Book 10 / Chapter 4
Paragraph 1 - The Nature of Pleasure and Movement
Explanation - Part By Part
"What pleasure is, or what kind of thing it is, will become plainer if we take up the question aga from the beginning."
Here, Aristotle is signaling a shift in his discussion about pleasure. He intends to revisit and clarify what exactly pleasure is and its nature. By "taking up the question again from the beginning," he is preparing to analyze pleasure more deeply and systematically, so its essence and characteristics become clearer. It's like saying, "Let’s go back to the starting point so we can fully understand this concept."
"Seeing seems to be at any moment complete, for it does not lack anything which coming into being later will complete its form; and pleasure also seems to be of this nature."
In this part, Aristotle is drawing a comparison between the act of seeing and the experience of pleasure. When you see something, the act of seeing is complete in itself at that very moment—it doesn't require anything additional or future events to finish or perfect it. Similarly, Aristotle suggests that pleasure has this same characteristic: it is whole and fully realized in the moment it is experienced, without needing something else to make it complete later.
"For it is a whole, and at no time can one find a pleasure whose form will be completed if the pleasure lasts longer. For this reason, too, it is not a movement."
Aristotle is making a strong distinction between pleasure and movement (or process). He argues that pleasure is inherently complete in itself—it doesn’t require more time or additional steps to reach its "full form." In other words, pleasure doesn't have a "goal" it's working toward like a process would. For example, building something (like a temple) is a movement or process because it happens in stages and isn’t complete until the final structure is finished. But with pleasure, there's no such progression; it exists fully and completely in each moment it is experienced, without needing completion through time.
So, Aristotle is saying pleasure is not like a task you work on or something that needs additional input to "become whole." It’s self-contained and instantaneous in a way that makes it fundamentally different from processes that unfold over time.
"For every movement (e.g. that of building) takes time and is for the sake of an end, and is complete when it has made what it aims at. It is complete, therefore, only in the whole time or at that final moment."
This part talks about how any movement or activity, like building something, is a process that takes time and is done with a specific purpose or goal in mind. The activity isn’t considered "finished" or "complete" until it achieves the goal it was aiming for—like when a building is fully constructed. Completion doesn’t happen during each step along the way, but only at the final point when the entire purpose is fulfilled.
"In their parts and during the time they occupy, all movements are incomplete, and are different in kind from the whole movement and from each other. For the fitting together of the stones is different from the fluting of the column, and these are both different from the making of the temple; and the making of the temple is complete (for it lacks nothing with a view to the end proposed), but the making of the base or of the triglyph is incomplete; for each is the making of only a part."
Aristotle is explaining that when we look at activities or processes like building something, the individual steps or stages involved are incomplete on their own. For example, when constructing a temple, the act of fitting the stones together is one step, and carving the columns (fluting) is another, but neither of these steps represents the completion of the full project—the finished temple. Each action is just a part of the whole process, and each part is different in nature (e.g., carving is not the same as assembling stones). The temple itself becomes "complete" only when all these steps have been finished and the intended goal is achieved. Therefore, the parts of a movement or process are incomplete until they contribute to the final result.
"They differ in kind, then, and it is not possible to find at any and every time a movement complete in form, but if at all, only in the whole time. So, too, in the case of walking and all other movements."
Aristotle is emphasizing that movements, such as walking or any activity that involves progression toward a goal, cannot be considered "complete" at just any random moment within the process. Movements are only complete when the entire action or process has reached its intended conclusion—its end goal. For instance, in walking from one place to another, the movement is only fully complete when the destination is reached. While in progress, the action remains unfinished and is merely a part of the whole process. This is a fundamental contrast with pleasure, which he is about to explore in its completeness at any given moment, unlike movements that depend on their end result.
"For if locomotion is a movement from to there, it, too, has differences in kind-flying, walking, leaping, and so on. And not only so, but in walking itself there are such differences; for the whence and whither are not the same in the whole racecourse and in a part of it, nor in one part and in another, nor is it the same thing to traverse this line and that; for one traverses not only a line but one which is in a place, and this one is in a different place from that."
In this part, Aristotle is discussing the nature of movement, specifically locomotion—the act of moving from one place to another. He highlights that movement itself can vary in form or kind. For example, walking, flying, or leaping are all different types of movement. Even within a single type of movement, like walking, there are variations depending on the starting point ("whence") and the destination ("whither").
He points out that moving across an entire racecourse is not the same as moving across just part of it. Likewise, crossing one specific section of a path is different from crossing another section. Each segment exists in its own unique context or location, making each act of movement distinct.
This is part of his broader argument contrasting pleasure with movement. Movements, he says, are incomplete until they reach their endpoint (e.g., when you finish walking from one place to another). In contrast, pleasure is complete in itself—there’s no "unfinished" state to a moment of pleasure. This distinction is important for Aristotle as he builds his understanding of what pleasure is and how it differs from other activities or processes.
"We have discussed movement with precision in another work, but it seems that it is not complete at any and every time, but that the many movements are incomplete and different in kind, since the whence and whither give them their form."
In this part, Aristotle is emphasizing that movement (or motion) is a process that is inherently incomplete at any specific point in time. Movements have a starting point ("whence") and an endpoint ("whither"), and these define their nature and purpose. For example, if you're building something, walking somewhere, or performing any action requiring progression, those movements are only fully realized or complete when the intended goal is reached. Along the way, the motion is fragmented into incomplete stages or parts, each distinct in nature depending on the specific piece of the journey or task at hand. Essentially, movement isn't a "whole" or finished thing at every moment – it only becomes truly complete when the end goal or purpose it works toward is achieved.
"But of pleasure the form is complete at any and every time. Plainly, then, pleasure and movement must be different from each other, and pleasure must be one of the things that are whole and complete."
Aristotle is distinguishing pleasure from physical movement or processes like walking, building, or any action that takes time to unfold. Movements are incomplete at various stages and only achieve their full purpose or "form" when they reach their end goal (e.g., when a temple is finished or a walk is completed).
In contrast, Aristotle argues that pleasure is whole and complete at any given moment. It doesn’t require time to reach its "end" because it isn’t part of a process or sequence that builds toward completion. Instead, the experience of pleasure is self-contained and fully realized in the moment it occurs. This is why he concludes that pleasure is fundamentally different from movement—it exists as a complete state in the present rather than something that develops over time.
"This would seem to be the case, too, from the fact that it is not possible to move otherwise than in time, but it is possible to be pleased; for that which takes place in a moment is a whole."
Aristotle is drawing a distinction between "movement" (or action that involves change) and "pleasure." Movement, like building something or walking, always takes time and involves a process that unfolds step by step. It isn't complete at any particular moment until the entire task is finished or the goal is reached. For example, when you're building a temple, you don't have the complete temple at any one stage of the work—it's only finished in its entirety at the end.
Pleasure, however, is different. Unlike movement, pleasure can be complete in a single moment. It doesn't need a sequence of events or time to unfold in order to be whole. When you experience pleasure, it is fully present and whole at that very instant—it doesn't depend on a future outcome or a process to be complete. This is why Aristotle says that "it is possible to be pleased" even in a single moment, whereas movement is something that necessarily requires time to occur.