Aristotle holds that pleasure is not “superadded” to the good life as a supplement or an external good, but is instead somehow internal to virtuous activity itself. This is why a virtuous person’s actions are “intrinsically pleasant.” Elsewhere in the Nicomachean Ethics, he makes it clear that he is no hedonist about the human good, for he claims that what a virtuous person “discerns” and responds to in acting virtuously is not the pleasure supplied by the activity, but its nobility—which is to say, its virtue. The goal of acting virtuously on this view isn’t to receive pleasure but to exhibit virtue.
For various reasons, then, living well for Aristotle cannot lie in the experience of pleasure alone. As we know, he holds that the good life for a human being lies in fulfilling our rational function virtuously. And he goes further: since the pleasure that a virtuous person takes in an activity depends on the nature of that activity, and since some activities accord with virtue and some with vice, it follows that some pleasures are better for us and others are worse: “Just as activities differ,” Aristotle argues, “so too do the corresponding pleasures” (NE X.5). If this is right, not all pleasures are equally good for us. Some can be bad. And it’s possible therefore to take a stand on the quality of our pleasures.