, all of your "micro-choices" and "macro-choices" in your active waking life add up to either bring well-being/good-spirits, or not.

In a recent blog post I wrote the following (and opening up this thread to discuss further):

"In the last two years especially, there has been more focus on the forum and in the podcast to gain a deeper context of Epicurean philosophy through study of other textual sources such as Cicero, etc. This newer material might be of interest for the more advanced student. However, for myself, I feel that at times it can begin to cloud up or muddy up the big picture with all the additional layers of contrast between Cicero, Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, etc. Also, it seems clearer to me now that there are certain interpretive differences that keep occuring. These are due to some subtle contradictions between the Letter to Menoeceus and the Principal Doctrines/Vatican Sayings. This can bring in a feeling of a lack of clarity. The only way to deal with this is to “try it out” or test it."

Thank you for your RSVP EdGenX ...we'll send out the link the day before the meeting

Quote from Titus

I'd rather prioritize simple structures within my life, being deeply intertwined with everything and everybody I am connected to. ... ...

... ... ...

... a key problem of modern societies is externalization. The world is a big place. We rely on too many factors, instead of living according to simple principles . I know that not everything in life can be made simple, but we can try to do so. With every little step we get more control and effectively will feel more in control, which is what in the end reduces stress and anxiety.

Titus I hear you regarding the unnecessary stress of modern life.

Some further thoughts coming up, and also in general for anyone else reading this:

The word "simple" often comes up in discussion of Epicurean ethics, and I just want to say that I think that this is a very subjective word which will look different for everyone. My "simple" will look different than your "simple".

Simplicity at times might not lead to long term happiness. And it may only be coincidence that something we do is labeled as simplicity, and that label we might attach to things after the fact of choosing something. Because we are choosing for the sake of more pleasure (or for removal of pain which opens up space for more pleasure).

For myself, I don't think that there is anything "simple" about my choosing to drink water with dinner instead of wine, but other people might be judging it as such. I drink water because it pleases me most.

As for lifestyles and stress/anxiety, a word of caution regarding the idea of "gaining control"...first of all this can be a slippery-slope and turn into an obsession of "removal of all pain", but we are humans not gods, so there will still be pain entering in our lives at some point, and we can't control everything.

Yet, here is my advice for people who feel troubled by a lot of stress in modern life: if you can, figure out how to move to a smaller city or better yet a very rural location. Of course making a living is important, but perhaps changing to a type of work which you can do remotely via internet (although now with AI coming those jobs may be diminishing).

Quote from wbernys

My general understanding is as follows: Desires necessary for Happiness are those which allow us to have confidence about the future, and allow us to have confidence we can live well throughout the greatest part of our life.

With this in mind some desires i think can be thought to be necessary for Happiness are as follows.

Let's start with one generally everyone agrees on, that of Friendship

Friendship.

As the Principle Doctrines tell us.

27. Of all the means which are procured by wisdom to ensure happiness throughout the whole of life, by far the most important is the acquisition of friends.

28. The same conviction which inspires confidence that nothing we have to fear is eternal or even of long duration, also enables us to see that even in our limited conditions of life nothing enhances our security so much as friendship.

Here Friendship, generally agreed by everyone to be among the desires necessary for happiness is thought to be necessary because it allows unparalleled security throughout our life, and ensures happiness throughout the whole of our life.

All of our friends give us the greatest security as the Principle Doctrines above tell us, and it's really the confidence that they will help us as opposed to their actual assistance as VS34 tells us "We do not so much need the help of our friends as the confidence of their help in need.

Display More

Must add: Good friends are also conducive toward "good spirits", and this would be a common sense way of understanding the desires that lead to happiness. It is from pleasure we begin, and to pleasure which we arrive.

Thanks kochiekoch, you're added to the link conversation, see you tonight!

I've sent out the Zoom link by private conversation for the Monday Aug. 3rd, 8pm ET Zoom, so look for that in your "conversations" section of the forum. Any others wishing to join, go ahead and RSVP by posting here in this thread (or messaging Cassius), to receive the link.

Thank you Aristos ...we'll be sending out the link the day before the meeting.

Quote from wbernys

a virtue called "φιλοποητικῶς" which is translated as "in a way that makes friends" or "makes friends" or "makes and keeps friends" by various translators I've seen.

Here is something from a modern practical perspective, a very good YouTube video by a psychologist who gives very good advice, with regard to interacting with strangers, and which over time can lead to friendships in community, clubs etc.

Posting this here in this thread since it is about meeting and interacting with strangers:

Here is another good one, on social curiosity and asking questions:

I just found this Youtube video on building communication skills, and he's got some interesting tips on moving from surface level to one layer deeper when endeavoring to make new friendships:

This may be a cause for marriage difficulties, and yet the article also suggests that over time people can work to improve their attachment styles:

Article from Yahoo Life: WashingtonPost:

• Scientists say this is the reason some relationships flourish and others flop.

Quote

• Securely attached people generally trust others and feel comfortable with both intimacy and independence.
• Those with an anxious attachment style often crave closeness but worry about rejection or abandonment.
• Avoidant individuals tend to prize self-reliance and keep an emotional distance, even from those they love.
• And people with a disorganized attachment style may swing between seeking connection and pushing it away, reflecting conflicting expectations about whether relationships are a source of comfort or danger.

And here is an older study (on Pubmed), and the only one study that I currently found online, about shifts in attachment styles:

• Changes in adult attachment styles in American college students over time: a meta-analysis.

If new research was done now perhaps there might even be greater shifts in attachment styles, since Covid-induced patterns of isolation. And I would guess that the more "avoidant" and "disorganized" attachment styles are less likely to marry. But this is just a guess.

Thanks TauPhi, and Patrikios has also RSVP'ed...And a new Level 1 member has also RSVP'ed! ...all for Monday.

Quote from Don

*My statement here assumes anyone would even notice if I was quiet or not.

I noticed...glad you are back posting.

Quote from Don

The living, sentient, sensing being ONLY feels pleasure OR pain. The dead feel neither. Pleasure comes in various varieties/flavors/experiences but is always pleasure. That terse quotation from Epicurus (which I continue to feel is genuine given the various references/citations Diogenes Laertius give it) is simply referring to the various experiences of pleasure by living, breathing people. AND he firmly plants his flag that THAT IS the goal by which we steer our ships. Pleasure, in all its multifarious manifestations, IS the North Star. And, no, he says, we can't exclude pleasant smells, pleasant sights, pleasant tastes, pleasant motions, any more than we can exclude contemplation of a healthy, fortunate state. It's all pleasure. For anyone to parse one pleasure above others, if it brings no pain, is a fool's errand...

Cassius as you wrote in post 24 above, I've now tried to briefly summarize this, and we may need to make this even more prominent...

Here is a possible wording, and which you may need to edit this:

The EpicureanFriends forum policy is intended to make sure that the clarity of the objective (the Epicurean summum bonum) as being pleasure, is not lost by substituting something else as the "supreme good."

Epicurus embraced all varieties of pleasure (active, resting, etc.) as part of a happy life. When we understand that "a life of happiness is a life of pleasure" we don't allow that to be qualified or modified to say "a life of happiness is a life of minimalist pleasures"; or "a life of happiness is a life of tranquility"; or "a life of happiness is a life of ataraxia"; or any other formulation that implies that some concept other than pleasure is actually the supreme good. Any post asserting a "minimalist" stance toward pleasure falls outside of this forum's understanding of Classical Epicurean Philosophy.

Oh...and I clicked on the link for the book and see that the cover has a little hermit crab on it... that's a "bad omen"!

Thanks, Don ...at first glance it looks intriguing, though it's a fairly vague general description. Perhaps it is written for middle age folks who really do "have it all" but for some reason still feel unhappy. We have VS68 which touches on the idea of "enough" ---> "Nothing is enough to one for whom enough is very little."

Yet, for younger folks, the book author's statement: "We already have what we need in order to be happy" is not going to be a helpful thing to hear for those who actually do need to put in more effort into getting their lives in order (gaining work experience, building financal sufficiency, building friendships, dating if they wish to find a partner and start a family.)

But basically I just wanted to speak up to say that the idea of just accepting your life "as it is" is not Epicurean.

Epicureanism is about understanding that we all need to make wise choices in life -- and take action when needed -- and as VS41 says: "One must laugh and seek wisdom and tend to one's home life and use one's other goods, and always recount the pronouncements of true philosophy."

Hi Everyone! We are now offering two new Zoom opportunities for new members (both Level 1 & Level 2) to come join us for a "meet-and-greet"! This also provides time for asking questions about the forum and Epicurean philosophy.

Level 3 established members are encouraged to please join us as well!

• Monday, August 3rd at 8pm ET
• Sunday, August 9th at 12:30pm ET - a good time especially for our members who live in the European time zone!

These Zoom meetings are open to registered members of the forum and new members who have fully completed their registration process.

Inviting Level 1 members: Morgan  Aeneadum  Aristos  Carlos  Stas  randres61  WilliamJ  Tgonzalez3790

Inviting Level 2 members: EdGenX  Randall Moose  Autoataraxic  ScottW  Noah Calderon  warjuning

...and anyone else that I may have missed mentioning. Even if you've been a Level 1 or Level 2 for quite some time, please don't be shy, we'd love to meet you!

To attend:

• All Level 2 and Level 3 members please RSVP here in this thread.
• Level 1 members please RSVP by messaging Cassius.

Agenda:

• Welcome by Cassius and individual introductions - please be prepared to introduce yourself to everyone.
• A short presentation may be given either by Cassius, or by Kalosyni (depending on the number of people attending this may or may not be included in the meeting).
• Open time for asking questions about the forum or Epicurean philosophy (or further discussion on the presentation topic).

We make our Zooms informal and easy-going, so you can enjoying coming out to meet your fellow forum members who are moving forward in the study of the philosophy of Epicurus!