Great lecture but her understanding of stoicism is greatly lacking. There is no repression of emotions. It's more like Buddhism. Your emotions exist but that doesn't mean you have to allow them to rule you or make decisions for you.
Epicurus doesn't know about Atom. Atoms can't be seen with naked eyes in ancient time. There's matter (Atom), there's also the Anti-matter. Most greeks/western philosophy was inspire from eastern philosophy.
Wilson's Anti-Globalism Roadmap Catherine's presentation is carefully crafted to hide the defects of a hedonistic philosophy. Namely, the importance of atomism to epicurean concepts. In presentation it largely goes unaddressed. Culture is mistakenly undervalued and relegated as a juvenile endeavor. despite its vital nature for successful democratic process. Catherine then fails to disclose, atomism writings were Epicurus' most famous works-- and were mostly lost to volcanic destruction and state sponsored burnings. This denial of facts displays the presentation in a more palatable misery, for unfamiliar audiences. Catherine also blatantly ignores the romantic fact pattern that is epicurean thought. That leads to the illogical assumptions on pleasure and discomfort. That weaponry was not discovered until metal-working?! The stone age is called such for a reason. The early democracies of native Americans is ignored (some 50 million north Americans). The social contract is only valid if governed by honor and set of clearly established set of overarching moral traditions and treaties/laws. Epicurus lives without honor, only wishing to prolong his desperate life of happiness at the expense of globalism. What the presentation does well is to, unearth and give name to the socio-political movement most modern democracies find themselves grappling with, now. The 1% is untenable.
I disagree with much of your comment. Epicurean is not hedonism, culture and atomism are compatible, tradition and democracy are overrated. Lucretius definitely got religion right. Epicurus was clearly not a scientist & got many details wrong, but he got so many principles correct. Atoms, natural selection, power dynamics in politics, mortality, avoiding pain (not seeking pleasure as gets caricatured),…most of his work was marginalized for so long was due to other Greek philosophies aligning with Christianity which became dominant. Obviously I think that was a mistake.
![[ ออกกอง ] วัยหนุ่ม 2544 โลกหลังลูกกรง..ทัวร์กองถ่ายหนังใน "คุกของจริง" | JUSTดูIT.](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vB--aOkZCpw/mqdefault.jpg)
thank you so much for uploading this
I just finished reading the book, but I can't remember the tittle.............. no he didnt.
Great lecture but her understanding of stoicism is greatly lacking. There is no repression of emotions. It's more like Buddhism. Your emotions exist but that doesn't mean you have to allow them to rule you or make decisions for you.
Epicurus doesn't know about Atom. Atoms can't be seen with naked eyes in ancient time. There's matter (Atom), there's also the Anti-matter. Most greeks/western philosophy was inspire from eastern philosophy.
He was influenced by Democritus and understood atoms similarly
Wilson's Anti-Globalism Roadmap
Catherine's presentation is carefully crafted to hide the defects of a hedonistic philosophy. Namely, the importance of atomism to epicurean concepts. In presentation it largely goes unaddressed.
Culture is mistakenly undervalued and relegated as a juvenile endeavor. despite its vital nature for successful democratic process.
Catherine then fails to disclose, atomism writings were Epicurus' most famous works-- and were mostly lost to volcanic destruction and state sponsored burnings.
This denial of facts displays the presentation in a more palatable misery, for unfamiliar audiences. Catherine also blatantly ignores the romantic fact pattern that is epicurean thought. That leads to the illogical assumptions on pleasure and discomfort. That weaponry was not discovered until metal-working?! The stone age is called such for a reason. The early democracies of native Americans is ignored (some 50 million north Americans). The social contract is only valid if governed by honor and set of clearly established set of overarching moral traditions and treaties/laws.
Epicurus lives without honor, only wishing to prolong his desperate life of happiness at the expense of globalism.
What the presentation does well is to, unearth and give name to the socio-political movement most modern democracies find themselves grappling with, now. The 1% is untenable.
I disagree with much of your comment. Epicurean is not hedonism, culture and atomism are compatible, tradition and democracy are overrated. Lucretius definitely got religion right. Epicurus was clearly not a scientist & got many details wrong, but he got so many principles correct. Atoms, natural selection, power dynamics in politics, mortality, avoiding pain (not seeking pleasure as gets caricatured),…most of his work was marginalized for so long was due to other Greek philosophies aligning with Christianity which became dominant. Obviously I think that was a mistake.
What an elementary critique.