DOCSLIB.ORG

The Gods of Philodemus by Paul Terence Matthias Jackson

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Gods of Philodemus by Paul Terence Matthias Jackson Jackson, P.T.M. (2013) ‘The Gods of Philodemus’ Rosetta 13: 73-88. http://www.rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue_13/jackson_philodemus.pdf Rosetta 13. http://www.rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue_13/jackson_philodemus.pdf The Gods of Philodemus Paul Terence Matthias Jackson [email protected] This paper represents an aspect of my current work on the theology of the Epicureans, where I am interested in working out exactly what the Epicureans believed in. Here, I am focusing on Philodemus’ conception of the gods, and considering how faithful to Epicurus he was in this area. Nichols (1976, 154) concludes that ‘we accordingly accept the traditional view…that Lucretius was an atheist.’ Sedley (1998, 102) refers to Lucretius as a fundamentalist - that, whereas other Epicurean philosophers have developed Epicurus’ philosophy in the two hundred years since his death, Lucretius remains true to Epicurus. In this way, the philosophy of Lucretius would seem to be that of Epicurus. Even so, whether one were to read Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura or even the fragments of Epicurus himself, charges of atheism appear to me to be without foundation. Of course, the nature of atheism itself requires definition. In The Apology, Socrates considers the charge he faces: that he is guilty of corrupting the minds of young; that he believes in deities of his own invention instead of the gods recognised by the state;1 and that he has taught the young to believe in these new deities. Socrates concludes from this that he is not a complete atheist, as he does believe in gods, but that he just cannot believe in supernatural beings that are bastard children of the gods by nymphs or other monsters.2 However, in Laws, Plato considers piety and impiety. On the one hand, the pious person, who believes in gods, has never committed an impious deed voluntarily. The impious person, though, is categorised in one of three ways: he who does not believe in gods; he who, though believing in gods, thinks that they have no care for 1 22e-24a. 2 24b-27a. 73 Rosetta 13. http://www.rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue_13/jackson_philodemus.pdf men; and he who, though believing in gods, believes that they are easily won over and bribed by offerings and prayers.3 These beliefs come from poets, orators, seers and priests.4 Plato equally dismisses the views of naturalists, who deny the divinity of things.5 Obbink (1989, 188-90) considers the very definition of atheism. He admits that it is a difficult issue, as “atheism in the ancient world was never a well-defined or ideologically fixed position. But deviation from a proper attitude towards gods…could result in charges of impiety or in the suspicion of atheism.” Obbink concludes that “the charge of atheism could be incurred for something less than an outright denial of the existence of the gods.” It has been suggested that the theism of the Epicureans was so far-removed from conventional belief in the Homeric and Hesiodic pantheon of traditional Olympian gods that it constituted atheism. For Santayana (1935, 62) writes that it is usual and, in one sense, legitimate to speak of the Epicureans as atheists, since they denied providence and any government of God in the world. Lucretius and Epicurus are not explicit in their descriptions or explanations of gods, which presents a difficulty. However they do profess to believe in gods. For instance Epicurus, in his letter to Menoeceus, admits that ‘gods there are.’ 6 This is perhaps where Philodemus may be helpful. Bailey (1928, 444) points out that it is, however, necessary to be cautious, for there is reason to believe that Philodemus - from whom Cicero probably derived his information- had gone beyond the tradition of Epicurus himself and worked out the notion of the constitution of gods on his own lines. 3 10.885bff. 4 10.885dff. 5 10.886bff. 6 ‘θεοὶ μὲν γὰρ εἰσίν’ (Epicurus, Ad Men. 123-4). 74 Rosetta 13. http://www.rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue_13/jackson_philodemus.pdf But Rist (1972, 163) writes that ‘our other evidence about Epicureanism, in particular that of Cicero, Philodemus and Epicurus himself, gives a more complete picture,’ however, ‘it might be imagined that this evidence has exaggerated the importance of the gods for Epicurus himself.’ The notion that we draw from both Epicurus and Lucretius is that the gods that there are, dwell removed from human affairs, heedless of mortals,7 in the ‘spaces between worlds’, the μετακοσμίοι as Epicurus himself puts it,8 or intermundia as Cicero translates this.9 They live in peace, removed from all pain,10 paradigms, it would seem, of a true Epicurean’s life. Indeed Stallings (2007, ix) writes that ‘some think that he (Epicurus) believed them (gods) to exist merely as concepts,’ and Strodach (1963, 51) also writes that the gods perform. This function is ethical; they are paragons of the good life, exemplifying in their own existence the highest Epicurean ideals. As Merlan (1960, 50) poses, is it not entirely possible that they [Epicureans] were ready to invoke Zeus and all the other divinities of popular religion, not to ensure their benevolence but just to express their admiration for these perfect beings? But, are these gods more than paradigms or paragons, and if so, what are they? A natural, initial question perhaps ought to be from where the Epicureans took their notion of the divine from, and what evidence they gave for this concept. The answer to this is entirely tied up with the word προλήψις. The Epicurean spokesman in Cicero’s De Natura Deorum, Velleius, explains the term as follows, that ‘Epicurus uses the word prolepsis [transliterated] for these notions, that is, a sort of preconceived mental picture of a thing,’11 and so 7 Drn 1.44-9. 8 Ad Pyth. 88-9. 9 Dnd 1.18. 10 Drn 1.44-9. 11 ‘quam appellat πρόληψιν Epicurus, id est anteceptam animo rei quandam informationem’ (Cicero, Dnd 1.16). 75 Rosetta 13. http://www.rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue_13/jackson_philodemus.pdf gods exist, because nature herself has imprinted a conception of them on the minds of all mankind. For what nation or what tribe of men is there which possesses untaught some ‘preconception’ of the gods?12 The term preconception13 itself is difficult, as this is an opinion or idea formed beforehand.14 But what is this idea formed before? Epicurus must mean that the mental picture of a god is received in advance of the god itself; that the gods are only known to exist as this mental picture was imprinted on the mind in advance of the knowledge of their existence; and that this imprint was not taught, but was received in advance of any teaching. It is interesting that Lucretius uses the term notitia or notities,15 which translates a being known, an idea, conception or notion,16 without a prefix denoting beforehand, perhaps to avoid any such confusion. For this is not something reasoned, but something acquired initially and innately, even though the faculty of reasoning, the mind, acquires it. This προλήψις is the only evidence that the Epicureans assert for proof of the existence of the gods, that although people might grow up distinctly and apart, all acquire this same preconception. This can be traced directly back to Epicurus himself, in his letter to Menoeceus,17 where he writes that ‘the common idea of a god is engraved on men’s minds,’ and that gods ‘there are, since knowledge of them is by clear vision…derived from sensation.’18 Lucretius follows this, writing that “men used to see with waking mind, and still more in sleep, gods.” 19 How exactly is this preconception imparted onto humans? At this juncture an appreciation of Epicurean physics and their explanation of vision would be useful. The Epicureans believed that things come about, are created, by the collision and thus compounding of atoms. Atoms are the smallest possible units of matter in 12 ‘esse deos, quod in omnium animis eorum notionem impressisset ipsa natura. Quae est enim gens aut quod genus hominum, quod non habeat sine doctrina anticipationem quandam deorum?’ (Cicero, Dnd 1.16). 13 Masson 1907: 264 translates προλήψις as prenotion. 14 Foreman, 1966, 380. 15 Drn 2.745; 4.476; 479; 5.124; 182; 1047. 16 Lewis 1996; 542. 17 Epicurus, Ad Men. 123-4. 18‘ἐναργὴς γὰρ αὐτῶν ἐστιν ἡ γνῶσις’ (Epicurus, Ad Men. 123-4). 19 ‘divom mortalia saecla egregias animo facies vigilante videbant, et magis in somnis’ (Drn 5.169-71). 76 Rosetta 13. http://www.rosetta.bham.ac.uk/issue_13/jackson_philodemus.pdf Epicureanism, refuting Anaxagorean homoeomeria (of matter being infinitely small).20 Such atoms, even when compounded, are in continual motion, and so the compounds themselves are continually losing atoms, whilst also replenishing themselves at the same time.21 The atoms on the outside of the compound are of course most liable to be lost, through continual collisions from without, and it is these atoms, or rather thin films of these atoms, that escape and then come to collide with the sensitive eye, and thus allow sight.22 However, there are various types of atom, or rather, atoms of varying size and shape, within limits.23 The atoms that come to make up mind and soul are said to be the slightest, lightest and swiftest of atoms, and so it is that these are undetectable to the eye, but can be detected by that most sensitive organ, the mind itself.24 Diogenes Laertius records Epicurus as writing ‘that the gods are perceived by reason alone,’ 25 and Aetius that ‘gods can be contemplated by reason because of the fineness of the nature of their images.’ 26 So the gods can be apprehended only by the mind, due to the delicacy of their image.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • De Rerum Natura, Chant II
    Neptune ¢ Musée de Sousse Fonds BARDON Neptune ¢ Musée de Sousse Fonds BARDON No 193-194 Anno MMXVI No 193-194 Anno MMXVI No 193-194 Anno MMXVI No 193-194 Anno MMXVI LUCRÈCE, De rerum natura, chant II BIBLIOGRAPHIE COMMENTÉE (par Sabine Luciani) Édition au programme : Lucrece, De la Nature, t. I, livres I-III, A. Ernout (éd.), Paris, Les Belles Lettres, « Collection des Universités de France », 1920 (nombreuses rééditions ¢ révision par C. Rambaux en 1990). Il existe néanmoins d’autres éditions et/ou traductions de grande qualité. 1. Le texte du De rerum natura 1.1. Éditions et traductions Lucrèce, La naissance des choses,B.Combeaud (éd.), édition critique, traduction et notes, Préface de Michel Onfray, Bordeaux, Mollat (diffusion Seuil), 2015. Titus Lucretius Carus, De rerum natura, E. Flores (éd.), edizione critica con introduzione e versione, 3 vol., Naples, Bibliopolis, 2002-2009. Titus Lucretius Carus, De rerum natura, W. H. D. Rouse &M. F. Smith (éd.), Cambridge (Mass.)/Londres, Harvard University Press, The Loeb Classical Library, 1992. 1.2. Éditions commentées Bailey C. 1947, Titi Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex, edited with Prolegomena, Critical Apparatus, Translation and Commentary, 3 vol., Oxford, Clarendon Press. Ernout A. & Robin L. 1962, Lucrèce. De rerum natura. Commentaire exégétique et critique, 3 vol., Paris, Les Belles Lettres (1925-1928). Giancotti F. 1996, Lucrezio. La natura : introduzione, testo criticamente riveduto, traduzione et commento, Milan. Vita Latina 193-194 (2016) : 228-238. bibliographie commentée 229 Guissani C. 1980, Lucrezio. De rerum natura. Commento e note, Turin, (1896-1898), reprod. 2 vol. incluant les Studi Lucreziani, New York-Londres, Garlan.
    [Show full text]
  • The Female in Lucretius' De Rerum Natura
    Colby Quarterly Volume 30 Issue 3 September Article 5 September 1994 Mater Matters: The Female in Lucretius' De Rerum Natura S. Georgia Nugent Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/cq Recommended Citation Colby Quarterly, Volume 30, no.3, September 1994, p.179-205 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Colby. It has been accepted for inclusion in Colby Quarterly by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Colby. Nugent: Mater Matters: The Female in Lucretius' De Rerum Natura Mater Matters: The Female in Lucretius' De Rerum Natura by S. GEORGIA NUGENT PIC POETRY CELEBRATES the creation of a certain kind of self. l That creation E will often-but not always-be directed toward, tested through, and dam­ aged ordestroyed by war. AI ways, it will be male. This is not to say that females do not appear on the epic stage; they may even appear in the guise of heroic warrior-there is Camilla, there is Atalanta.2 But each such figure is anomalous; the "real" subject of epic is how to be a man and, beyond that, how to be a community of men-an army, a polis, a republic, an empire. Typically, such epics will address questions ofautonomy and social comrade­ ship, appetite and sublimation, intellection and action. Whether via the portrayal of Achilles sulking in his tent, Aeneas setting sail from Carthage and Dido, Tydeus single-handedly slaughtering an ambush party of fifty men, or even Epicurus laying bare the secrets of nature, epic provides narrative models for male life in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • The Polemical Practice in Ancient Epicureanism* M
    UDK 101.1;141.5 Вестник СПбГУ. Философия и конфликтология. 2019. Т. 35. Вып. 3 The polemical practice in ancient Epicureanism* M. M. Shakhnovich St. Petersburg State University, 7–9, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation For citation: Shakhnovich M. M. The polemical practice in ancient Epicureanism. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, 2019, vol. 35, issue 3, pp. 461–471. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2019.306 The article explores the presentation methods of a philosophical doctrine in Greek and Ro- man Epicureanism; it is shown that for the ancient, middle, and Roman Epicureans a con- troversy with representatives of other philosophical schools was a typical way of present- ing their own views. The polemical practice, in which the basic principles of Epicureanism were expounded through the criticism of other philosophical systems, first of all, Academics and Stoics, was considered not only as the preferred way of presenting the own doctrine, but also as the most convenient rhetorical device, which had, among other things, didac- tic significance. The founder of the school, Epicurus, often included in his texts the terms used in other philosophical schools, giving them a different, often opposite, content. While presenting his teaching in the treatise “On Nature” or in letters to his followers, Epicurus pushed off the opinions of Democritus, Plato, and the Stoics, but resorted mainly to implicit criticism of his opponents, often without naming them by name. His closest students and later followers — Metrodorus, Hermarchus, Colotes, Philodemus, Lucretius, Diogenes of Oenoanda — continuing the controversy with the Academics and the Stoics, more frank- ly expressed their indignation about the “falsely understood Epicureanism” or erroneous opinions.
    [Show full text]
  • Reading of “De Rerum Natura” in the Light of Modern Physics
    Open Journal of Philosophy 2012. Vol.2, No.4, 268-271 Published Online November 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ojpp) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojpp.2012.24039 Reading of “De Rerum Natura” in the Light of Modern Physics Gualtiero Pisent Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Padova, Padova, Italy Email: [email protected] Received April 28th, 2012; revised May 30th, 2012; accepted June 10th, 2012 An analysis of the Lucretius atomism is given, that makes particular reference to the naturalistic argu- ments and contents of the poem. A possible comparison with the atomism of nowadays, based on quite new, both theoretical (quantum mechanics) and experimental (particle accelerators) grounds, must be treated with much care. But it seems possible and interesting to compare at least the world outlined by Lucretius, with the new world, derived by familiarity with modern theories of matter. This is the point I have tried to stress. Keywords: Science; Nature; Atomism; Vacuum; Swerve Introduction gust of wind, which lashes the sea, strikes the ships and drag- sthe clouds [I-265].” Although Lucretius theories are not fully original (being de- We shall see later on, the reasons that suggest the atomistic rived in particular from Epicurus), the poem “De rerum natura” idea, but first of all we must be aware that the assumption, al- is so wide, self consistent and miraculously integral in the form though not trivial, is nevertheless realistic. arrived up to our days, that it is worthwhile to be studied and “The clothes, left on the seaside, become wet.
    [Show full text]
  • Naming Effects in Lucretius' De Rerum Natura
    Antonomasia, Anonymity, and Atoms: Naming Effects in Lucretius’ DRN Princeton/Stanford Working Papers in Classics Antonomasia, Anonymity, and Atoms: Naming Effects in Lucretius’ De rerum natura Version 1.0 September 2009 Wilson H. Shearin Stanford University Abstract: This essay argues that selected proper names within Lucretius’ De rerum natura, rather than pointing deictically or referring with clear historical specificity, instead render Lucretius’ poem vaguer and more anonymous. To make this case, the essay first briefly surveys Roman naming practices, ultimately focusing upon a specific kind of naming, deictic naming. Deictic naming points (or attempts to point) to a given entity and often conjures up a sense of the reality of that entity. The essay then studies the role of deictic naming within Epicureanism and the relationship of such naming to instances of naming within De rerum natura. Through analysis of the nominal disappearance of Memmius, the near nominal absence of Epicurus, and the deployment of Venus (and other names) within the conclusion to Lucretius’ fourth book, the essay demonstrates how selected personal names in De rerum natura, in contrast to the ideal of deictic naming, become more general, more anonymous, whether by the substitution of other terms (Memmius, Epicurus), by referential wandering (Venus), or by still other means. The conclusion briefly studies the political significance of this phenomenon, suggesting that there is a certain popular quality to the tendency towards nominal indefiniteness traced in the essay. © Wilson H. Shearin. [email protected] 1 Antonomasia, Anonymity, and Atoms: Naming Effects in Lucretius’ DRN Antonomasia, Anonymity, and Atoms: Naming Effects in Lucretius’ De rerum natura Poet, patting more nonsense foamed From the sea, conceive for the courts Of these academies, the diviner health Disclosed in common forms.
    [Show full text]
  • Lucretius's Atomic Soul
    Searching for Answers: Lucretius’s Atomic Soul Katherine McCreery [email protected] Dartmouth College, Class of 2019 Economics Major, Classics Minor 4 April 2018 McCreery 2 In his De Rerum Natura, Lucretius strives to scientifically explain several aspects of the natural world. In fact, he focuses so heavily on science that the text often reads more like an ancient scientific textbook than a philosophical work. Given the considerable attention paid to science, and given the modern practice of science as the basis for all further intellectual exploration, one may assume that scientific phenomena make up the essential building blocks that define Epicurean philosophy. However, several descriptions in De Rerum Natura seem like leaps not fully supported by science that are added in order to explain a pre-constructed Epicurean principle. While Lucretius includes more than one problematic scientific account, I will focus on his handling of the soul. His description of the soul is unsatisfactory in several ways, and the inconsistencies that arise from it call into question the assumption that science shapes Epicurean principles. In fact, his explanation for the soul only makes sense if one assumes that Epicurean principles precede Epicurean science. Given this new understanding, Lucretius’s scientific description of the soul becomes a product of a preconceived idea rather than the foundation from which the nature of the soul arises. The Epicurean approach to science has previously been met with skepticism. Cicero challenges
    [Show full text]
  • Philodemus, on Anger
    PHILODEMUS, ON ANGER Press SBL WRITINGS FROM THE GRECO-ROMAN WORLD General Editors John T. Fitzgerald and Clare K. Rothschild Editorial Board Andrew Cain Margaret M. Mitchell Teresa Morgan Ilaria L. E. Ramelli David T. Runia Karin Schlapbach Number 45 Volume Editor Elizabeth Asmis Press SBL PHILODEMUS, ON ANGER Introduction, Greek Text, and Translation by David Armstrong and Michael McOsker Press SBL Copyright © 2020 by SBL Press All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permit- ted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed in writing to the Rights and Permissions Office, SBL Press, 825 Hous- ton Mill Road, Atlanta, GA 30329 USA. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Philodemus, approximately 110 B.C.–approximately 40 B.C., author. | Armstrong, David, 1940– translator, editor. | McOsker, Michael, translator, editor. | Philodemus, approximately 110 B.C.–approximately 40 B.C. De ira. 2020. | Philodemus, approxi- mately 110 B.C.–approximately 40 B.C. De ira. English. 2020. Title: Philodemus, On anger / by David Armstrong and Michael McOsker. Other titles: On anger | Writings from the Greco-Roman world ; 45. Description: Atlanta : Atlanta : SBL Press, 2020. | Series: Writings from the Greco-Roman world; 45 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: 2019059288 (print) | LCCN 2019059289 (ebook) | ISBN 9781628372694 (paperback) | ISBN 9780884144274 (hardback) | ISBN 9780884144281 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Anger—Early works to 1800.
    [Show full text]
  • Diogenes of Oinoanda: Epicureanism and Philosophical Debates / Diogène D’Œnoanda: Épicurisme Et Controverses
    Jürgen Hammerstaedt, Pierre-Marie Morel, Refk Güremen (eds.), Diogenes of Oinoanda: Epicureanism and Philosophical Debates / Diogène d’Œnoanda: Épicurisme et controverses by Frederik bakker On the publisher’s website this book is commended as the «first col- lection of essays entirely devoted to the inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda». Indeed, this book can be said to represent a new stage in the research into this very important document. The inscription, which was set up in the early second century AD in Oinoanda in Southern Turkey, provides an elaborate exposition of the philosophy of Epicurus (341-270 BC). It was discovered in 1884, and so far 299 fragments have been brought to light, in various states of preservation and readability. For the last half century the study of Diogenes’ inscription has been dominated by the towering figure of Martin Ferguson Smith (Durham University), whose editions with translations and commentary – both philological and philosophical – still provide the best if not the only ways of access to the fragments. Most of the results of his research have been brought together in two volumes: M. F. Smith, Diogenes of Oinoanda. The Epicurean Inscription, Bibliopolis, Naples 1993; and M. F. Smith, Supplement to Diogenes of Oinoanda. The Epicurean Inscription, Bibliopolis, Naples 2003. From 2007 onwards Smith has been work- ing together with Jürgen Hammerstaedt (University of Cologne). The results of their investigations have been conveniently collected in J. Hammerstaedt-M. F. Smith, The Epicurean Inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda. Ten Years of New Discoveries and Research, Rudolf Habelt Verlag, Bonn 2014. Besides these two scholars, over the years many others have involved reCensioni Syzetesis V/1 (2018) 113-122 ISSN 1974-5044 - http://www.syzetesis.it 113 Frederik Bakker themselves with the inscription or portions of it, offering new interpre- tations of its philosophical content, and sometimes proposing alterna- tive readings.
    [Show full text]
  • Lucretius Carus, Titus
    Lucretius Carus, Titus. Addenda et Corrigenda* ADA PALMER (University of Chicago) The Addenda follow the order of the original article (CTC 2.349–65) and consist of a) additional material for the Fortuna, Bibliography and commen- taries, b) vernacular translations of the seventeenth century. New information on copyists, owners and annotators is included within the Fortuna, following the original structure. Fortuna p. 349a4. Add: A theory, now discredited, was much discussed in the fifteenth century that the surviving six-book poem was actually the middle or end of a twenty-one- book work. This confusion arose from a passage in M.T. Varro De( Lingua Latina * The author is grateful for the support and assistance of David Butterfield, Alison Brown, James Hankins and Michael Reeve. She owes much to the support given to her by the Villa I Tatti Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies, and the Mel- bern G. Glasscock Humanities Center at Texas A&M University. Gracious help was also provided by librarians at many institutions, including the Biblioteca Medicea Lauren- ziana, Biblioteca Nazionale and Biblioteca Berenson, Florence; Biblioteca Nazionale, Rome; Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vatican City; Biblioteca Marciana, Venice; Biblioteca Ambrosiana, Milan; Biblioteca Comunale A. Mai, Bergamo; Biblioteca Estense, Modena; Biblioteca Malatestiana, Cesena; Biblioteca Comunale Passerini- Landi, Piacenza; Biblioteca Capitolare, Padua; Biblioteca dell’Accademia Rubiconia dei Filopatridi, Savignano sul Rubicone; Biblioteca Nazionale, Naples; Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève and Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris; Öffentliche Bibliothek der Uni- versität, Basel; Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna; Cambridge University Library; Bodleian Library, Oxford; Harvard University’s Widener and Houghton Libraries, Cambridge, Mass.; Cushing Memorial Library & Archives, College Station, Tex.; and especially the British Library, London.
    [Show full text]
  • Lucretius De Rerum Natura
    ! " This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License Lucretius De rerum natura The University of Edinburgh School of History, Classics, and Archaeology 2011–2012, Semester 2 Lucretius Edinburgh 2012 Lucretius (U03531) You should use this course handbook in conjunction with the Honours Handbook 2011–2012. There you will find information on course protocol, in particular on plagiarism and penalties for late coursework and a section on assessment. If you do not have a copy of the handbook it can be downloaded from: http://www.shc.ed.ac.uk/undergraduate. Course Organiser Dr Michael Lurie (ML) Office: William Robertson Wing 1M.13 | Office hour: by appointment only Telephone: (0131) 6503588 | E-mail: [email protected] Brief Description of the Course This course will look at Lucretius’ poem ‘De rerum natura’. The text will be read partly in Latin and partly in English translation and interpreted in its literary and philosophical contexts. Discussion will centre on the question of Lucretius’ aims, the way he uses poetical imagery and rhetoric to achieve these aims, his treatment of the central question of (im)mortality of the soul and of the fear of death in book 3, and his theory of development of human civilization in book 5. Attention will also be paid to the enormous influence of Lucretius in the Renaissance and in the European Enlightenment. Teaching Arrangements PLACE: Old Medical School, Doorway 4, Room G. 13 TIME: Tuesdays in Semester 2 at 14.00–15.50. Learning Outcomes
    [Show full text]
  • “Then Truly the Life of the Gods Will Pass to Men”: Contemplating Diogenes of Oenoanda’S Golden Age Wim Nijs
    “then truly the life of the gods will pass to men”: Contemplating Diogenes of Oenoanda’s Golden Age Wim Nijs PICUREANS are well known for their preoccupation with the present and their avoidance of the anxieties that may E be caused by fretting over the uncontrollable future. Since one can only exert direct influence over the present, the only viable strategy to enhance ataraxia and increase one’s hap- piness is to enjoy the present moment to the fullest by living it in accordance with the principles of Epicurean doctrine. 1. Thinking about the present, but keeping one eye on the future? When Diogenes of Oenoanda in Lycia, a wealthy citizen as well as an Epicurean philosopher, decided that, before he died,1 he wanted to share the benefits of Epicurean doctrine with present and future citizens and visitors of Oenoanda, he had stonemasons cover a stoa’s wall with a monumental inscription containing treatises on ethics, physics, and old age. Although this wall is no longer standing and the stone blocks of the inscription have been re-used elsewhere in the city, many fragments of the text have been recovered and reassembled, gradually enabling us to gain some insight in Diogenes’ philosophical legacy. One of these recovered fragments, NF 184, shows that Dioge- nes was no exception with regard to the typically Epicurean orientation towards the present, rather than to the uncertain 1 As far as Diogenes’ life and death are concerned, we know only that he probably lived during the first half of the second century A.D.
    [Show full text]
  • 19Chronology of Works in Aesthetics and Philosophy Of
    Chronology of 19 Works in Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art Darren Hudson Hick Notes on Selection This chronology, as with this Companion as a whole, focuses on those works that contribute to the Western tradition of aesthetics, and, beginning in the twentieth century, in the analytic current of thought within that tradition (as opposed to the Continental one). As with the history of Western philosophy in general, the study of philosophical problems in art and beauty dates back to the ancient period, and is infl uenced by the major philosophical and cultural move- ments through the centuries. Much of what survives from the ancient to the post-Hellenistic period does so in fragments or references. In cases where only fragments or references exist, and where dating these is especially problematic, the author or attributed author and (where available) his dates of birth and death are listed. Where works have not survived even as fragments, these are not listed. As well, much of what sur- vives up to the medieval period is diffi cult to date, and is at times of disputable attribution. In these cases, whatever information is available is listed. Aesthetics in the period between the ancients and the medievals tends to be dominated by adherence to Platonic, Aristotelian, and other theories rooted in the ancient period, and as such tends to be generally lacking in substantive the- oretical advancements. And while still heavily infl uenced by ancient thinking, works from the medieval period tend also to be heavily infl uenced by religious thinking, and so many issues pertaining to art and aesthetics are intertwined with issues of religion as “theological aesthetics.” Movements in art theory and aes- thetics in the Renaissance, meanwhile, were largely advanced by working artists, and so tend to be couched in observational or pedagogical approaches, rather than strictly theoretical ones.
    [Show full text]