Versión en español

In this text I try to answer two very related questions: “Is there a symmetry between suffering and enjoyment?” and “Can suffering be compensated with enjoyment?”

Investigating the way in which we respond to these questions is very relevant, since we may have biases or blindness that are encouraging to make bad decisions, such as the survivorship bias. By better understanding and evaluating suffering and enjoyment we can more easily minimize suffering and maximize enjoyment, as well as compensate for bad experiences, if such a thing were possible.

As a summary of the ideas presented here, I believe that suffering can hardly be compensated with pleasure. I think that most of the time (or even every time), when we believe that we accept a little suffering to achieve greater pleasure later (or before), in reality what we are doing mainly is to accept a little suffering to avoid greater suffering. For example:

We do not eat just for pleasure, but to prevent hunger. The fundamental thing about a meal is to calm hunger.

We do not have sex solely for pleasure, but to avoid the pain caused by the frustration of unresolved sexual tension.

We do not look for a companion just for being happy together, but also for not being sad and lonely.

We do not go on vacation once a year to a distant country only to enjoy new experiences, exotic foods and paradisiacal places, but to avoid the boredom and frustration of staying in the usual city, always doing the same.

In my opinion, the reason for this is that pain and suffering are very relevant, while pleasure and happiness are not.

In what follows I will use the words “pleasure” and “enjoyment” as synonyms (of positive experiences), in the same way that “pain” and “suffering” will mean the same thing (negative experiences). The differences between physical and psychic pleasure; and physical and psychic pain, are not considered relevant here.

Are pleasure and pain values ​​of a single axis? How many axes of experience are there?

It is common to mentally represent pleasure and pain respectively with positive and negative values of the same axis (a single dimension). While this metaphor has some meaning and descriptive value, in other respects it is wrong.

To complete it, we can say that pleasure and pain are also in a way like sugar and salt. Sugar and salt are flavors that we could describe as “opposites” and that, however, can exist at the same time. That is, we should talk about two axes (with positive values), not just one (with positive and negative values).

Although we are accustomed to our experiences being both positive and negative, we could imagine a world or a type of sentient being for which only negative experiences existed, or much more interesting, that only positive experiences existed, as proposed by David Pearce in his “gradients of bliss“.

We can also imagine worlds or beings for which all experiences were neutral, and even, forcing a little imagination, worlds or beings that do not have two, but three or more types of experiences, which correspond to three or more axes.

Is there a symmetry between pleasure and pain?

Pleasure and pain are intuitively symmetrical in the sense of being contrary: we seek the former, but we try to avoid the latter. But in some aspects we can find lack of symmetry. The following are some cases of lack of symmetry between pleasure and pain.

1.- Different cost or difficulty (probably related to entropy and the second law of thermodynamics)

If a sentient living being that we know well (animals) were to move to any randomly chosen place in the universe, it would probably suffer intensely and die (quickly, but sadly, not instantly).

Provoking pain is easier than provoking pleasure. We sentient beings need to feed ourselves and adapt constantly to the environment. In general, if we minimize our activity, for example, if we remain motionless, pain ensues (from hunger, thirst, cold, heat …). This happens except in very specific situations where it is best to remain motionless, such as a bear hibernating in winter. Instead, to get pleasure (and above all, to avoid pain), we must expressly do something (except for extraordinarily rare cases).

In short, pain comes alone, but to get pleasure we must work for it. I think the evidence of this asymmetry is very large.

If we represent pleasure and pain through positive and negative values of the same axis (in a single dimension), with pleasure on the right and pain on the left, it seems that:

We will always be interested in moving to the right

If we do not do anything, our experiences probably move to the left

In general, it will cost us an effort (energy, resources) to move to the right

2.- Different amount

In my opinion, another asymmetry that exists between pleasure and pain is that in practice there is much more pain than pleasure.

To say that there is “more” pain than pleasure (or vice versa) can mean several things: do we refer to the number of cases? Or do we also consider the intensity of the experiences? And its duration?

If we want to quantify experiences, whether positive or negative, it is very reasonable to take into account these three parameters or dimensions in which the experiences unfold, which are their intensity, their duration and the number of occurrences.

Intensity : There seems to be a known limit to pleasure, difficult to overcome, and yet the pain seems to be much deeper and potentially much deeper. The most pleasurable experiences we have ever known can make us “lose our heads” but rarely lose our judgment, while painful experiences are unsettling, leading to mental deterioration, insanity and death. Of course, this may change in the future.

: There seems to be a known limit to pleasure, difficult to overcome, and yet the pain seems to be much deeper and potentially much deeper. The most pleasurable experiences we have ever known can make us “lose our heads” but rarely lose our judgment, while painful experiences are unsettling, leading to mental deterioration, insanity and death. Of course, this may change in the future. Duration : The very painful experiences are longer and their negative effects lengthen more in time, than the very pleasant experiences, whose positive effects fade with greater speed. As Eduardo Mendoza said in the mouth of one of his novel characters (I quote from memory because I do not find the literal quotation, but the idea is faithful): it is frustrating to see how a stroke of good luck is not enough to make up for a lifetime of discomfort and misery; and yet a setback of fortune can ruin a lifetime of happiness in a minute.

: The very painful experiences are longer and their negative effects lengthen more in time, than the very pleasant experiences, whose positive effects fade with greater speed. As Eduardo Mendoza said in the mouth of one of his novel characters (I quote from memory because I do not find the literal quotation, but the idea is faithful): it is frustrating to see how a stroke of good luck is not enough to make up for a lifetime of discomfort and misery; and yet a setback of fortune can ruin a lifetime of happiness in a minute. Number of occurrences : I believe that at any moment there are more suffering individuals than enjoying individuals. This is probably the most controversial point.

3.- Different motivation

I believe that we are much more motivated to avoid suffering than to achieve pleasure, and that many of the things that at first we seem to do for pleasure can be explained by a desire to avoid pain. In addition, I believe that, of all the possible ways to compensate for experiences, the most usual by far is to accept a small suffering to avoid greater suffering. All this I explain in greater detail in the next section.

Can suffering be compensated with pleasure?

When we talk about the possibility of compensating a pain with a pleasure, obviously we are not saying that one annuls the other in the sense of ceasing to exist, but in the sense that the overall result “is positive”, it is something “good” (or better than another result) and it seems like a good decision to make.

Regarding this type of “compensation”, I think there is something we do continuously, which is to accept a little suffering in order to avoid greater suffering. This preference has its symmetric, which is to refuse a small pleasure if in return we can obtain a greater pleasure. I think the opportunity for this second situation to occur is much less frequent, and this represents another asymmetry between pleasure and pain.

In relation to these “compensations” there are four possibilities that are interesting to investigate, which I will number as “1”, “4”, “13” and “16”. Actually, there are more options, but many of them are trivial or are equivalent to others. At the end of the text, I detail all the combinations. The four main possibilities are:

Accept a small pain in order to avoid a big pain

Accept a small pain in order to obtain a great pleasure

Refuse a small pleasure in order to avoid a big pain

Refuse a small pleasure with the goal of obtaining a great pleasure

They can be expressed in the form of a question:

Would you accept a small pain whose consequence would be to avoid a big pain?

Would you accept a small pain whose consequence would be to obtain a great pleasure?

Would you refuse a small pleasure whose consequence would be to avoid a big pain?

Would you refuse a small pleasure whose consequence was to obtain a great pleasure?

Defining these categories of possibilities to explore through questions is very intuitive and direct, but it can also be confusing or imprecise. It does not really matter much if we answer “Yes” or “No” to these questions, but instead, on the one hand, identify that possibility, and on the other, know what we should answer or answer if we had all the necessary information, that is, try to determine what the answer should be if what we intend is to maximize happiness and minimize suffering, whether in a single individual under selfish criteria; or in several individuals, if what we seek is, in some way, to maximize the common good.

A table with all the combinations

The following table represents all the combinations related to “Accept” or “Reject” an experience (either Painful or Pleasant) with the aim of Avoiding or Obtaining a greater experience, either Painful or Pleasant.

Other asymmetries or clues about asymmetries and between good and bad experiences