Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:24:52 -0500
From: hbone <hbone-AT-optonline.net>
Subject: Re: what is philosophy and this list for ?



Eric wrote:


> Hugh,
>
> I'm glad you liked my Epicurean pieces. Actually in many ways I would
> still define myself both politically and spiritually as an Epicurean.  I
> believe his legacy remains a vital one, if we would only rethink his
> position for our times.

o.k.

> One of his greatest accomplishments in my opinion was that he solved the
> problem of religion.

Most of the world's population considers religion a solution, not a problem.

> There has always been something a little dismal about atheism and
> secular humanism. Even though they tend to be more accurate than the
> usual theistic dogmas, they still leave unanswered the great human
> desire for happiness.  What Epicurus realized was a way to satisfy our
> religious desires for flourishing and fulfillment without offending our
> native intelligence.

I'm curious about any form of intelligence, including native.

> Epicurus pointed out that many of our desires are completely unnecessary
> for human happiness, being informed merely by social conventions playing
> upon our fears and anxiety about status.  The basic desires according to
> Epicurus are simpler and far easier to satisfy.

His desires as he understands them.

> When these desires are met, the mind has become tranquil and no longer
> anxious, Epicurus thought it would be possible to realize a different
> kind of pleasure, one he termed katastematic to distinguish it from the
> usual kinetic ones, with which we are all familiar. The desires that
> have been compared to a hydra and which spring up once again as soon as
> they are satisfied.

His mind, his interpretation of  minds of others.

> The idea of katastematic pleasure is an unusual idea in terms of
> mainstream culture. It is the kernel, however, of the current of thought
> that has come to be identified as the sublime, even though I don't have
> the time to develop this connection today.

I can't define the sublime for myself,  nor others.

> Perhaps the best insights into katastematic pleasure come from the
> religious traditions. Mystics speak of 'the peace that passeth
> understanding' and the Great Sabbath Night, nirvana which means
> literally a 'blowing out', fana which means extinction, and ananda which
> means 'whose bliss comes from'.

Nor the peace mystics speak of.

> Epricurus realized these so-called religious emotions were profoundly
> human and there was no real need of a god in order to underwrite them.
> Under the right setting, they would simply manifest themselves. For it
> is the view of Epicurus that our human destiny remains to live like
> gods. We should become ecstatic and live life from the stance of a great
> joy rather than the ordinary fear, anxiety and sadness mandated by our
> religious traditions. That is why Lucretius could refer to him as the
> great liberator of humankind.

Some philosophers have substituted "history" or other systems of belief for
the "need of a god".  Lucretius was the first Nietzsche?

> The philosophy of Epicurus might be described as a secular transhumanism
> in order to distinguish it from the more anemic secular humanism, that
> ho-hum idea that the death of god does not really change anything and
> against which Nietzsche so strongly rebelled.

"secular transhumanism"  is a name for  an experience, feeling, belief,
system
of thought, that is differeint from  "secular humanism".  Like an experience
of
the sublime, or the "peace" of mystics, I , you, others , use words (as best
we can)
to describe our personal experiences.

> It is related to what Maslow once termed the peak experience and the
> whole process he identified as self actualization.  It is also related
> to what the later Freud of "Beyond the Pleasure Principle" termed the
> death instinct; once this is re-inscribed from another perspective.

Is there such aa thing a "the peak experience of a lifetime"?  Is it a
moment
or moments preceding death?  If so,  living healthy persons would not
know the experience....they might "believe" it "happened" to others.

> I would also relate it to Lyotard's critique of development. Even though
> he tended to interpret this in terms of systems, it is also possible to
> view it as a kind of ideology of development at the personal level.
> Individuals, especially in our post-industrialized society, are
> pressured to 'be all they can be'; super-moms and multi-tasking
> overachievers.  There is a basic sense that unless you are successful in
> every area of life and have it all, you cannot be happy. We are all
> consumed by the very thought of consumption.

I think of "be all you can be" as specialization in say philosophy or, more
commonly, a particular niche in the world of sports, or the world of
entertainment.
This does not contradict the idea of being consumed by consumption.
Each person is different from each other person, even identical twins.  Each
is a
product of  his/her life-history, which is the software of memory and
intelligence.

> In the pursuit of these things, the resources of the world are being
> used up at an ever greater rate.  And the paradox is that amid all this
> frenzy and overabundance, we are not really all that happy. Most people
> feel overworked, overstressed, overweight, anxious, fearful and lonely.
> Today we all live lives of loud desperation.

Some live lives of  loud desperation; some don't.  One can be overworked,
overstressed,
without being fearful and lonely, especially in a firefight or other
emergency.

> What if the social principle that underlies all this might be changed?
> What if the image of our humanity could become transfigured by another
> renaissance of the pagan spirit?

What if we in the U.S. spent as many dollars  to make peace as we spend  to
make
war?  (over $1 billion  per day.)

> Epicurus is the prophet of a more sustainable society; one in which
> people live simpler and more ecstatic lives; one in which they have less
> in order to become more. He offers us not just a philosophy, but another
> image of our humanity and what we might realize in a society that didn't
> have to constantly reinvent the wheel of the struggle for existence.

o.k. How  get there from here?

> The challenge today is not merely political, but also religious. It
> means replacing the outdated, fearful and authoritarian vision of a
> craven and fallen humanity that fears being left behind on a dismal
> demonic earth with a contrary vision of a new earth and a new people
> where life may be lived instead as a profane joy.

> "The shore has disappeared - now the last fetter falls from me, the
> boundless roars around me, far out glitter space and time, well then,
> come on! old heart!"

> Thus Spake Zarathustra.

You say "secular trnshumanism"  which implies a transformation of humanity..
"By our deeds we are transformed.", a statement that presupposes meaning,
(a personal future)  belief  (in deeds and transformation, in legitimacy and
authority conferred by the systems of intelligence which make the real
and symbolic world(s) each person inhabits.,

regards,
without fear of fallinng fetters,

Hugh



>
> Blissfully,
>
> eric
>
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.524 / Virus Database: 321 - Release Date: 10/6/2003
>
>
>