Book 7 / Chapter 14
Paragraph 3 - The Complexity of Pleasure
Explanation - Part By Part
"There is no one thing that is always pleasant, because our nature is not simple but there is another element in us as well, inasmuch as we are perishable creatures, so that if the one element does something, this is unnatural to the other nature, and when the two elements are evenly balanced, what is done seems neither painful nor pleasant; for if the nature of anything were simple, the same action would always be most pleasant to it."
Aristotle is saying here that humans do not experience one single thing as always pleasant because our nature is complex and made up of different elements. On the one hand, we have a part of ourselves that seeks higher, enduring goods (like reason and intellectual fulfillment), but on the other hand, we are also physical beings with temporary, changing needs and desires. These different parts of our nature can conflict with one another. For example, something that satisfies our physical urges might not align with what is good for our intellectual or moral nature.
When these two aspects of ourselves — the higher and the physical — are in balance, actions or experiences often feel neutral rather than clearly pleasant or painful. However, if our nature were simple — not divided like this — the same experiences or actions would consistently bring us the highest pleasure because they would completely align with who we are. For Aristotle, this reflection highlights the complexity of human beings compared to, say, divine beings, whose nature is simple and unified.
"This is why God always enjoys a single and simple pleasure; for there is not only an activity of movement but an activity of immobility, and pleasure is found more in rest than in movement."
Aristotle is contrasting the nature of human beings with that of God to highlight a key difference in how pleasure is experienced. For human beings, pleasure often comes from action, change, or movement because our nature is complex and tied to being perishable, meaning we are constantly driven by needs and desires that require motion or effort to be satisfied. However, Aristotle posits that God, being a being of perfect simplicity and permanence, experiences a higher, purer form of pleasure—not tied to movement or change but instead rooted in immobility, or a state of unchanging completeness. This type of pleasure is found in a state of rest or perfection, free from the restless striving that characterizes human life.
In essence, Aristotle is suggesting that the ultimate form of pleasure is not in chasing or obtaining but in being—a stable, unchanging fulfillment that is beyond the conditions of human experience.
"But 'change in all things is sweet', as the poet says, because of some vice; for as it is the vicious man that is changeable, so the nature that needs change is vicious; for it is not simple nor good."
This part touches upon the idea that the desire for constant change and novelty often stems not from virtue or goodness but from some kind of flaw (or vice) in one's character. Aristotle is referring to the saying, "Change in all things is sweet," to point out that those who are unsettled and perpetually seek change are usually not living in harmony with a stable and virtuous nature. A virtuous person is more balanced and doesn't constantly require shifts or stimulation to feel content, whereas a "vicious" or flawed personality might constantly crave change, as their nature isn't simple or aligned with the good.
Aristotle contrasts this restless desire for change with what he views as a more ideal state: simplicity and stability. To him, a person whose character is virtuous and uncomplicated will find satisfaction without needing to jump from one thing to another. The implication is that being changeable or restless is a sign of imbalance, imperfection, or even moral deficiency.
"We have now discussed continence and incontinence, and pleasure and pain, both what each is and in what sense some of them are good and others bad; it remains to speak of friendship."
Aristotle is wrapping up his discussion on self-control (continence) and lack of self-control (incontinence), as well as the nature of pleasure and pain. He has examined what these things are, how they manifest, and how some types of pleasure and pain can be considered either good or bad depending on the context. Now, he signals a shift: the next topic he will explore is friendship, which is a critical subject in his broader discussion of ethics and living a good life. Friendship, for Aristotle, isn't just personal—it has deep ethical and social implications, tying into what it means to live well as a human being.