If Satisfied, Do Tell Others...

There is a relationship between freedom of choice and satisfaction. In fact, the question of how much satisfaction really arises only where there is adequate or ample choice available and where the exercising of one's choice holds a meaning or significance.

If a man has known nothing else than just one or a couple of fruits, or singers, or shampoos or whatever, at best he can say which he deems to be better of the two. Or which one he likes more.

It is when he can select from more than half a dozen options, that he is able to declare which one did the most for him. The act of picking the option after due consideration itself is a gratifying act.

It is part of the process of satisfaction and the culture of satisfaction that choice is required and celebrated, the differences between the choices are measured and highlighted, the choice rationalised to oneself, and so on.

Such a culture doesn't gloss over your dissatisfactions, it attaches importance to the level of your satisfaction, and does care more than two hoots about your needs as well as your wants.

It's about the importance attached to calibration, configuration, and customising the settings for your life. You can decide how much of what you would like. You would choose to hear recommendations that you can ignore, instead of impositions you can't. And the responsibility for your choices ( and the wisdom or unwisdom about them!) would too be yours alone.

So the art of satisfaction has much to do with learning an accountability to one's own self. Epicurus ( circa 300 B.C.) was of the point of view that all one's actions should aim to attain pleasure (tranquillity) which is achievable by limiting one's desires, and by ceasing to fear the gods or death.

Let me quote from the Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy: (Epicurus) He distinguishes between two different types of pleasure: 'moving' pleasures and 'static' pleasures. 'Moving' pleasures occur when one is in the process of satisfying a desire, e.g., eating a hamburger when one is hungry. These pleasures involve an active titillation of the senses, and these feelings are what most people call 'pleasure.' However, Epicurus says that after one's desires have been satisfied, (e.g., when one is full after eating), the state of satiety, of no longer being in need or want, is itself pleasurable.

Epicurus calls this a 'static' pleasure, and says that these static pleasures are the best pleasures.

Because of this, Epicurus denies that there is any intermediate state between pleasure and pain. When one has unfulfilled desires, this is painful, and when one no longer has unfulfilled desires, this steady state is the most pleasurable of all, not merely some intermediate state between pleasure and pain.

Epicurus also distinguishes between physical and mental pleasures and pains. Physical pleasures and pains concern only the present, whereas mental pleasures and pains also encompass the past (fond memories of past pleasure or regret over past pain or mistakes) and the future (confidence or fear about what will occur). The greatest destroyer of happiness, thinks Epicurus, is anxiety about the future... if one can banish fear about the future, and face the future with confidence that one's desires will be satisfied, then one will attain tranquility (ataraxia), the most exalted state.

Clearly, the man was an early champ in this field. He's come to be associated with fine taste and gourmet dining etc., also with refined discourse. Many of the very things that in fact produce high levels of satisfaction among the healthily inclined. His suggestion is that we just try and keep those anxieties and regrets from taking over. Or, like another imbiber said (more or less): Fill the cup that clears, Today of yesterday's regrets and tomorrow's fears.

A worthy toast to the seers of satisfaction.