Not really odd when you think about it. Many people think that true pleasure and happiness comes from moderation (rather than indulgence) and cutting out that which is unnecessary - hence the appeal of minimalism in this vulgar consumerist era. — Tom Storm

:up: All things in moderation is, I think, a good motto. My thoughts were framed in terms of what Epicureanism has come to commonly signify today. Thought the same distortions of belief can be said of Cynicism, to not also get into Ancient Skepticism. :razz:

Epicureanism has come to commonly signify today. — javra

Yes, for some it means pretentious gluttony and fat restaurant reviewers. :gasp:

Great post! Danke.

The Mind-Body Gap

According to our bodies, we're ~35k years old (Cro-Magnons)

According to our minds, we're way older than that!

Species IQ, the old fashioned way $\frac{Mental \space Age}{Physical \space Age} \times 100$

The body is the prison of the soul. — Socrates

Our minds can think of things that are physically impossible as of now. That's a mixed blessing (uplifting & disappointing).

You can do this, you can give up lesser pleasures in the pursuit of better ones.

Many people think that true pleasure and happiness comes from moderation (rather than indulgence) and cutting out that which is unnecessary - hence the appeal of minimalism in this vulgar consumerist era. — Tom Storm

As long as the intention behind one's consumption is the same (to satisfy a craving), it doesn't really matter whether one goes full blown hedonism or the moderate epicureanism. Epicureanism is just an anally retentive hedonism.

Epicureanism is just an anally retentive hedonism. — baker

Dear mother of god... Is the the soothing pleasure of the gods-given Papaveraceae degraded to anal retention here?

Epicureanism is just an anally retentive hedonism. — baker

That's a witty line. :wink:

You can do this, you can give up lesser pleasures in the pursuit of better ones. — baker

Yeah, it can be done but it's not exactly something an untrained person can pull off. The lower pleasures tend to, well, give more pleasure for a given amount of effort. If this weren't true, the world would be quite a different place, oui?

Was it John Stuart Mill who talked about higher and lower pleasures?

Better Socrates dissatisfied than a pig/fool staisfied. — J. S. Mill

This statement has implications on the meaning of "better" we discussed.

In a sense, J. S. Mill planted a bomb inside the utilitarianism house - it went off a long time ago. No one's noticed it. How peculiar! How very peculiar!

You can do this, you can give up lesser pleasures in the pursuit of better ones.
— baker

Yeah, it can be done but it's not exactly something an untrained person can pull off. — Agent Smith

If you prefer hot pizza over cold pizza, then you understand the principle of pursuing higher pleasures and are able to act on it. How consciously and how consistently is the matter at hand.

The lower pleasures tend to, well, give more pleasure for a given amount of effort.

In this case, you seem to be talking about, say, preferring classical music to rock music.
I'm not talking about such fixed scales. I'm talking about the aforementioned principle.

Dear mother of god... Is the the soothing pleasure of the gods-given Papaveraceae degraded to anal retention here? — Hillary

Eh? You?! Talk about religion being the opiate of the people!

And "soothing pleasure"? All intoxicants sooner or later show their ugly side.

Eh? You?! Talk about religion being the opiate of the people! — baker

The people are free to choose their own opiate, brought to them by the dealer of choice.

All intoxicants sooner or later show their ugly side. — baker

So does life, brother baker.

Epicureanism is just an anally retentive hedonism. — baker

So in what light can we place the pleasurable of an ecstacy driven dance with follow up love affair when we consider this? Is it shit that's kept in or shat out?

It's shit -- to use even more shitty language -- retained at first and then later evacuated into a fancy toliet, at the time the evacuator chooses to do so.

It's shit -- to use even more shitty language -- retained at first and then later evacuated into a fancy toliet, at the time the evacuator chooses to do so. — baker

The evacuator! :lol:

I don't see anything but a trivial 'resemblance' of Bentham/Mill's utilitarianism (re: hedonia) and epicureanism (re: aponia).

:point:

aponia — 180 Proof

I agree wholeheartedly that hedonism (pursuit of happiness & avoidance of suffering) isn't a philosophy we can afford to be flippant about, as of now that is; the future, however, could be radically different, oui?

A question that needs urgent attention:

Do things have value because they make us happy or do they make us happy because they have value? This is something I've been mulling over for the past 4 or so years.

Do things have value because they make us happy or do they make us happy because they have value? — Agent Smith

Personally I don't think it much matters. But perhaps the only 'meaningful' response to such a question would be in locating happiness in the context of the transcendentals.

I think a good first step in the 'happiness' caper is reflecting upon what you think would make you happy and why this is. It might well be that money, mansions and fast cars (or any other cliché) actually don't matter to you - you might just want to be liked and you think that gaudy things will make that happen. Then of course you could reflect upon why you want to be liked and what that means. And on we go...

Gracias señor!

Personally I don't think it much matters. — Tom Storm

The parable of the arrow

Do things have value because they make us happy or do they make us happy because they have value? — Agent Smith

That seems a muddle (à la "Euthyphro"), Smith.

In my conception, one's habits cause one either to flourish (i.e. reduce suffering) or to languish (i.e. fail to reduce suffering or worse); the latter being much more common than the former and, thereby, is – like sickness (unsustainable) in comparison to fitness (sustainable) – of lesser and greater value, respectively.

I like your philosophy.

The right to pursue happiness should be replaced, for the time being, with The right to flee suffering. In short aponia.

The right to flee suffering. — Agent Smith

What's stopping you?

What's stopping you? — baker

Nothing! :snicker: Thanks for asking the right question.

No, think. If you agree that you're not acting on your right to flee suffering, then there must be a reason for this.

No, think. If you agree that you're not acting on your right to flee suffering, then there must be a reason for this. — baker

Good point! I'll give it due consideration. Perhaps, I'm an idiot!

You have the right not to be an idiot.

You have the right not to be an idiot. — baker

Merci beaucoup, monsieur.

monsieur. — Agent Smith

I really do feel like a dick, posting here, sometimes.

I really do feel like a dick, posting here, sometimes. — baker

A thousand apologies. — Ranjeet

You have a point! We know for certain (?) that pleasure is better than pain. What could be more desirable than pleasure in your opinion? My mind draws a blank. Is it the same for you? — Agent Smith

This makes me think about the relationship between happiness and pleasure. They’re are arguments that posit that a life of unending pleasure may not lead to a happy life. Or, conversely, that a happy life likely requires suffering.

So, it may be that happiness is more desirable than pleasure. Simple longevity may be as well. Wouldn’t it be worth it to live say 1,000 years even if 300 of those are painful? 400 years?

There are different pleasures. Some more sophisticated than others, some with more harmful side-effects or consequences than others.

Understanding this principle, one would be prudent to opt for the less harmful pleasures, or to deliberately look for them in the first place. — baker

Not sure if this is exactly what you’re alluding to, but not all pleasure is created equal. Yes, satiating your hunger is pleasurable, but doing so with carrots is vastly different than doing so with ice cream.

So to me, it’s more about determining what type of lifestyle you prefer. Oftentimes the most pleasurable pleasures also come with the greatest risk/harm, but some may deem the trade off acceptable. Of course others may not.

Pleasure is obtained from that which pleases one. It is, tmk, impossible to do without. If it pleases one to do away with being pleased, there is yet the pleasure that awaits when this goal is reached, as well as the pleasure held in the active pursuit of this goal … if only one could figure out how to obtain it. But I don't see how one can. — javra

Maybe extreme desensitization would work? Conceivably one could list all the things that give them pleasure, and then proceed to consume them as much as possible. Eventually, the amount of pleasure derived from the experience would diminish over time. I’m not sure if it would ever reach a neutral state though. It also assumes that what we find pleasurable is static and unchanging.