The assertion that there are different kinds of pleasures has been considered by various philosophers. The most detailed assertion has been made by John Stuart Mill. Mill asserts that there are classes of pleasure that human beings classify as being more valuable or desirable than others. He bases his argument on the fact that pleasures should not only be founded on quality, but also on quantity. Mill affirms that any classification based on quantity is absurd since it does not bring out the desired results. He supports his philosophy by stating that quality and quantity of pleasures are dependent on the judgment and the experience of the assessors. According to Mill, if the person judging tends to give one pleasure preference over the other then it means that it is more valuable than others, thereby falling under the category of higher pleasures. The assertion has been challenged on the grounds that a preferred pleasure is not the best, but the choice of the person making the judgment could be due to other circumstances. Mill uses the faculties of intellect and imagination to explain his point. He asserts that the pleasures guided by intellect and feelings are higher than those based on physical judgment. This assertion is grounded on the fact that higher pleasures are achievable with some level of greater amount of relinquishing what the demands of the physical pleasure may be. The foregoing assertion is brought closer to a pig’s satisfaction. The comparison is meant to show that a pig’s satisfaction is a physical event, while the appeal to a man’s intellect is a pleasure that appeals to the mind (Gibbs 32).
The credit given to Mill’s assertion is worthless if the desired purpose for the arguments is not put into consideration. In distinguishing pleasures, Mill was trying to draw a line between his understanding of utilitarianism and what Jeremy Bentham believed in. Mill desired to show that utilitarianism was not a body based on the doctrine that Bentham sought to introduce. Bentham referred to Mill’s arguments as brutal insensibility. Bentham sought to include a category of pleasure that desired to show that the quantity of all pleasures is not equal. The aforementioned standard was mainly desired to indicate that Mill’s theory was more of a revision on what Bentham advocated for. This assertion has been contracted by other philosophies derived from Plato and Aristotle. The oratorical style of Mill is the main stand that enhances the understanding of his ideology in the popular culture. Unnecessary terminologies have been inserted to qualify the statements by Mill. The fact that his argument has an origin has been a major point why it should not be considered, with much of the credit going to Mill. Francis Hutcheson’s is the main influence behind Mill’s arguments on pleasures. Mill did not anticipate the influence, but the central concern that they have on morals has been mentioned in their writings. The different types of pleasures that Mill advocates for are rooted in Plato’s understanding of utilitarianism. Plato’s assertion needs to compare the different kinds of pleasures that are found in a human being, and those pleasures are closely linked to the living styles of different persons. The bases of the assertions are derived from the different classes that are in any society (Gibbs 53).
Noble people will have a different way of perceiving pleasures as opposed to peasants. This is brought about by the different ways in which a person lives and the environment that the person lives in. It, therefore, follows that there are pleasures that will seem less painful, while others will be more pleasant. The foregoing argument is best understood in circumstances where different people of different classes live. To a person of the noble class, a pleasure will be different from that of a peasantry class. In that reasoning, Mill focused on establishing what makes one pleasure more valuable than another in a given setting. The most grateful feeling that defines a given pleasure is based on the consequences that are achieved by such pleasure. The self consciousness of an individual is the basis upon which the opportunities and experiences are furnished. Mill is in agreement with Plato in the understanding that mental pleasures are the same and often preferable. The pleasures of mind are in this case pleasures of the highest point of nature. In the consideration of Mill’s argument, it is very clear that there is a lot of avoidance of weaknesses, thus his ideology is somehow flawless. That happens to be the distinguishing feature between Plato’s argument and Bentham. Mill makes it clear that even if there are various classes of pleasures, it is not easy to state which one is more pleasant than the other. This is to put a clear dispute on the assertion that there are careful refrains between a like and a dislike in a given case (Gibbs, 41).
In the comparison of mental pleasures with physical pleasures, the latter is of a higher grade. When pleasures are of high grade they become appealing to the faculties of intellect as opposed to the dislikes and likes of an individual. The question on what makes one pleasure more important than another has formed part of Mill’s giant discussion. The most pleasant of the lives is one that the wise and the good have considered so. It, therefore, follows that life is not an issue based on the objective ways, but on the subjective mode. The wise may have a good understanding of the pleasures of life, but such is not the case when all the likes of individuals are put across in a distinct setting in the same environment. The hypothetical cases that have been used before are to the effect that being in a high grade pleasure is better than being in a low pleasure. In the least of words, Mill desired to affirm Plato’s claim that pleasant life is better and pleasurable. The distinction between the two has formed the basis for Plato’s argument, although it has been challenged with time. Mill perceives life as a denial or a sacrifice of happiness. This assertion has been challenged on the basis that a denial does not, in all circumstances, establish an inferior situation. These desires of reaching happiness provide results that do not support the existence of pleasures. That explains the fact that there could be an intermediate between pleasure and pain. This brings about the contention that not all pleasures are supposed to make an individual happy (Gibbs 34).
Bentham would agree that a person may not be genuinely happy in all types of pleasures. Mill disputed this by indicating that the content of happiness is not the struggle to solve a problem. The satisfaction of an individual’s pleasures may be a struggle that is concerned with making a person happier. It can only be understood by considering the statement that learning may not be equivalent to quenching thirst, which is a form of pleasure too. The remedying of a deficiency is different from a situation whereby pleasure is derived from achieving a virtue. The two pleasures are traceable from the growth of a child. Pleasure and pain are distinguishable from a tender age of a child whereby the child learns what it ought to like and it ought to dislike. Human beings derive higher pleasures from higher faculties. The assertion goes against the higher pleasures since they are grounded on childhood experiences and they differ from one person to another. Childhood experiences are a determinant factor of the pleasures that an individual acquires. The proper pleasure that makes the mental faculties higher is fact that devoting them to a pleasant life makes them develop fully. The main bone of contention has been to ascertain who exactly came up with the original theory on pleasures. The pleasures that humans have in common are based on the fact that they have same situations that dictate their pain (Gibbs 36).
If the arguments put across by Bentham have to be put into consideration, it is not a clear thing to establish a line of pleasures that is distinct from the rest. The pleasures analysis by Mill assumes classes’ stratification mode of analysis. The pleasures are classified in accordance to their appeal, instead of the satisfaction that they bring once entrusted in the hands of human beings. It has been immaterial regarding the classes that an individual is to adopt bearing in mind that classes emanate from the individual’s background. By classifying pleasures, Mill has opted to seek a point that is based on experiences, but experiences can be biased in some instances (Gibbs 45).
The detailed classification of pleasures by Mill has long been held to contribute to the understanding of human beings’ lives. This has been through establishing the pleasures that are most likely associated with human nature. Mill ‘s version of pleasures has been based on two modes, which include the higher pleasures and the lower pleasures. The pleasures that are produced by faculties of intelligence are classified as higher pleasures. On the same note, pleasures may be experienced through a child’s situation from birth. A child born of a noble family is considered to have different pleasures compared to a child born of a peasant. This test has not always been true since the definitions of pleasure lack a clear line of distinction. One cannot identify with ease the different types of pleasures by the reason of how they are arrived at. The cases on consideration have clearly shown that there are various cases that are not in either higher pleasures or lower pleasures categories. This makes it hard to come up with reasons why some of the events in life are not painful or do not produce pleasure. This is the main cause of opposing opinions between Mill and Bentham. It has been argued that the two philosophers have overlapping principles that are not easily distinguishable.
Works Cited
Gibbs, Benjamin. “Higher and Lower Pleasures.” Philosophy 61.235 (1986): 31-59. Print.