
Scientists Arguing Over Pleasure - jedwhite
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/10/science/pleasure-art-sex-food-drugs.html
======
dwaltrip
I think that the "pleasure" one gets from art is longer lasting than that
provided by a piece of candy. This could be easily tested by doing a series of
evaluations at later dates.

I used scare quotes as it seems misguided to attempt to analyze such diverse
points of human experience with the metric of "pleasure" alone.

Art and similar activities carry much more meaning and significance than
candy, thus have they have a larger effect on an individual's life and broader
society. Surprisingly, this obvious point was not mentioned in the article.

Of course, we may not yet have instruments that can accurately assess these
more nuanced differences.

~~~
krageon
Isn't the whole point of studying these things to find out if what you're
saying is true? While it is possible you are correct, I'd really hesitate to
say it's obvious in any way, especially as there is a large swathe of
population that doesn't particularly care about art. On the other hand, the
segment that really doesn't at all like candy is much smaller.

~~~
dwaltrip
Oh sure, I'm all for studying it. But we shouldn't lose sight of the broader
context.

> there is a large swathe of population that doesn't particularly care about
> art

Ah yes... "Art" is a tricky term. I think things such as movies, music, books,
etc are also relevant here, and are considered forms of art. I might define
art as "creatively expressing ideas through an imprecise medium".

Of course, as they say, anything can be art. My definition fits that -- all
expression, even mathematic and scientific, contain some imprecision.

