We've put a low premium on what Kant called "negative pleasures".
These include joy, watchfulness and wishing and are distinguished from their negative counterparts (pleasure, fear and appetite) in being well-reasoned and not excessive.
The negative of pleasure, or perhaps its antidote, is depression, the popular modern malady, an uncomfortably dull refuge from the question of pleasure and how much is the right amount for you.
James Russell is a leading exponent of positive and negative affect (pleasure and pain) as polar opposites; John Cacioppo (see his 1999 and Ito and Cacioppo 1999 and 2001) among the opponents (while acknowledging that the two tend to exclude each other at high intensities) as are David Watson and Robert Thayer, discussed in n. 1, 4 and 5 above.
Results of the BVP analysis, which reveals peripheral blood vessel vasoconstriction, revealed a significant negative correlation with pleasure ratings.
Those who had little discussion about safe sex, negative safe sex pleasure, low self-efficacy to use condoms and multiple partnerships were more likely to have unprotected sex.
The quantitative rating would be positive for pleasure, negative for displeasure, and zero for indifference (or for "I don't know").
Those reporting multiple partners (AOR = 2.67, 95%CI: 1.09, 6.57), those who did not discuss condom use or safe sex (AOR = 7.23, 95% CI: 4.14, 12.63), having negative safer sex pleasure (AOR = 2.39, 95% CI: 1.52, 3.76), and those lacking condom use self-efficacy (AOR = 3.29, 95% CI: 2.07, 5.23) were more likely to engage in unprotected sex.
See also: Freudenstalke (to take pleasure in negative findings).
A positive rating would indicate pleasure, a negative rating would indicate displeasure.
