Posts by Kalosyni

Quote from Cassius

And the biggest problem I think in evaluating power, wealth, status, etc is that a significant number of people argue that those things are "bad in themselves" and thus "always empty."

I don't think that is correct at all. The power to defend yourself, enough money to live reasonably, and enough status to be well-regarded by your friends are perfectly proper Epicurean goals. So happiness does depend on some amount of power, wealth, and status. It is not reasonable to expect to be helpless, penniless, and hated by all your neighbors and still live a happy life. Extremely rare exceptions to that generalization might exist but the fact that they are extremely rare establishes the conclusion as a general good rule to follow.

Cassius I think you may be picking up on how the words "power", "wealth", and "status" are too vague.

It would be more correct for me to say (and put into modern times):

Groundless and incorrect opinions are when people believe that well-being and a pleasurable life require taking a political career or a corporate CEO position, a large amount of assets and great amount of monetary funds, a wardrobe filled with designer clothes or garage of top-notch sports cars, or receiving great awards such as the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, Guinness Book of Records, or a Gold Star in Hollywood.

Also, the emphasis is on when you don't have it, not if you've already acheived any of these. And, if you have already acheived any of these, then you'll likely know how they come with great stuggles, competition, and a loss of personal freedoms (paparazzi chasing you, and/or "contracts" with the people who helped you get to where you are and that you are unable to extricate yourself from).

I may need to do a bit more editing on this, because I've mixed up "pleasures" and "desires" (Oops...I should have caught this sooner).

***

PD26, PD29, etc.

Quote from Cassius

Bottom line: our purpose here is not to nitpick each others' posts, but to draw out in conversation fine points that help us and others to better apply the philosophy and articulate it to others. So I see both posts above as useful contributions.

I should probably add references to the Principal Doctrines, etc.

I made this using my own brain and Canva (there is no AI used at any point in making this)

The content cannot be displayed because you do not have authorisation to view this content.

Quote from Cassius

Where do you plan to take this?

The question is...does this help with understanding the Epicurean concepts...and can we then compare this with modern pyschology and science (and the understanding of clinical death and brain death).

Quote from Patrikios

the moderation of passions

I'd venture to say that Epicurus never spoke this way.

Also, from a modern psychology standpoint, t is actually healthy and motivates you to take action when you feel strong passions (or strong emotions/feelings) when you aren't getting your basic necessities for life met.

Here is an updated version:

Prompt: make a text based flow chart that consolidates Lucretius' theory of the nature of the soul in De Rerum Natura, starting with atoms and void and ending with what happens to the soul at death.

ChatGPT result:

Lucretius’ Theory of the Soul in De Rerum Natura: Text-Based Flowchart

                    ATOMS AND VOID
                          |
                          ↓
        Everything in the universe consists of
             atoms moving through empty space.
                          |
                          ↓
                  ATOMIC COMPOSITION
                          |
                          ↓
       The soul, like everything else, is made of
       atoms. It is material, not supernatural.
                          |
                          ↓
                  NATURE OF THE SOUL
                          |
                          ↓
       The soul consists of extremely fine,
       subtle, and mobile atoms.
                          |
                          ↓
       The soul is closely connected to the body
       and is distributed throughout it.
                          |
                          ↓
              TWO PARTS OF THE SOUL
                          |
              ┌───────────┴───────────┐
              ↓                       ↓
       ANIMUS (MIND)              ANIMA (SPIRIT)
              |                       |
       The reasoning and          The vital spirit
       thinking center.           spread throughout
       Located in the             the body.
       chest.                          |
              |                       |
              └───────────┬───────────┘
                          ↓
                SOUL AND BODY UNITY
                          |
                          ↓
       The soul and body work together as one.
       The soul depends on the body to function,
       while the body depends on the soul for
       sensation and life.
                          |
                          ↓
                    MORTALITY
                          |
                          ↓
       Because the soul is made of atoms, it is
       subject to the same natural processes as
       all other material things.
                          |
                          ↓
                    DEATH
                          |
                          ↓
       When the body dies, the connection between
       the soul and body is broken.
                          |
                          ↓
                 ATOMIC DISPERSION
                          |
                          ↓
       The soul's atoms separate and disperse,
       just as the atoms of the body do.
                          |
                          ↓
                END OF SENSATION
                          |
                          ↓
       Without the unified soul-body connection,
       sensation, consciousness, and thought cease.
                          |
                          ↓
                  NO AFTERLIFE
                          |
                          ↓
       The individual no longer exists as a
       conscious being. There is no experience
       of suffering, punishment, or reward after
       death.

                 DEATH = NONEXISTENCE

Central Argument

Lucretius argues that the soul is material, mortal, and inseparable from the functioning body. Since it is composed of atoms, it cannot exist eternally. At death, the soul's atoms disperse, ending consciousness and sensation. Therefore, humans should not fear death because death is not an experience of suffering; it is the complete absence of experience.

Key takeaway: Just as we did not experience anything before we were born, we will not experience anything after we die.

*****

Edit note: the formatting looked fine until I click Submit, which then changed everything and added the line numbers.

Quote from Joshua

Shinzaemon: "Soon. But if I'm late... I'll be at the Festival of the Dead.

I had to look that up...internet says: "The Festival of the Dead in Japan is known as Obon, a Buddhist celebration that honors deceased ancestors and is typically observed in mid-August. Families welcome the spirits of their ancestors back home, perform rituals, and conclude the festival by sending the spirits back to the afterlife with lanterns and bonfires."

Happy Halloween Everyone!

I just posted this image in the image gallery:

Quote from Thomas Karion

If I don’t feel pleasure, it’s indeed because I’m experiencing suffering, however slight it may be.

It's important to be clear about what you mean by "suffering". It could be referring to physical pain or to mental pain.

For physical pain we see that there is this Principal Doctrine:

PD04 - "Continuous pain does not last long in the flesh; on the contrary, pain, if extreme, is present a very short time, and even that degree of pain which barely outweighs pleasure in the flesh does not last for many days together. Illnesses of long duration even permit of an excess of pleasure over pain in the flesh." (Hicks translation)

For mental pain, PD01 and PD02 deal with fear of the gods and fear of death. Then various other PD's deal with other issues, such as fear of natural phenomena (PD12), and other issues, etc. It could make an interesting list to see which PD's help with which mental pains.

A person can feel both pleasure and pain at the same time. But to arrive at a state of unalloyed pleasure requires removing the mental pains caused by the incorrect understanding of things.

Thomas Karion please see this forum regarding your second question:

The Term "Pleasure" Means The Same As "Absence of Pain," And Includes All Experience Which Is Not Painful

Quote from Thomas Karion

I’m not sure if this is the right forum, or even if I’m in the right section of the forum. I hope you’ll forgive me if that’s the case.

Yes, entry level (Level 1) is granted posting permissions only in their Welcome thread.

Quote from Thomas Karion

My question is this:

What do you think Epicurus would write about today if he were alive in our time?

To add to what Cassius wrote, I would say "free will vs determinism".

Cassius this phrase is way too vague, and so I personally wouldn't state the following:

Quote from Cassius

People live thinking that they should follow "virtue," or "reason," or "piety" rather than pursuing happiness through pleasure.

We see in PD16 the following:

PD16. "In but few things chance hinders a wise man, but the greatest and most important matters, reason has ordained, and throughout the whole period of life does and will ordain."

So...a possible alternative would state:

Because of pleasure we choose virtue/just actions (which are not to harm or be harmed) and this leads to the pleasure of experiencing the most pleasant life. ---> This is virtue/just actions as a tool that leads to a pleasant and fullfilling life.

Compare these two scenarios: 1) God decrees that one should not kill one's neighbor (and then that person goes ahead anyway --> This is virtue/just actions as a blind rule that is not fully understood) --vs-- 2) Reasoning and remembering that killing one's neighbor won't lead to a most pleasant life, and in fact will bring about many bad consequences (unless done as a clear act of self-defence) ---> a fully developed moral understanding that leads to a happy life.

Of course there is an additional layer of moral development, which comes from the full understanding of pain and the full understanding of conscious experience of all animals (including humans) incorporating awareness of "self and other". ---> And which I would venture to say is a newer and further development of civilization beyond Epicurean philosophy. ---> And this also leads to a pleasant and fulfilling life (which is the goal of Epicurean philosophy).

Welcome to the forum! Thomas Karion

Believing in fate can provide comfort by framing life's challenges as part of a "larger plan" (reducing stress by increasing acceptance of circumstances) but it may also contribute to feelings of helplessness and reduced motivation when individuals perceive outcomes as beyond their control.

I've been thinking lately that a common theme in movies is this notion of fate, that things were "meant to be", especially in romance movies. Fate is thought to be either some sort of outside force is dictating the unfolding of reality, or for those who are religious, God. This is actually so common in movies (and wider culture) that one must guard one's thinking against it.

Epicureans do not believe in fate, and seeing that things as not subject to fate is actually a liberating way of living in the world. But it does require taking responsibilty for choices and using critical thinking skills. "In but few things chance hinders a wise man, but the greatest and most important matters, reason has ordained, and throughout the whole period of life does and will ordain." PD16

According to Pew Research here are some statistics, (Report date: November 23, 2021):

Quote

Overall, 44% of U.S. adults say they believe in fate, defined as the course of their life being predetermined. This group includes half of women (51%) and 35% of men. There also are differences based on levels of educational attainment, with college graduates significantly less likely than those without a degree to say they believe in fate (32% vs. 49%).

Source

So now the question is this: do you notice people around you believing in fate, or do you notice yourself occasionally slipping into that way of thinking?

The following article is interesting regarding AI, but also brings up questions regarding morals -- and for us here on the forum that would be such things as comparing religion vs. Epicurean philosophy. And I would suggest since this about training AI, that it would specifically be regarding what not to do.

https://apnews.com/article/anthropic-moral-artificial-intelligence-religion-2bb91e3334fd6d732edf22288cabf4ec

While the end result of the actions of a "morally correct" Christian (regarding what not to do) might be similar in many areas of life, as compared to a "morally correct" Epicurean, they arrive there by very different methods, as we can see in PD33.

Quote from Patrikios

Also, is this translation the entirety of the Encounter With Epicurus?

After the young man posing this natural next step question, we’re left hanging, waiting for the next instructions from wise old Epicurus.

This fragment is an excerpt from a much larger body of work, which focuses only on a presentation of Epicurean philosophy. The rest of the story is not Epicurean at all. If anyone is interested how the story ends, on the last page of the PDF there's a link to the original which is available on Archive.org.

Happy Twentieth Everyone!

Bryan This thread is relevant to what came up in this afternoon's Zoom discussion.