Pain is Pleasure

         While Mill’s argues many great points for the premises supporting Utilitarianism, I believe there is one rejection that he fails to adequately address concerning happiness. Mill states in the passage that 

“ …the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure…”

- John Stuart Mill

          In this passage it can be concluded that Mill considers Utilitarianism to agree that right is determined by happiness and wrong is determined by unhappiness. He then goes on to believe that happiness is determined by pleasure without pain, while unhappiness is determined by pain and the privation of pleasure. I argue that these premises are valid but unsound because there are multiple circumstances where pleasure is pain and pain is pleasure. This can be seen in examples such as athletics, and types of sexual, and artistic sadomasochism. There are athletes who play sports like wrestling or boxing that enjoy the sport for the mere fact that the pain gained from getting pined or punched gives them joy and excitement. Of course there is more to the sport than merely getting hit but a large part of the sport is the painful contact you will receive because you have an opponent whose goal is to pin or hit you. There are also examples such as sexual sadomasochism where sexual acts are performed to give you pain which, for those who partake in it, can be determined as pleasurable. Dominatrix is used in this way, where the pain inflicted gives pleasurable sensations that make the painful experience desirable. Enjoying the pain from tattoos offers a similar type of sadomasochism, one in which the person involved find the pain of the needle on their skin, pleasurable.  One may argue that this still fulfills the idea that happiness is pleasure because at the end of the day they are still experiencing pleasure. However, I would defend my claim by pointing out that this pleasure is not in the absence of pain nor could it ever be. Because the pleasure and pain in these circumstances are one in the same and there is no way to separate the pleasure from the pain. Another way of thinking about it could be that in order for there to be pleasure under these circumstances, there must be pain and thus the argument by Mill does not stand to be completely sound.