Search Results

Search results 1-3 of 3.

  • I want to think further about this but my preliminary thought is that what you're talking about is not something that ends up being "higher" or "lower" but something that gives measurement to the "intensity" of the pleasure. I know Elayne has discussed this before and "intensity" and "duration" both fall short of being full descriptions of what we are talking about, but clearly pleasures, while all sharing the same nature as being felt as pleasure, do differ from one another in important respect…
  • Thanks for thank Eugenios. This is probably also what is covered in DeWitt's "unity of pleasure" discussions, but I find the entire discussion by virtually everyone to be unsatisfying. As that wiki entry points out, there really is even lingering doubt as to whether the point is that pleasures cannot be so condensed, or is in fact a hypothetical asking us to imagine that they can be condensed and therefore asking us to think about what that tells us about the particular pleasures. I could read t…
  • I somehow seem to have missed Godfrey's post of May 6. I don't know that we really grappled with Eugenios' original point, but I am now gathering we are talking about how to describe the attributes of what we mean by "pleasure." We have used or seen used words like "intensity" or "meaning" and "duration" and perhaps "purity" and potentially applicable adjectives. We also have the word "condensed" which as far as I am concerned in English is virtually devoid of meaning, or is so ambiguous that it…