90. Bodily vs. Spiritual Pleasures: Article 5, Question 31

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Question: Are Bodily Pleasures Greater Than Spiritual Pleasures? #

Apparent evidence for bodily pleasure superiority:

• More people pursue sensible pleasures than spiritual ones
• Bodily pleasures produce stronger physical effects and transformations
• They require restraint and temperance due to their vehemence
• They serve as medicine against bodily defects (hunger, thirst, fatigue)

Thomas’s resolution: Bodily pleasures appear greater but are actually less so secundum se (in themselves). Spiritual pleasures are genuinely greater according to three essential factors.

Three Factors That Determine the Magnitude of Pleasure #

1. The good that is joined: Spiritual goods (knowledge, honor, virtue) are greater and more loved than bodily goods; men willingly forgo bodily pleasure to preserve honor
2. That to which it is joined: The intellectual/understanding part is far more noble than the sensitive part
3. The joining itself (unio): The joining is more intima (intimate), more perfect, and more firm in spiritual pleasure

The Nature of Sensible vs. Spiritual Pleasure #

Sensible pleasure involves motion (motus):

• Connected to bodily change and emotion (passio) of the sensitive appetite
• Successive, not all at once (not totum simul)
• Something passes and something is expected; never complete at one moment
• Examples: food, venereal pleasure
• Corruptible and quickly fades

Spiritual pleasure is without motion:

• Constituted in the act of understanding or knowing itself
• Totum simul—all at once, complete in a single moment
• The mind comes to rest in understanding (like ἐπιστήμη [epistḗmē] = coming to a halt)
• Incorruptible and firm
• The understanding penetrates to the what it is (essence) of things, while senses grasp only exterior accidents

Why Sensible Pleasures Appear Greater #

1. Sensible things are more known to us: Bodily realities naturally precede spiritual ones in our knowledge
2. Bodily changes are evident: The passions produce visible physical effects
3. Opposition enhances perception: Hunger alongside eating makes food taste better; no comparable pain opposes intellectual pleasure
4. Most men lack virtue: Those unable to attain spiritual pleasures (which require virtue, both intellectual and moral) decline to bodily pleasures

The Intimacy of Spiritual Union #

Sensible knowing stops at exterior accidents of a thing; intellectual knowing penetrates inward to the nature itself:

• Etymology of intelligere: in + legere (to read within); to see within; insight
• Knowledge progression: We first know things outwardly through senses, then gradually come to understand what they really are
• Example from Shakespeare’s All’s Well That Ends Well: Parolles is known outwardly as brave through his words, but only in the moment of truth is his true nature revealed
• The sense stops at outward accidents; understanding reads within to essence

Pleasure in Knowledge vs. Mere Sensation #

• A man delights much more in understanding something than in merely sensing it
• Intellectual knowledge is more perfect, more known (understanding reflects upon its own act), more loved
• Evidence: No one would rather lose intellectual sight (go mad) than bodily sight (go blind)
• Augustine’s testimony: In City of God, the same principle applies

The Distinction Between Reason and Sense #

• Reasoning: Movement of mind, seeking understanding (like motion toward rest)
• Understanding: The mind comes to rest and contemplates
• Sensible pleasure is tied to emotion (motus); spiritual pleasure is without motion

Key Arguments #

Why Spiritual Pleasures Are Actually Greater (Despite Appearances) #

Argument from the three factors:

1. The spiritual good is greater and more loved than bodily good
2. The intellectual part (to which spiritual pleasure is joined) is more noble than the sensitive part
3. The joining is more intimate—understanding penetrates inward to essence, whereas sense remains with exterior accidents
4. The act is more perfect: understanding is totum simul (all at once), while sensation involves successive motion
5. Spiritual pleasure is incorruptible; bodily pleasure quickly fades

Why Bodily Pleasures Seem Greater #

• Sensible things are more known to us naturally
• Bodily pleasure produces obvious bodily changes; spiritual pleasure does not (except by overflow)
• Bodily pleasures serve as medicine against bodily defects, making the relief more acutely felt
• Opposition between pain (hunger) and pleasure (eating) makes the contrast vivid; no such opposition exists for ignorance vs. understanding
• Most men have not acquired the virtue necessary for spiritual pleasures

Important Definitions #

Motion (Motus)—Two Senses #

1. Imperfect act: The act of potency; successive; in time; incomplete by definition (e.g., moving from point A to point B)
2. Perfect act: The act of what is already perfect; all at once (totum simul); not successive; includes understanding, sensing, willing, delighting

Intelligere (Understanding) #

Etymology: in + legere (to read within); to see within

• Penetrates to the essence or “what it is” (quod quid est) of things
• Contrasts with sensation, which grasps only exterior accidents
• Produces insight (seeing within)
• More perfect, more known, more loved than sensation

Natural (Secundum Naturam) #

In this lecture, Berquist emphasizes that pleasures arise from what is suitable (conveniens)—what accords with human nature or a particular nature.

Examples & Illustrations #

Sensory vs. Intellectual Knowledge #

• Mozart and understanding: Berquist acknowledges he himself babbles about what Mozart’s music represents while listening, seeking understanding rather than mere sensation. Kossevitzky objected that he attributed more meaning than the music actually possesses.
• Vision and blindness: Most people would rather go blind than go mad (lose intellectual sight)—this is clear from human preference
• Shakespeare’s King Lear: Lear’s eyes are put out; he is blind but didn’t know his situation before. Now beginning to understand, but what he fears more is madness (intellectual loss). We fear losing the mind more than losing bodily senses.

Bodily Pleasures and Their Limits #

• Beer and satisfaction: Berquist cites his friend Mark’s observation that the first beer tastes better than the second; only the first sip truly satisfies
• Hunger makes good sauce: Hunger enhances the pleasure of eating; you need the defect to make the pleasure acute
• Cheeseburger after fasting: After spending a whole day starving to see the Pope, the cheeseburger that followed was the best he’d ever had—hunger made the difference

Opposition and Pleasure #

• Hunger and eating: There is a direct opposition between the pain of hunger and the pleasure of eating; hunger makes food taste better
• Ignorance and understanding: It is not the same. Ignorance is not a pain that makes understanding taste better; it is a mere lack. If you don’t know what you’re missing, you don’t experience pain opposite to intellectual pleasure
• The problem of acquired taste: Classical music and Shakespeare are “acquired tastes”—requiring habituation and attention, not the immediate relief that hunger + food provides

Music and Physical Vigor #

• Dancers and music: Without music, dancers tire quickly; with music, they can dance all night
• Canoe drivers and songs: French canoe drivers, exhausted, would begin to sing together and suddenly zoom along with renewed energy
• Military marches for staying awake: Berquist used military marches on records to stay awake driving to pick up his brother Paul from West Point at 2 a.m.

Notable Quotes #

“No man can live without pleasure.” — Thomas Aquinas (cited by Berquist)

“Would you rather go blind or go mad?” — Question posed by Berquist to highlight human preference for intellectual sight over bodily sight

“The Lord is my rock . . . sweeter than honey to my mouth.” — Psalm 118 (cited as the counterargument: Scripture speaks of bodily pleasure because that’s as far as some people can go)

“The greatest pleasure is that which is according to the operation of wisdom.” — Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book X (cited by Berquist)

Questions Addressed #

Main Question: Are Bodily Pleasures Greater Than Spiritual Pleasures? #

Objections (apparent evidence for bodily pleasure):

1. More people pursue sensible pleasures than spiritual ones; therefore bodily pleasures are greater
2. Bodily pleasures have more potent effects—they change the body, sometimes make people insane (as in Ethics 7)
3. Bodily pleasures must be tempered and restrained due to their vehemence, whereas spiritual pleasures need no such restraint; therefore bodily pleasures are stronger

Thomas’s resolution: Sensible pleasures appear greater due to:

• Being more known to us naturally
• Producing bodily changes
• Serving as medicine against bodily pain
• Benefiting from the opposition between pain and pleasure

But spiritual pleasures are actually greater secundum se (in themselves) because:

• The good is greater and more loved
• The subject (intellect) is more noble
• The union is more intimate (understanding penetrates to essence)
• The act is more perfect (all at once, without motion)
• They are incorruptible

Connections to Previous Discussions #

The Appetite and God’s Will #

Berquist opens by discussing an objection from the Prima Pars on God’s will: appetitive powers are named from desire and want, but God cannot want or desire (as this would imply lack). Thomas’s reply: there are other acts of appetite besides wanting—love and joy. These are found in God; wanting is not. This frames the discussion of pleasure as a kind of resting in what is suitable, which does not require lack.

The Name “Appetitive” #

Appetitive powers are named from the most known acts—hunger and thirst, wanting. The English word “want” beautifully captures both senses: desire and lack. God cannot want (lack), but can love and rejoice.

Issues in Translation #

Berquist notes serious translation problems in Aquinas texts:

• Some translations reverse meanings by adding or omitting negatives
• He cites a dissertation citing a passage incorrectly translated (a negative added that wasn’t in the Latin), supporting a conclusion opposite to what the Latin actually said
• He mentions consulting Father Lyne about whether a Latin construction could be read differently; it couldn’t
• He notes variations between Latin editions (Navarre vs. Mary Eddie texts) on small but important details

Teaching Methodology #

Berquist employs:

• Personal anecdotes to illustrate abstract concepts (beer, cheeseburger, music, drives)
• Literary references to clarify philosophical points (Shakespeare, Augustine)
• Etymological analysis to recover meaning (intelligere, epistḗmē)
• Socratic questioning to draw out student understanding
• Concrete examples before abstract principles