But can that which is neither become both?
I should say not.
And both pleasure and pain are motions of the soul, are they not?
Yes.
[584] Pleasure and pain are said to be states of rest, but they are really motions. But that which is neither was just now shown to be rest and not motion, and in a mean between them?
Yes.
How, then, can we be right in supposing that the absence of pain is pleasure, or that the absence of pleasure is pain?
Impossible.
This then is an appearance only and not a reality; that is to say, the rest is pleasure at the moment and in comparison of what is painful, and painful in comparison of what is pleasant; but all these representations, when tried by the test of true pleasure, are not real but a sort of imposition?