I wanna talk about Epicurus.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-12-2013, 07:09 AM
RE: I wanna talk about Epicurus.
(20-12-2013 10:53 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  No matter what forum or Facebook meme that mentions Epicurus there's always someone who says, "He didn't say that." or some variation when it comes to the god-evil philosophy. It's interesting to me because at the moment I'm in the middle of an email debate with a theist regarding the gospels and whether they were written by their namesakes. My theist debater asked what proof we have that Homer wrote his works, etc. I told her while she brought up a great example, the major difference is an entire religion doesn't hinge on the authentic attribution of The Odyssey, or the eternal well-being of an entire planet's species isn't at hand if an imposter wrote the works attributed to Homer, and people don't kill other people over his works. So, as for Epicurus, I take the Hitchens POV, the argument still stands even if an ancient Smurf said it.

Epicurus was a Smurf? Shocking

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
21-12-2013, 07:34 AM
RE: I wanna talk about Epicurus.
I'm going to get killed for saying this but I hate the word "philosophy". It is just a fancy word for mental masturbation. Humans have notoriously flawed perceptions, and their "thinking" can stumble accidentally on a fact without understanding WHY they are right.

Epicurus's problem with evil to me has never been shattered and is as solid an indictment to the broken concept of a god. He was right, but he had no modern knowledge of evolution or biology or human psychology.

I like to treat everything as an idea first, that way if your idea is fucked up, you wont get married to it. "Philosophy" is an abused word and can be anything from religion, to politics to worldview. It becomes ridged far to often to make justifications to claim superiority in an evolution that long term does not play favorites to personal "philosophies".

It's not simply enough to be right, you cant know what that is unless you know WHY it is a fact.

In the case of Epicurus he was RIGHT factually speaking because the psychology in evolutionary terms as atheists and scientists know now that god concepts are merely the childish anthropomorphic reflections of our own desires as a species. We want control over our environments and resources. If something gets in the way of that we will compartmentalize this and seek justification to get around it. "God" is merely our species tribalism in comic book form. It can also reflect in politics and even greed as class warfare. But it still amounts to the individual and or group seeking to survive, by either/or or BOTH cooperation and or cruelty.

"God" as a literal claimed reality does not match the scientific reality we know of. Entropy alone has much more input which never equates to equal output. "God" is a perpetual motion machine, which does not reflect the imperfect reality we actually live in. But our base evolutionary instinct, which makes us look both ways before crossing the street, is also the same instinct that gives us our flawed false placebos in the form of anthropomorphism.

Once one claims a "perfect" or "omni-max god" it can only fail because reality says "perfect" does not exist as a scientific reality.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Brian37's post
21-12-2013, 07:34 AM
RE: I wanna talk about Epicurus.
(20-12-2013 08:05 PM)Elesjei Wrote:  Are there some good online resources (books are good too) for learning about ancient philosophy/philosophers? Modern philosophers tend to have comprehensive books where they write all about a subject, but for ancient philosophers I just keep finding scattered questionably sourced quotes or biographies.

If we are talking about ancient Greek philosophy, unfortunately those philosophers didn't work that way. Aristotle was probably one of the first to write down his philosophical thoughts and ideas, but it wasn't of big use before printing became a thing.

Most of the other famous philosophers are known through their letters, other people's accounts about them, conversations, etc (for example, all we know about Socrates is through Plato's conversations).

If you want to learn about ancient philosophers, it's best to look for general info (such as searching "ancient philosophy" on Google) and then look up whatever is interesting to you.

And yeah, most of it will be scattered and questionably sourced because as I said before, most of them didn't write books.

It's not that hard though. The only tricky part, I think, is the fact that some ancient Greek words do not have an equivalent in English, or they might mean something slightly different than the translation. I've seen many ideas misunderstood because of that.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes undergroundp's post
21-12-2013, 08:06 AM
RE: I wanna talk about Epicurus.
(21-12-2013 07:34 AM)Brian37 Wrote:  I'm going to get killed for saying this but I hate the word "philosophy". It is just a fancy word for mental masturbation. Humans have notoriously flawed perceptions, and their "thinking" can stumble accidentally on a fact without understanding WHY they are right.

Epicurus's problem with evil to me has never been shattered and is as solid an indictment to the broken concept of a god. He was right, but he had no modern knowledge of evolution or biology or human psychology.

I like to treat everything as an idea first, that way if your idea is fucked up, you wont get married to it. "Philosophy" is an abused word and can be anything from religion, to politics to worldview. It becomes ridged far to often to make justifications to claim superiority in an evolution that long term does not play favorites to personal "philosophies".

It's not simply enough to be right, you cant know what that is unless you know WHY it is a fact.

In the case of Epicurus he was RIGHT factually speaking because the psychology in evolutionary terms as atheists and scientists know now that god concepts are merely the childish anthropomorphic reflections of our own desires as a species. We want control over our environments and resources. If something gets in the way of that we will compartmentalize this and seek justification to get around it. "God" is merely our species tribalism in comic book form. It can also reflect in politics and even greed as class warfare. But it still amounts to the individual and or group seeking to survive, by either/or or BOTH cooperation and or cruelty.

"God" as a literal claimed reality does not match the scientific reality we know of. Entropy alone has much more input which never equates to equal output. "God" is a perpetual motion machine, which does not reflect the imperfect reality we actually live in. But our base evolutionary instinct, which makes us look both ways before crossing the street, is also the same instinct that gives us our flawed false placebos in the form of anthropomorphism.

Once one claims a "perfect" or "omni-max god" it can only fail because reality says "perfect" does not exist as a scientific reality.

I like to think of "philosophy" the way the people who invented the word used it. Love for wisdom, for knowledge, seeking for the truth, torturing your mind with questions until you make sense of something.
Talking with others, comparing, discussing, reaching an end.

Epicurus did not destroy the idea of God exactly. He destroyed the idea of an omnipotent, benevolent god. The trillema does not destroy the idea of a malevolent god, or of an imperfect, not omnipotent god (such as the gods of Ancient Greece). Epicurus did not need any scientific knowledge to get there. It's a simple, logical argument.

Philosophy is not there to answer questions, it's there only to ask, to make one wonder, think, investigate. That is why the ancient Greeks made a distinction between φιλοσοφία (philosophy, love for knowledge) and επιστήμη ("science", factual knowledge).

If you study some ancient Greek philosophical texts, you will often see phrases like "If... then it should be like this" or "maybe we can say that it means that". You don't usually see strictly self assured statements, even if the deductions come from "evidence" that could be seen as scientific.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like undergroundp's post
21-12-2013, 01:19 PM (This post was last modified: 21-12-2013 02:20 PM by λάθε βιώσας.)
RE: I wanna talk about Epicurus.
(18-12-2013 02:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  I am also an admirer of Epicurus. I think we can blame Paul (Saul of Tarsus) for any negativity about Epicurean views.

Epicurus was/is a rather narrow view, definitely one sided and materialistic in the broad scope of Greek Philosophy.

Western thought is not the only philosophy...

As an example, Eastern Philosophy is non theistic in nature although matter even inanimate has a spirit of its own, an object can have a spirit so therefore it has a soul. (eg; a statue or a robot)

Hence... all matter has life, and has a spirit.

And I've been trying to get down to the heart of the matter myself...

[Image: ec25156e-63b1-4c54-98cc-e0325deeaf3b_zps3f7864d1.jpg]
Hands Of Dust
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-12-2013, 05:53 PM
RE: I wanna talk about Epicurus.
(21-12-2013 01:19 PM)λάθε βιώσας Wrote:  
(18-12-2013 02:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  I am also an admirer of Epicurus. I think we can blame Paul (Saul of Tarsus) for any negativity about Epicurean views.

Epicurus was/is a rather narrow view, definitely one sided and materialistic in the broad scope of Greek Philosophy.

Western thought is not the only philosophy...

As an example, Eastern Philosophy is non theistic in nature although matter even inanimate has a spirit of its own, an object can have a spirit so therefore it has a soul. (eg; a statue or a robot)

Hence... all matter has life, and has a spirit.

And I've been trying to get down to the heart of the matter myself...

Interesting, but silly. There is no evidence for objects having spirits or souls.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-12-2013, 06:41 PM (This post was last modified: 21-12-2013 06:50 PM by λάθε βιώσας.)
RE: I wanna talk about Epicurus.
(21-12-2013 05:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  Interesting, but silly. There is no evidence for objects having spirits or souls.

tell that to the harbinger of 1/3 of the worlds population, you can start in Japan and work your way around the area.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qg0AP7yc28

[Image: ec25156e-63b1-4c54-98cc-e0325deeaf3b_zps3f7864d1.jpg]
Hands Of Dust
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-12-2013, 06:50 PM
RE: I wanna talk about Epicurus.
(21-12-2013 06:41 PM)λάθε βιώσας Wrote:  
(21-12-2013 05:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  Interesting, but silly. There is no evidence for objects having spirits or souls.

tell that to the harbinger of 1/3 of the worlds population, you can start in Japan and work your way around the area.

Argumentum ad populum? Fallacious thinking, my dear laddie.

Those who make this claim have the burden of proof.


Are you sure 'harbinger' is the word you are looking for?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Chas's post
21-12-2013, 07:47 PM
RE: I wanna talk about Epicurus.
(21-12-2013 01:19 PM)λάθε βιώσας Wrote:  
(18-12-2013 02:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  I am also an admirer of Epicurus. I think we can blame Paul (Saul of Tarsus) for any negativity about Epicurean views.

Epicurus was/is a rather narrow view, definitely one sided and materialistic in the broad scope of Greek Philosophy.

Western thought is not the only philosophy...

As an example, Eastern Philosophy is non theistic in nature although matter even inanimate has a spirit of its own, an object can have a spirit so therefore it has a soul. (eg; a statue or a robot)

Hence... all matter has life, and has a spirit.

And I've been trying to get down to the heart of the matter myself...
depends what you mean by "spirit"
You sound oddly like TTT, are you related?Consider

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes grizzlysnake's post
21-12-2013, 08:56 PM
RE: I wanna talk about Epicurus.
(21-12-2013 06:50 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(21-12-2013 06:41 PM)λάθε βιώσας Wrote:  tell that to the harbinger of 1/3 of the worlds population, you can start in Japan and work your way around the area.

Argumentum ad populum? Fallacious thinking, my dear laddie.

Those who make this claim have the burden of proof.


Are you sure 'harbinger' is the word you are looking for?

that's incorrect, the pacific basin is the harbinger of eastern philosophy...

in the above video they talk about how there is a big difference between westen robots and eastern robots.

AI is on the rise (what has been declassified of it anyway) but in Japan and Korea and other Asian countries they already believe their robots have souls, and this is even without the AI installed.

In the west we take a different approach, but in the east they have been designing robots to imitate humans and to be a type of companion servant to humans.

Alot of what I am trying to explain or lead to has been addressed somewhat in that movie with Will Smith (I Robot)

When is the AI lifeform that we created out of the dirt using a skill humans possess although not instantaneous (mind over matter) when is the lifeform going to be our equal?

our creation from dirt (raw minerals)

[Image: ec25156e-63b1-4c54-98cc-e0325deeaf3b_zps3f7864d1.jpg]
Hands Of Dust
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: