92. Pleasure, Contrariety, and the Proper Enjoyment of Goods

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

Can Pleasure Be Contrary to Pleasure? #

• The central question: whether pleasure is contrary to pleasure, or only to pain/sadness
• Passions receive their species and contrariety according to their objects
• The object of pleasure is the good; since good is not contrary to good, some argue pleasure cannot be contrary to pleasure
• However, pleasures can impede one another when they exist in the same subject
• Example: enjoying Mozart while doing philosophy—one cannot fully enjoy both simultaneously; they are mutually exclusive

Contrariety According to Aristotle #

• Contraries are “the opposites that are furthest apart in the same genus”
• Analogy: In a line, there can be many equidistant points, but only two furthest apart
• In dramatic forms: tragedy and comedy are contrary; romances and other forms fall between them
• Material contrariety (of the objects in which someone delights) differs from formal contrariety
• Formal contrariety is what defines true opposition

The Solution: Pleasure Contrary to Pleasure Through Different Rest States #

• Pleasure in the affections of the soul is proportional to rest in bodies (natural philosophy)
• Two rests are contrary when they are in contrary terms (resting above vs. resting below)
• Therefore, two pleasures can be contrary when they involve contrary states or dispositions
• The Lebanese monks’ example: cannot simultaneously enjoy eating and reading because they require different states of attention

Virtue Versus Vice Contrariety #

• Two contrary vices can exist (e.g., foolhardiness and cowardice, both contrary to courage)
• But virtue is not contrary to virtue—virtues do not oppose each other
• The virtuous person is “hit from both sides” by opposing vices but not by opposing virtues
• Example from Coriolanus: he is courageous, yet appears foolhardy to others, showing the complexity of proper virtue

The Good in Nature Versus the Good in Virtue #

• In natural goods, two goods can be contrary (hot and cold: good for fire and water respectively)
• Culinary examples: ice cream on steak, wine with chocolate—these can be physically combined but not genuinely enjoyed together
• In the good of virtue, two goods cannot be contrary because “the good of virtue is not taken except by agreement to something one, to reason”
• If you put ice cream on steak, you get neither the proper pleasure of ice cream nor steak

The Problem of Mismatched Pleasures #

• One must approach each form of pleasure according to its proper nature
• The example of wine: must be sipped slowly, sniffed three times before sipping, savored—not consumed like soda pop
• Seeking the wrong pleasure in a form corrupts both the form and the experience
• Example: candy-flavored lipstick on lips seeks the pleasure of candy (lollipop) rather than the pleasure proper to a kiss

Key Arguments #

First Argument: Objects Cannot Cause Pleasure Alone #

• Some argue: the good (object) causes pleasure, and good is not contrary to good
• Response: The object of pleasure is the good, but the good is not contrary to good; bad is contrary to bad, and pleasure is contrary to sadness/pain
• Objects alone do not cause pleasure; they must be received into the soul through the affections

Second Argument: Impeding Pleasures Prove Contrariety #

• Objection: Things which impede each other, existing in the same genus, are contrary
• Some pleasures do impede one another
• Conclusion: Some pleasures are contrary to each other
• Illustration: The Lebanese monks cannot enjoy both eating and reading simultaneously because the pleasures impede each other

Third Argument: Formal Versus Material Contrariety #

• The contrariety of pleasures comes not from material difference (different objects delighted in) but from formal difference
• Material contrariety = difference in objects; formal contrariety = difference according to form
• As stated in the 10th Book of the Metaphysics

Important Definitions #

Contrary (Contrarium) #

• In Aristotelian metaphysics: opposites that are furthest apart in the same genus
• Distinguished from other forms of opposition
• Example: in plays, tragedy and comedy are contraries; intermediate forms like romance fall between

Pleasure (Delectatio) #

• The affection of the soul proportional to rest in natural bodies
• Can be contrary to other pleasures when they involve contrary states or dispositions
• Requires proper alignment between the form of the good and the mode of enjoyment

Rest (Quies) #

• The state of being at rest; natural rest versus violent rest
• Two rests are contrary when in contrary terms (above versus below)
• A violent rest (like a stone held at the top of a pillar) is contrary to natural rest (stone at ground)

Proper Pleasure (Delectatio Propria) #

• The pleasure appropriate to a particular form or good
• Must be distinguished from inappropriate pleasure sought in the wrong form
• Example: the proper pleasure of tragedy (catharsis of pity and fear) is different from the proper pleasure of comedy (delight in resolution)

Examples & Illustrations #

Monastic Life and Conflicting Pleasures #

• Lebanese monks remarked on how the community reads while eating
• Western visitor asks: “How can you do that? If I’m eating, I’m eating. If I’m reading, I’m reading. I can’t do them both.”
• The monk responds: This is possible because the pleasures come from different affections of the soul, proportional to different rest states
• Shows that true pleasure requires proper attention to each good

Mozart and Incompatible Pleasures #

• Should one have Mozart playing while doing philosophy or theology?
• Both are goods, but they cannot be properly enjoyed simultaneously
• One would lose the full pleasure of both philosophy and music
• Illustrates that when two pleasures impede each other, they are contrary

Shakespeare’s Coriolanus #

• Coriolanus is truly courageous
• Yet to other people, he appears foolhardy
• Shows how virtue can seem extreme to those viewing it from outside
• Illustrates the complexity of virtue versus vice and apparent contraries

Food and Drink Combinations #

• Ice cream on steak: while both are goods, they destroy each other’s proper pleasure
• Wine tasting with chocolate: a more disputed question of compatibility
• The principle: when you combine incompatible pleasures, you lose both
• Shows the importance of “agreement to something one, to reason” in virtuous pleasure

The Candy Lipstick Example #

• A girl’s boyfriend wanted her to wear candy-flavored lipstick; she wanted adult lipstick
• Solution: “Buy him a lollipop”
• He was seeking the pleasure of candy (appropriate to eating) rather than the pleasure proper to a kiss
• Illustrates how seeking the wrong pleasure in a form corrupts the experience

Wine Drinking as Proper Pleasure #

• Root beer: consumed quickly, boom-boom, a gulp
• Wine: must be sniffed three times before sipping, savored slowly in the mouth, contemplated
• If you drink wine like you drink soda pop, you get neither the pleasure of wine nor soda pop
• Shows that each good has its proper mode of enjoyment

Pornography as Misplaced Pleasure #

• Seeking pornography is not merely a moral defect
• It represents seeking the pleasure proper to the bedroom in the form of fiction
• Fiction has its own proper pleasure; pornography corrupts it by importing a pleasure that doesn’t belong
• Shows the principle: wrong pleasure in a form corrupts both

Shakespeare’s Drama and Proper Pleasure #

• 18th-century adaptations of King Lear: Cordelia doesn’t die; she restores her throne and throne
• These are “desecrations” of the text
• The proper pleasure of tragedy comes from catharsis of pity and fear, not happy endings
• When people realized this was wrong, they restored Shakespeare’s original tragic endings
• Seeking the pleasure of comedy (happy ending) in tragedy destroys the proper pleasure of tragedy

Greek Drama Structure #

• The Greeks would play two tragedies and then a comedy
• This shows they understood the proper pleasure of each form
• Following tragedy with comedy prevents fatigue from one emotional tone
• Shows structure designed for proper enjoyment according to form

C.S. Lewis on Reading Properly #

• Preface to Paradise Lost: teaches how to read the work to enjoy it properly
• The Allegory of Love: introduces a form of fiction (allegory) that had a longer life than the modern novel
• It’s hard for modern readers to appreciate this form, so instruction is needed
• Shows the need to learn the proper pleasure of each literary form

Questions Addressed #

Can Pleasure Be Contrary to Pleasure? #

• Initial objection: Good is not contrary to good, so pleasure cannot be contrary to pleasure
• Resolution: Pleasure can be contrary to pleasure not through contrariety of their objects (the goods) but through contrariety of the states or dispositions in which the pleasures rest
• Two pleasures can impede each other and thus be contrary, like two contrary rests

How Do We Account for Pleasures That Impede Each Other? #

• Answer: Through the analogy with rest in natural bodies—just as two rests can be contrary (above and below), two pleasures can be contrary when they involve opposite dispositions or states
• The Lebanese monks cannot enjoy eating and reading simultaneously because the affections of the soul are proportional to contrary states

What Makes Some Apparent Goods Incompatible? #

• Answer: In matters of natural good, two goods can be contrary (hot/cold, good for different creatures)
• But in the good of virtue, no two virtues are contrary—they all agree “to something one, to reason”
• Mismatched pleasures (like ice cream on steak) are not virtuous but rather corrupt each other

How Should We Approach Different Forms of Pleasure? #

• Answer: Each form of pleasure (wine versus soda, tragedy versus comedy, fiction versus pornography) has its own proper mode of enjoyment
• One must learn and respect the proper pleasure of each form
• Seeking the wrong pleasure in a form destroys both the form and the pleasure

Notable Quotes #

“If I put ice cream on my steak, I would get neither the pleasure of eating ice cream, nor the pleasure of eating steak.” — Berquist, illustrating how incompatible pleasures impede each other

“You can’t enjoy them both. You can’t enjoy them both.” — Berquist, explaining the Lebanese monks’ response to eating while reading

“The good of virtue is not taken except by agreement to something one, to reason.” — Aquinas (cited by Berquist), explaining why virtuous goods cannot be contrary to each other