Talk:Pleasure

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pleasure article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Psychology High‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Neuroscience High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy High‑importance

	Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from [nil this version] of [nil Kindness] was copied or moved into Pleasure. The former page's [ history] now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

On creating article

This article used to point to Happiness. Pleasure is distinct and important concept -- see definition in article. Vir 16:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Needs Work

Seems like there should be a larger, more distinct article on Pleasure. An end of some sort. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.157.195.216 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 26 March 2006

Having just tried to edit "Pain" I find the subjective nature of pleasure to be understated in this entry. SmithBlue 12:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question: is pleasure an emotion or a feeling? Is happiness a mood, rather than either of the above? -- The Anome 21:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

good question I am baffled.--Dwarf Kirlston 16:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the distinction between happiness and pleasure is one of time frame. Whereas happiness can be prolonged, even under sometimes unfavorable or displeasurable circumstances - pleasure seems to indicate an immediate sensory response. So essentially, happiness is a mood - pleasure is conditional on the existence of stimuli. Or something, IMHO. For Philosophy, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is always a good place to start. This article in particular should be a good read for those interested.Kelden (talk • contribs). 03:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Finding Sources

Searching "main source of pleasure" gets 7,340 ghits. 293 on google books, 49 on google news (all time), 70 on google scholar--Keerllston 15:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

..searching just "pleasure" = several million. And most of them only discuss pleasure in relation to, predominantly, sexual pleasure. Maybe someone with a philosophy background could help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinderbloog (talk • contribs) 16:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm cautious

I am no "expert" on the subject, but I was able to expand the Activities section somewhat. However, I've decided to place it here for review. If anyone sees fit(and can pick out appropriate references), I welcome them to add it. On the other hand, I also welcome its rejection. You may view the expansion here. It needs expanding. Figured I'd get a jump on it. Wakanda's Black Panther! (contribs) 05:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Opposite

I suggest we remove the reference to pleasure as the "absolute opposite" of pain. As any masochist will tell you, pain and pleasure can exist simultaneously, complement or cause each other. Pleasure is not the opposite of pain. If you insist on listing an opposite, apathy would be more appropriate. Thoughts? Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing no objections, I will remove it at this time. Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of those things seem like the exact opposite of pleasure. DISpleasure is probably what you want. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.193.50.224 (talk) 03:24, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Issue resolved... this page needs help to achieve greatness.

This page WILL achieve greatness, someday... mark my words. But first we need more sources. I will improve upon above and place in better format. But first, I must go to the library and get some citations of text. I took the liberty of resolving the issue of pain and pleasure's relationship by adding that pleasure may be defined in terms of a sensation that people will strive to repeatedly achieve. To the library! --Melune (talk) 22:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

possible trouble here,, I just did a quick search through the library's web page inventory. Nothing usable besides (possibly) an essay entitled "The Pursuit Of Pleasure," that and the fact the library is currently closed until tomorrow. Melune (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 22:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Experts please!!!

I've done what I can, but I am neither Neuroscientist nor Philosopher... PhD's, MSc's, Professors and University Deans: Please help!!! Jubilee♫clipman 01:50, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A great website to use to gather sources and do research to expand philosophy articles such as this is: [1], in this case there is specifically an article at [2]. I suggest that anyone who has spare time read there to start adding citations and facts, theories, etc. Shanata (talk) 14:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution and survival

I am no expert, and so I won't make this myself, but someone could mention that pleasure is contributing to the survival of individual creatures and species as whole. Like pain, pleasure acts as a sanction - only a positive one. While pain punishes and warns of danger, pleasure rewards positive actions, like eating and breeding, and urges the creature to carry on these positive habits. If some expert on the subject confirms this, I think this should be added in the article. Kotiwalo (talk) 12:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely true; what we need is a proper source to attribute it to. Looie496 (talk) 00:38, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can this video be used as evidence on the debate in the article of whether animals experience pleasure?

Can this video be used as evidence on the debate in the article of whether animals experience pleasure? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOHriDR8F8o I know it might be intended as humor, but it's very obvious from seeing it that the turtle is experiencing pleasure. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 14:50, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Humorlessly I say no, that would be OR. Looie496 (talk) 16:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of definition

All definitions on the page, or found on Google by “define:pleasure” are circular reasoning. Either directly, through defining it by using a word that is just another word for “pleasure”. Or trough its (just as undefined) opposite, or other words for it.

So we still lack a real definition. Can anyone please elaborate, and provide a real definition?
(Or until then, state that no scientific definition is known.)

Thank you.
— 88.77.140.123 (talk) 18:32, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Pleasure" is a common-language term, not a scientific term. For terms of this sort, the best type of definition is a discussion of the ways that people use the word. It would be possible to give a scientific definition, but since it would not correspond precisely to the way people speak, it would be misleading. I'm not saying that the article is perfect as written, just that there is a limit to what you can hope for in this regard. Looie496 (talk) 03:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

physical pleasure

Physical Pleasure describes the broad physical state which humans and other animals percieve as positive and worth-seeking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soumyajit basu chowdhury (talk • contribs) 09:44, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

is pleasure not a physical sensation ?

Is pleasure only a mental state not a physical sensation what about pleasant sensation I get on my tongue while eating tasty food or on the skin while taking a bath etc but here it is only described as broad class of mental states. Please respond to my question and if I am right please make a change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soumyajit basu chowdhury (talk • contribs) 10:13, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your brain's interpreting those sensations, so it's mental, not physical. Graham87 13:07, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

original editor of this article?

is graham87 the original editor of this article pleasure — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.62.31.185 (talk) 06:33, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, as you can see in the page history. Graham87 13:23, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

so why you are responding

so why are you responding and the original editor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soumyajit basu chowdhury (talk • contribs) 04:32, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really understand your question, but I'm responding because the page is on my watchlist. Also, who the original editor of an article is is irrelevant on Wikipedia. Graham87 07:43, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Schultz says money, like food, may be pleasurable.

"...not all rewards are pleasurable, (e.g., money)." That's not true. At noon I have food and money in my pocket. At 4 pm I enjoy consuming both. At noon is the food pleasurable? Is reading a book pleasurable? going to a bookstore? Buying a book? (Well, I haven't seen many rodents or monkeys at Barnes and Noble.) But I know lot's of people who enjoy books, and buying books, human infants excepted. Spending money may be pleasurable just like consuming food may be pleasurable. Should we refer to the activity or the thing? — βox73 (৳alk) 00:53, 9 January 2017 (UTC) fix βox73 (৳alk) 00:57, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Section "Philosophy"/"Historical views" and how to organize the content

I am working on new content on the application of the concept of pleasure in other theories, a rough outline can be found at User:Phlsph7/Pleasure-applications. I thought it would be a good idea to discuss here how to organize the content already here and the new content into different sections. My idea was roughly the following: the existing section "Theories of pleasure" deals with the nature of pleasure; a new section "Applications" would deal with the role of pleasure in other theories (like hedonism); the section "Historical views" (or maybe "History of philosophy") would deal with how the theories in these and other sections developed or with the ideas of particular theorists or schools of thought.

Editor Teishin renamed the section "Historical views" to "Philosophy". Another way to arrange the content would be to follow his/her lead and to add the content being developed under the heading "Applications" to the "Philosophy" section. I would prefer the first option since the label "Philosophy" is rather vague and the alternative organization is more specific to the content. But there may be other ways to organize the content that I haven't considered yet, so it might be good to get some opinions on how to proceed. Phlsph7 (talk) 05:40, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Given the importance of pleasure to philosophical hedonism it would seem to me that any article on pleasure should have a discussion of pleasure's role in philosophy. Naming something "historical views" implies that those views are no longer held. There are plenty of utilitarians and modern Epicureans who currently hold these views. Teishin (talk) 14:03, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have a point. I've added the new sections to the section "Philosophy" and made a subsection for the history. I'm not fully satisfied with this solution but the proposed alternative also had its flaws. Phlsph7 (talk) 04:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that the new content in this section in "Motivation and behavior" is psychology, not philosophy. I suggest that the Philosophy section should be a short summary of the central part of the hedonism article starting with "Ethical hedonism" and ending with "History". For what is in "History" perhaps we should not present it as history, but instead mostly a bunch of links to major hedonist schools of thought. We only need enough content here to convey that pleasure is awfully important in philosophy and if the user wants to know more they should go to hedonism. Teishin (talk) 19:11, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not very happy with the history section either since the selection of topics is incomplete and a little random. The content in the section "Motivation and behavior" is also treated in philosophy, but I think you are right that it is closer to psychology. I moved it to its own section for now. It could be added to a new section on psychology once we have more content on that. Phlsph7 (talk) 05:08, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Phlsph7 your continued work on this article is sizably improving it. The reorganization to create a Psychology section seems to be a good idea. Teishin (talk) 15:10, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, the feedback is appreciated. Phlsph7 (talk) 02:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More information on how it feels to have pleasure

This article doesn't seem to elaborate on what it feels like to have pleasure, it literally just says it feels good and that's it. Maybe it could be expanded? Lallint⟫⟫⟫Talk 20:00, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Other characterizations in this context found in the article concern the contrast between sensory and non-sensory pleasures, that it comes in degrees, its contrast with pain, and its relation to desire satisfaction. Details on the essential aspects of pleasure, i.e. what all pleasure experiences have in common, are found in the section "Theories of pleasure". This includes, for example, the question whether pleasure is experienced as a sensation or as an attitude towards a sensation. Phlsph7 (talk) 06:13, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Enjoyableness" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Enjoyableness has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 14 § Enjoyableness until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 20:15, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Libitum" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Libitum has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 14 § Libitum until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 20:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]