A Seagull ? — Pantagruel

Maybe it was just an echo.

I was just endorsing your previous conversation, I came to the same conclusion on this thread a few days ago.

Well, true to what I said, you gave some reasons for why art or philosophy is pleasurable. The same applies to all higher pleasures in that they possess some qualities that afford pleasure to us. — TheMadFool

No, I did give qualities of art and philosophy, but I explained that those qualities couldn’t even be experienced individually, therefore they could not be said to be pleasurable in and of themselves. You can’t know or determine whether or not style is what makes art pleasurable. It’s inseparable from art, so there’s no way to tell if it’s inclusion in a piece of art adds any pleasure whatsoever. To prove the hypothesis that there are reasons why art is pleasurable you need to account for and control the variables. The qualities of art are the variables, and their inseparability from art prohibits you from being able to account for them.