“Pleasure, scarcely in one instance, is ever able to reach ecstasy and rapture; and in no one instance can it continue for any time at its highest pitch and altitude.”
In the discourse, the philosophers determine the balance between pleasure and suffering in the universe. In the assertion, the narrator points out that pleasure, unlike suffering, reaches an optimal level that it cannot surpass. Suffering on the hand only worsens with its intensity as the longevity of agony brings more anguish. Unless the source of the suffering is eliminated or another occurrence takes place that removes the suffering. In determining the existence of God the philosophers decipher the nature of God through the scales of pleasure and suffering.
“All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be sceptical, or at least cautious, and not to admit of any hypothesis whatever, much less of any which is supported by no appearance of probability.”
Many of the arguments center on the fact that the human mind is limited by its nature to actually know the absolute truth. Therefore, the philosophers rely on logic to present their arguments that adhere to certain criteria. The statement refers to how human understanding is flawed and obscured for it to be trusted completely. Thus, any suggestion made should be deciphered by a skeptical mindset in order to at least be close to absolute truth. Or rather the arguments with more concrete and logical conclusions merit to be reliable theories.
“Reasonable men may be allowed to differ where no one can reasonably be positive: Opposite sentiments, even without any decision, afford an agreeable amusement…”
The basis of the discourse is the provision of an avenue that allows for differing mindsets for logical conclusions to be reached. The narrator, Pamphilus, as the moderator of the debate, for the most part, provides the avenue despite siding with one of the philosophers at the end. In the assertion, he highlights how the argument is framed as a logical debate that relies on reason. In that while the philosophers are skeptical and critical of each other they are willing to be convinced otherwise. Though the debate is inconclusive, it offers substantial theories that further the discourse on the existence and nature of God.
