This coming Wednesday at the Ideas Cafe, we are discussing the relationship among pleasures, expectations for future pleasures, and how to be content.
Originally, the title was to be about happiness but I substituted the word pleasure for happiness to direct our discussions to what philosophers would refer to "hedonistic pleasures", and not good feelings or human flourishing from intellectual pursuits, doing good for society, achievement etc.
We are talking about the pleasures from the physical senses; excitement, food and drink, luxury goods etc.
The basic issue with these pleasures is our habituation from past pleasurable experiences which cause us to raise the bar and expect a new level to excite our sense that much more in order to get the same amount of pleasure as we had the last time.
Like a drug addict, an ever increasing amount is required to achieve the same euphoric experience.
This is by definition not sustainable, causing the unavoidable fall due to disappointment from the high level of expectation that is built up over successive pleasurable episodes.
Is it possible to control our expectations and prevent it from ratcheting up each time?
Can we space out pleasures over time just so that we won't get used to it? Or is this stark budgeting of pleasures counter to the whole idea of maximizing pleasure?
Can we constantly remind us of how lucky we are compared to the less fortunate who cannot have the level of pleasures we are already tired off? Is this reminding going to get tiring too?
Can we continually find new adventures and sources of new pleasures in order to scale a different mountain each time to satisfy our quest for the new high?
Maybe we can convince ourselves that we should be content with "good enough", that what we had last time was good enough and that we really ought to enjoy that even though our senses tell us otherwise?
Is contentment possible if we subscribe to the belief that habituation is integral to our senses and that as human beings, it is our nature to respond to changes rather than a constant state of affairs?
Or, should we take the route of a lot of philosophers and demote physical pleasures as not very desirable and aim for human flourishing instead?
While some philosophers indeed live a simple life, a lot of them do indulge in physical pleasures as well. How can this be managed?
Perhaps pleasures are just sugar coated pills for future disappointment after the inevitable rise in expectations following the pleasures. Is there a ledger that is tracking our pleasures requiring us to make deposits in disappointment after withdrawals in pleasures? Do they balance out in the long run?
Are we better off not trying to have pleasure at all and have a flat line for our lives instead of the peaks of pleasure and valleys of disappointment?
Flat line, how boring! Is contentment meant to be boring? How can we be content without being bored?
And we thought we were just going to have fun!
Looking forward to your ideas and comments and see you Wednesday.
I wonder if conversation, over time, is the greatest creator of human happiness - and misery
ReplyDeleteI read "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" by Robert Louis Stevenson at the end of last year. One given cause for the horrible situation that the main character finds himself in was the desire to find a method to experience the animal pleasures of life without paying with moral guilt or conscience.
ReplyDeleteIf we were to find a biochemical (drug like) fix which could give unlimited pleasure, would it be addictive and would people cease working and desire only more passionate highs?
If we were to find a way to directly stimulate the brain with an internal superpatch or box of some kind, could people stimulate themselves beyond oblivion and onwards to death?
Would such stimulation have no edifying qualities? If we were to choose among pastimes such as doing sudoku or reading political policy journals, are some more culturally sound types of activities that can be made to be gratifying and enriching?
Must gratification have an accompanying 'opponent process' kind of painful rebound effect?
Are there 'positive addictions' as William Glasser indicates in a book with that title; or, must all addictions be harmful? What about sailing?
I understand that brain scientists have located the "pleasure center" in the brain through FMRI imaging. Laboratory rats that have been wired to stimulate this part of their brains by tapping a switch will continually tap the switch and not stop to eat, drink, or sleep. Presumably, the laboratory rates will die if the scientists did not end the experiment.
DeleteI wonder if the pleasure center functions as a motivator for us much like the other basic urges for food, shelter, and sex.
Sailing, like a lot of other pursuits are "fun" because it is "not fun" a lot of the time. It is also unpredictable due to weather, sea state, and all kinds of other variables. The variation of the different sailing experiences makes the overall pursuit interesting. On top of which, it is difficult to be good at, involving many variables that overwhelms a logical thinker's methodical approach. It also matters a lot to one's survival if not done right so that raise the stakes in the game.
Tic-tac-toe, on the other hand, is an example of something that may be easy to grasp but soon becomes predictable as well as repeatable. It also does not matter much if one screws up.
Political policy journals seems to have a lot of the qualities of being unpredictable, hard to pin a correct answer, constantly changing, and it can matter in real life. So I can see why political discussions can be absorbing. It lacks the immediacy of handling a boat in the storm but if one is involved in political change, then it should be every bit as involving and engaging.
However, I prefer sailing. Taming the elements is more satisfying for me than convincing people to change!