“A metaphysical thought so subtle.” Bayle’s defense of pleasure as happiness

Arnauld’s critique of Malebranche’s proposition pleasures of the senses make us happy has been addressed by Bayle by way of a lengthy refutation leading to the demonstration that sensible pleasures are not bodily pleasures: instead, sensible pleasures are spiritual pleasures. This paper examines how Bayle manages to ruin the categorization of pleasures (sensual/intellectual/spiritual) by combining two strategies: first, the use of the Epicurean principle happiness is pleasure as a criterion to demonstrate the truth of Malebranche’s proposition; and second, the use of Malebranche’s thesis that sensations are non-intentional as a confirmation of the purely psychic nature of pleasure in Epicurus.