2 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: Questions about Richard Price and desires.
Surely I can get pleasure from shit that I have no desire for, right?
He's not claiming that this is false. Price's assertion is this: if you desire something, then obtaining it will (at least typically) give you pleasure. The converse (if you don't desire something, obtaining it will *not* give you pleasure) is something he doesn't argue for, because, as you note, it's obviously false.
The point he *does* argue for, which is that we desire things like fame, knowledge, welfare for a friend, and so on not because we think they will bring us pleasure (imagine saying to a friend "I hope you ace that job interview - it will bring me lots of pleasure, you see, which is why I desire it!") but rather for more principled reasons. Of course, because we desire these things, when they obtain, they will bring us pleasure, but that's just a secondary characteristic of them.
Comment by GrandPappyDuPlenty at 10/01/2015 at 06:16 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I read him as claiming that desire must be explicable independently of the pleasure we get when obtain what we desire. So, understanding what's going on with the pleasure is parasitic on understanding what's going on with the desire. I *think* that's compatible with what you say about desire bringing us pleasure for more principled reasons - does that sound right, or am I misunderstanding you?