The Kinetic and Katastematic Pleasure Debate

For Discussion of the Distinction Between The Two Categories, and Whether the Distinction Was Important To Epicurus. Before getting too deep into this issue, be sure to read Boris Nikolsky's "Epicurus On Pleasure." Nikolsly, following Gosling & Taylor, argues that this division was not significant to Epicurus: "As it happens, most sources make no mention whatever of any differentiation between kinetic and static pleasures but rather convey Epicurus' doctrine in such a way as to suggest that pleasure was to him a unified and unambiguous concept. This group comprises sources that are rightly considered to be the most reliable: these are texts by Epicurus himself, as well as by Lucretius and Plutarch. On the other side, besides Cicero, only Diogenes Laertius and Athenaeus mention two kinds of pleasure. ... Thus by my reasoning it follows that Epicurus might speak of any pleasure both as motion and as the absence of pain; thus, these two concepts by no means refer to two different kinds of pleasure."