I don’t agree with Epicurus’ claim
that the absence of pain is the truest pleasure. To have a pain go away, or even
momentary respite from it can be a powerful and intense pleasure; but that pleasure
is fleeting. After recovering from a severe cold, simply breathing through uninhibited
nostrils is fabulous. After a very few hours, however, breathing is again taken for granted.
I think the reason the statement was so
powerful for Epicurus is because he was in bad health all his life. The brief
moments where his body felt like a normal body must have been blissful and
sublime.
Epicurus’s
claim that the absence of pain is the truest pleasure also seems
self-contradictory. According to him, there are two types of pleasure, static and dynamic. Static pleasures are a state of equilibrium (the sensation of being
full), and he regards static pleasures as superior to dynamic pleasures, which “consist
in the attainment of a desired end, the previous desire having been accompanied
by pain.” Wouldn’t the absence of pain then be the most basic definition of a
dynamic pleasure? So wouldn't that make dynamic pleasure the superior one?
I think
that pleasure is an active and pleasing emotion, which can change with the
conditions of the person who is experiencing the feeling. I don’t feel that
pleasure is a set thing; I agree with Epicurus that there are different types
of it, but I think it would be very difficult to narrow every type of it down;
it varies so much from person to person, and who can say that their perception
of pleasure is in any way similar to those of other people?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.