Discourse on Temperance
Feb. 11th, 2003 02:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jackofallgeeksPutting off my paper again (it's OK, it's not due for a week now) I take some time to think.
I'm a firm believer in self-control and temperance, and believe it's a tribute to the greatness of mandkind that we can resist our basic urges -- that is, the urge to seek pleasure and avoid pain. I was recently presented with this simple, one sentence argument: pleasure is not a bad thing. And I must say, I have to agree -- if I claimed that pleasure were a bad thing, it would mean we shound necessarily avoid it, which is not my stance. So how does one reconsile the fact that pleasure is a good thing with the idea that it must not be sought after indiscriminately?
It can be stated that the desire for pleasuree is not a weakness. And I would agree with this -- it's not a weakness, anymore than the desire to breathe is a weakness. It's natural to want both, and under 'normal' circumstances, neither one is a 'bad' thing. However, it can also be argued that the man who has trained himself to hold his breath is a stronger man than one who has not been so trained -- granted, not a better man, but a stronger one. It takes discipline in order to not breathe. Under normal circumstances, this seems like a ridiculous ability, for who would even -not- want to breathe? And yet, in certain situations, such as swimming, it is a valued skill.
Similarly, one who has train themselves to avoid pleasure is stronger than one who has not -- not because the other is less of a person in some way, but because it is not an easy feat, and because it take discipline. Under 'normal' circumstances, one wouldn't need to avoid pleasure. However, anything which controls you may be seen as a weakness, and so the ability to avoid pleasure, particularly when that pleasure can lead to harm, is a particularly useful skill.
Furthermore, one who has trained themself to overcome their natural repugnance to pain is similarly gifted. Normally, one would not want to subject oneself to pain, but the ability and willingness to endure pain for the sake of a greater good is noble, indeed.
As such, both the ability to resist pleasure and that to endure pain are not ridiculous fancies, but a measure of the control one has over oneself. Neither pleasure nor pain is good or bad - they are sensations which our bodies experience in order to inform us about our environment. The fact that man has a will and can decide how to react to these sensations is what makes him different from beasts.
Note, I do not claim to be so trained, and even if I did, I've already said it doesn't make one person 'more human' than another. I do claim this to be an ideal for which one should strive, and so it is a measure of the sort of person I would like to be.
I'm a firm believer in self-control and temperance, and believe it's a tribute to the greatness of mandkind that we can resist our basic urges -- that is, the urge to seek pleasure and avoid pain. I was recently presented with this simple, one sentence argument: pleasure is not a bad thing. And I must say, I have to agree -- if I claimed that pleasure were a bad thing, it would mean we shound necessarily avoid it, which is not my stance. So how does one reconsile the fact that pleasure is a good thing with the idea that it must not be sought after indiscriminately?
It can be stated that the desire for pleasuree is not a weakness. And I would agree with this -- it's not a weakness, anymore than the desire to breathe is a weakness. It's natural to want both, and under 'normal' circumstances, neither one is a 'bad' thing. However, it can also be argued that the man who has trained himself to hold his breath is a stronger man than one who has not been so trained -- granted, not a better man, but a stronger one. It takes discipline in order to not breathe. Under normal circumstances, this seems like a ridiculous ability, for who would even -not- want to breathe? And yet, in certain situations, such as swimming, it is a valued skill.
Similarly, one who has train themselves to avoid pleasure is stronger than one who has not -- not because the other is less of a person in some way, but because it is not an easy feat, and because it take discipline. Under 'normal' circumstances, one wouldn't need to avoid pleasure. However, anything which controls you may be seen as a weakness, and so the ability to avoid pleasure, particularly when that pleasure can lead to harm, is a particularly useful skill.
Furthermore, one who has trained themself to overcome their natural repugnance to pain is similarly gifted. Normally, one would not want to subject oneself to pain, but the ability and willingness to endure pain for the sake of a greater good is noble, indeed.
As such, both the ability to resist pleasure and that to endure pain are not ridiculous fancies, but a measure of the control one has over oneself. Neither pleasure nor pain is good or bad - they are sensations which our bodies experience in order to inform us about our environment. The fact that man has a will and can decide how to react to these sensations is what makes him different from beasts.
Note, I do not claim to be so trained, and even if I did, I've already said it doesn't make one person 'more human' than another. I do claim this to be an ideal for which one should strive, and so it is a measure of the sort of person I would like to be.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-02-11 12:27 pm (UTC)One of the best examples I can think of for this - and I know I've posted this in my journal - is Van Veen, my favorite Nabokovian male. He is in love with Ada, his life-long sweetheart, but he is very sexually attracted to her sister Lucette. The latter woman ends up throwing herself at Van multiple times during a period of terrible separation between Van and Ada, during which Van thought he'd never see Ada again, but he resists Lucette's advances time and agian. I think that's marvelous. I think it's one of the things that makes me love him most; because he held out for the woman he loved despite the fact that he was uncertain as to the tenure of their seperation, and despire temptation for instant pleasure.
Mouse, in "The Matrix", makes the comment that "To deny our own impulses is to deny the very thing that makes us human", but I would tend to disagree with this. Let us consider the five senses: let us say that vision and hearing are in a seperate category from the other three, in that they can function at a distance from the thing being percieved. Taste, touch, and smell, however, usually require proximity, even intimacy with the object percieved. The sheer physicality associated with these senses makes them more a part of the human "reptile" brain, thereby associated more with the animal side of humanity. Sight and hearing are removed from this in that, while sight and hearing can be powerful stimulants, usually seeing something is never enough. We are driven to touch, taste what we see; in order to be intimate with it, to derive pleasure from it. Even I, an aestheticist, am not so much driven by a desire to see beauty as to touch it once I have seen it. As one of my favorite Nabokov quotes states, "...or else was it the anguish that always accompanied his hopeless yearning to extract something from beauty, to hold it still for an instant, to do something with it - no matter what, provided there were some kind of contact, that somehow, no matter how, could quench that yearning?"
Then there is also the impermenance of pleasure to be considered. John Locke once said, "For who is content is happy. But as soon as any new uneasiness comes in, this Happiness is disturb'd, and we are set afresh on work in the pursuit of Happiness." Pleasure functions in the same way. Gorge yourself on the freshest, most tender steak you can find, and you'll be satisfied for a time, but you'll be hungry again later. Go out and have sex with all the beautiful people you can manage to tempt into your bed...but the orgasm is painfully fleeting, as are meaningless sexual relationships, and in the end, you will be left lonely and unsatisfied.
I think that we, as humans, have been given the gift of higher minds to be able to overcome our base instincts and drives for pleasure in order to find more permenant happinesses - a chance for real meaning in our lives.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.