The psychological classification of pleasure and pain.

Abstract

In trod uctory Bum mart/ PLEASURE and Pain are states so distinct and so familiar to all of us that it is unnecessary to make any explanation concerning the subject-matter of this volume; but, as happens often when terms are appropriated from common speech for scientific purposes, the words pleasure and pain themselves are used so loosely in ordinary conversation that some difficulty arises when we attempt to employ them with accuracy. That this is no fault of our English usage is shown by the fact that French and German writers find as much trouble in this respect as we do (p. 7 ff.). The most obvious means of avoiding this difficulty would be to adopt some one word to cover the subject of this discussion. The Germans have very generally adapted the word Gefilhl to this use; and an attempt is being made in the same direction by some of our best psychologists who wish to use " Feeling" in the same limited sense. I do not think such usage will win acceptance ; for " feeling" has too broad a meaning in everyday conversation to be useful for such specific scientific purpose. At all events, if it were used thus in this connection, misunderstanding might arise as to my own view, and I B 1 Cp. Vorschule dcr yEsthetik. 2 Problems of Life and Mind, 3rd series, chap. iv. and elsewhere. 3 Mind, No. 45. * Essays, p. 310. r ' Senses and Intellect, 3rd edition, p. 668.

What is pain: Are cognitive and social features core components?

“…Concepts of pain as emotion date back to the ancient Greeks who considered pain a passion rather than a sensation like touch or smell. The sensory model of pain reflecting the magnitude of underlying tissue damage began to gain more authority in the 19th century as biomedical science advanced with Von Frey in 1894 (see Pearce 37 ) and Goldschneider, 38 generating a vigorous debate as to whether pain was primarily a sensory or an emotional experience 39,40 . But there were concerns as to whether pain and sensation could even be grouped together, 41 and others pondered the link between sensation and emotion, positing that pain was a sensation that brought about displeasure 40,42 .…”

“…The sensory model of pain reflecting the magnitude of underlying tissue damage began to gain more authority in the 19th century as biomedical science advanced with Von Frey in 1894 (see Pearce 37 ) and Goldschneider, 38 generating a vigorous debate as to whether pain was primarily a sensory or an emotional experience. 39 , 40 But there were concerns as to whether pain and sensation could even be grouped together, 41 and others pondered the link between sensation and emotion, positing that pain was a sensation that brought about displeasure. 40 , 42 At present, emotional processes are recognized as integral to the phenomenology of pain, 43 potentially serving as antecedents, intrinsic features, and consequences of pain.…”

The definition of pain

“…The issue was much debated near the end of the 19th century by HR Marshall (1889) and CA Strong (1895). Their arguments depended upon the analysis of conscious experience although they were also well aware of the development of knowledge about sensory pathways.…”

Introspective psychology, pure and applied: Henry Rutgers Marshall on pain and pleasure.

“…Marshall wrote about pleasure and pain as an architect interested in aesthetics, presenting his theory of aesthetic experience in Pain, Pleasure, and Aesthetics (1894b) and a series of essays (1889, 1891a, 1891b, 1892, 1894a, 1895a, 1895b). He defined aesthetics as “a branch of hedonics; as being dependent directly upon pleasure laws and indirectly therefore upon the laws of pain” (1894b, p. 299).…”