Higher Pleasures: Unique to Human Beings
Are Higher Pleasures Unique to Human Beings?
John Stuart Mill argues in Utilitarianism that higher pleasures are unique to human beings. Higher pleasures are those pleasures that require some minimum of cognitive capacities to enjoy. More specifically, higher pleasures are intellectual pleasures while lower pleasures are sensual pleasures. Mill argues that animals are not capable of experiencing higher pleasures because animals are not aware of their higher facilities; animals lack the conscious ability to be curious, to achieve a sense of self-worth from volunteering, or to hold a deep and intellectual conversation. Mill successfully argues in Utilitarianism that higher pleasures are not only distinct and unique to human beings, but are also more desirable and valuable than lower pleasures because human beings have higher facilities for happiness. “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig dissatisfied,” (pg 18.) Mill uses this example because human beings have experienced both higher and lower pleasures, and would not willingly switch from a life of higher pleasures to a life of lower pleasures. Through controlled experiences, Griffen and Speck argue in New Evidence of Animal Consciousness that animals do possess some form of primary consciousness enabling them to experience these lower pleasures that Mill describes. Intellectual pleasures may be unique to humans, but sensual pleasures are now being examined and documented in animals. How do we, as humans, know with certainty that higher pleasures are more desirable and valuable than lower pleasures? Mill argues that higher pleasures are superior to lower pleasures with the following example, human beings know both sides of the question, while pigs only know their side of the question. Human beings and animals have two very different ideas of happiness and content. “It is indisputable that the being whose capacities of enjoyment are low, has the greatest chance of having them fully
John Stuart Mill argues in Utilitarianism that higher pleasures are unique to human beings. Higher pleasures are those pleasures that require some minimum of cognitive capacities to enjoy. More specifically, higher pleasures are intellectual pleasures while lower pleasures are sensual pleasures. Mill argues that animals are not capable of experiencing higher pleasures because animals are not aware of their higher facilities; animals lack the conscious ability to be curious, to achieve a sense of self-worth from volunteering, or to hold a deep and intellectual conversation. Mill successfully argues in Utilitarianism that higher pleasures are not only distinct and unique to human beings, but are also more desirable and valuable than lower pleasures because human beings have higher facilities for happiness. “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig dissatisfied,” (pg 18.) Mill uses this example because human beings have experienced both higher and lower pleasures, and would not willingly switch from a life of higher pleasures to a life of lower pleasures. Through controlled experiences, Griffen and Speck argue in New Evidence of Animal Consciousness that animals do possess some form of primary consciousness enabling them to experience these lower pleasures that Mill describes. Intellectual pleasures may be unique to humans, but sensual pleasures are now being examined and documented in animals. How do we, as humans, know with certainty that higher pleasures are more desirable and valuable than lower pleasures? Mill argues that higher pleasures are superior to lower pleasures with the following example, human beings know both sides of the question, while pigs only know their side of the question. Human beings and animals have two very different ideas of happiness and content. “It is indisputable that the being whose capacities of enjoyment are low, has the greatest chance of having them fully