Understanding hedonistic pleasure
Any cases that are hedonic equals but value unequals would deliver what the non-necessity objector seeks.
The first obstacle for a useful definition of pleasure for hedonism is to unify all of the diverse pleasures in a reasonable way. Mill justified this distinction by arguing that those who have experienced both types of pleasure realise that higher pleasures are much more valuable. Hedonism I. The best and most detailed account of Attitudinal Hedonism. Pleasures of the Brain, Oxford University Press. One study , looked at the effects of an eight week program promoting savouring for a group of community dwelling adults aged 60 and above. Indeed, since G. An important distinction between Prudential Hedonism and Folk Hedonism is that Prudential Hedonists usually understand that pursuing pleasure and avoiding pain in the very short-term is not always the best strategy for achieving the best long-term balance of pleasure over pain. Many well-known criticisms of hedonism can reasonably be interpreted as non-necessity objections. The same scientists have wondered if the same processes govern all of our liking and wanting, but this question remains unresolved. Along these lines, it might be held that delight in the day is a state or property in the delight mode that is directed at the day, and that in addition has a certain felt character. Plato His festivals were crazy hedonistic parties with plenty of drinking, overeating, and reckless behavior.
Epistemic arguments for hedonism about value claim that pleasure clearly or obviously has value c. But motivational egoism is at best controversial see entry on egoism. Some go further and try to explain why so many people choose not to plug in.
Jowett, New York: Random House.
This argument has weaknesses. To an ascetic, indulging in pleasure is a kind of weakness and distraction that would prevent them living up to their spiritual values and attaining their spiritual goals—usually being selfless, without desires, reaching the highest levels of meditation, and serving others purely.
Arguments against hedonism
The Origins of Hedonism a. Reasons and the Good, Oxford: Clarendon Press. In addition, the further argument that it still needs is in effect a separate argument for hedonism over its rivals, so this unification argument is not self-standing. Becker eds. Second, one might instead appeal to the epistemic thesis that the felt character of pain and pleasure gives us direct awareness, perception or apprehension of the badness of pain and the goodness of pleasure. This is because any increase in a potentially valuable aspect of our lives will be viewed as a free bonus. Shafer-Landau, R. The present entry treats it as a claim just about desires see the entries on desire and intention. An example of a pro-attitude towards a sensation could be being pleased about the fact that an ice cream tastes so delicious. Moderate phenomenalist accounts instead claim that all pleasure is both phenomenal and intentional; so they are consistent with intentionalism, and some are also consistent with strong intentionalism.
Intentionalists, by contrast, must insist that every pleasure and displeasure has an object. Philosophical work will continue to be needed too, to weed out incoherent ideas, to separate out the numerous distinct motivational hedonist theses; and to scrutinize whether, and if so with what significance, various empirical findings actually do bear on these various hedonist theses.
The Future of Hedonism The future of hedonism seems bleak.
Intentionalist accounts of pleasure are less well known than phenomenalist accounts, so they merit brief elaboration on several points. Fourth, is it a claim about every desire whatever, or just a claim about every human desire?
For example, they might claim that moral pleasures are no higher in quality than immoral pleasures, but that moral pleasures are instrumentally more valuable because they are likely to lead to more moments of pleasure or less moments of pain in the future. Moore himself thought the heap of filth example thoroughly refuted what he saw as the only potentially viable form of Prudential Hedonism — that conscious pleasure is the only thing that positively contributes to well-being. Prudential Hedonists need not relinquish the Quantitative aspect of their theory in order to deal with these criticisms, however. Fred Feldman, the leading proponent of Attitudinal Hedonism, argues that the sensation of pleasure only has instrumental value — it only brings about value if you also have a positive psychological stance toward that sensation. Hedonism as a theory about well-being best referred to as Prudential Hedonism is more specific than Value Hedonism because it stipulates what the value is for. Some go further and try to explain why so many people choose not to plug in. Perhaps the best method for identifying intrinsically valuable aspects of lives is to compare lives that are equal in pleasure and all other important ways, except that one aspect of one of the lives is increased. Nearly everyone thinks that the deceived businessman has a worse life.
based on 30 review