VI. Good Character and Pleasure Are Not Equals

Seneca takes direct aim at the Epicurean position.

The school of pleasure says that good character and pleasure cannot be separated, that no one can live honestly without also living pleasantly, and that a pleasant life and an honest life are the same thing.

Think about what this actually claims. It claims that good character needs pleasure's company to be good. It makes pleasure the standard by which good character is measured. That inverts the order completely.

Good character is lofty. Unconquerable. Royal. It does not tire. It does not fade. You will find good character in the temple, in the marketplace, in the halls of government, manning the walls of the city, covered with dust, sunburnt, with calloused hands.

Pleasure is low. It belongs to the body. It is weak and will not last. Its homes are the dark corners of taverns and bath-houses, the places that avoid inspection. It is pale or painted. It reeks of wine.

These are not companions. They do not belong in the same sentence as equals.

Pleasure dies at the very moment it charms us most. It fades by the exercise of its own function. It runs up against a wall where it simply stops being, and even while it is at its height it has already begun to end. Nothing built on something that changes so quickly can be solid.

The pleasure that good people take and the pleasure that bad people take look the same from the outside. Bad men enjoy their shame as much as good men enjoy their nobility. If pleasure were genuinely connected to good character, this would be impossible.