I know we did not discuss Mill in his entirety, but after the brief discussion of the different "levels" of happiness, I began thinking about how humans to sometimes go to fulfill the "lower pleasures" rather than striving for the higher ones. This thought lead to other internal dialogue which ultimately lead me to the conclusion that one person's "higher pleasure" could be considered another person's "lower pleasure" or vice versa.
Granted the portion of Mill's Utilitarianism essay containing the statement "it is better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied" is not in our book, the statement came up in class towards the end which launched my thought process in regards to happiness. After much research, I found the portion of Mill's essay where he states that "a pleasure is of higher quality if people would choose it over a different pleasure even if it is accompanied by discomfort, and if they would not trade it for a greater amount of the other pleasure." With that definition of "higher pleasure," one can easily deduct that one person's "higher pleasure" could be another person's "lower pleasure" or vice versa.
The example used in class of a homeless person not being able to gain knowledge of philosophy is fairly accurate. However, saying that the knowledge of philosophy is a "higher pleasure" is strictly subjective. Given the option of food, the homeless person would most likely choose it over learning about philosophy even if it means he would have to dig through the trash, fulfilling Mill's definition of "higher pleasure." While knowledge of philosophy may seem like a "higher pleasure" due to its long lasting fulfillment, it is not necessarily a "higher pleasure" in all cases. Therefore, the concept of "higher pleasure" is in fact subjective and varies from person to person.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yeah, the whole "higher pleasure" idea was really vague. It is so contingent on a human being who has all the resources afforded to them and will live a long and healthy life. While that may be ideal, many people don't find themselves in that situation. As for the homeless person example if they were literally dying of starvation their only goal would be to survive so I think a full meal would be an extreme source of pleasure. I think Mill's concept of "higher pleasure" works for a society without scarcity but in practicality it has several different meanings.
ReplyDeleteWith the homeless man and the food though, I think Mill would still argue that his pleasure eating food is not a highest pleasure. Everyone must have food to survive, and the pleasure of eating it is what keeps us living. I'm not sure, but Mill might consider this one of the basest pleasures, since just eating food is a need that is necessary for life and doesn't bring any other pleasure than that. On the other hand, maybe learning how to cook well would be a higher pleasure. A chef takes the basic desire of a person's need to eat and chooses to make food that is not only necessary to eat for living, but is also made in a way that offers more than just the simple pleasure of eating. While a person could just be happy with the basic getting by of eating whatever they can find, I think the higher pleasure would be postponing the immediate gratification of having food for the pleasure one can get out of taking the time and effort to prepare a great meal. I think Mill would argue that in both cases eating brings the same base pleasure, but the happiness got out of it is different.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Brendan. This is something that I discussed with Doctor J after class. I still think Mill views hunger and thirst as lower pleasures because they represent those appetites which can easily be satiated. I know that the example given in class was to make him choose between a cupcake and learning philosophy. But what if the choice was between a cupcake and a job? He would choose the job, as we all would, because having a job would provide him with an income to get off the streets and buy all the cupcakes he wanted. Higher pleasures are labeled so because they have a lasting sense that can provide someone with further pleasures, such as income and security from a job. Lower pleasures only satisfy the immediate, here and now desires. That is how, at least in the way I view Mill's argument, there can be distinct higher and lower pleasures that are true for all.
ReplyDelete