4 ms·

I think making the distinction between 'reducing the unpleasure' vs having pleasure is an artificial thought, not more than a philosophical idea. We strive for

I think making the distinction between 'reducing the unpleasure' vs having pleasure is an artificial thought, not more than a philosophical idea. We strive for something, which is building up tension, and once we are able to do it, there is a relief of that tension, which feels pleasurable. We do this repeatedly until we die. A footballer strives to score a goal. As long as there is none, frustration is felt. When they score, that frustration is replaced by intense happiness. Or am I wrong?

curiousllama 3y ago
Your footballer could also remove the frustration by playing defense. In your analogy, having pleasure is scoring; reducing unpleasure is finding a new way to contribute to victory
spandrew 3y ago
I'm not sure if you're wrong. What about boredom? Boredom isn't pleasure, or unpleasure. There could be some unpleasure associated with it, or it could manifest in daydreaming if the boredom is a nice reprise from a busy schedule. Anyone who's been to a nil, uneventful football match has felt this.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
solumos 3y ago
Imagine the following scenario: A footballer strives to score a goal. During the game, the footballer collides with an opponent and hits his head. He has a concussion and won't be able to play for the rest of the game, and frustration is felt. Is this different from the scenario you described? Is the frustration in the presence of unpleasure the same as frustration in the absence of pleasure?
maxbendick 3y ago
I agree that would feel pretty artificial, if we understand it the utilitarian way. But Wilhelm Reich doesn't really follow a utilitarian calculus. I.e., for him pleasure is not the equal yet opposite of unpleasure. Rather, the calculus is one of material tension and release, or intensity, which I think you get at quite well in your example. And yeah, if Marx, Bataille, and Spinoza are called philosophers, I guess we can call this a philosophical thought as well. Though it certainly reaches beyond the bounds of philosophy into psychoanalysis, biology, and cybernetics.

curiousllama 3y ago

Your footballer could also remove the frustration by playing defense. In your analogy, having pleasure is scoring; reducing unpleasure is finding a new way to contribute to victory

spandrew 3y ago

I'm not sure if you're wrong. What about boredom? Boredom isn't pleasure, or unpleasure. There could be some unpleasure associated with it, or it could manifest in daydreaming if the boredom is a nice reprise from a busy schedule. Anyone who's been to a nil, uneventful football match has felt this.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

solumos 3y ago

Imagine the following scenario: A footballer strives to score a goal. During the game, the footballer collides with an opponent and hits his head. He has a concussion and won't be able to play for the rest of the game, and frustration is felt. Is this different from the scenario you described? Is the frustration in the presence of unpleasure the same as frustration in the absence of pleasure?

maxbendick 3y ago

I agree that would feel pretty artificial, if we understand it the utilitarian way. But Wilhelm Reich doesn't really follow a utilitarian calculus. I.e., for him pleasure is not the equal yet opposite of unpleasure. Rather, the calculus is one of material tension and release, or intensity, which I think you get at quite well in your example. And yeah, if Marx, Bataille, and Spinoza are called philosophers, I guess we can call this a philosophical thought as well. Though it certainly reaches beyond the bounds of philosophy into psychoanalysis, biology, and cybernetics.