Creatures throughout the universe share the ability to desire things, however the motivations that guide the way human beings are able to achieve any feeling of pleasurable sensations is highly debatable. The hedonist view is too limited on the actual ability of the human mind because it is unsuccessful in considering the existence of other emptions or feelings besides this ultimate goal of leading a good life through seeking pleasure. Nonetheless, it is impossible to receive pleasure from things if they are only desired for the sake of achieving pleasure because this view only recognizes a selfish aim to satiate personal desires and fails to recognize the rationality of morality and subsequently altruistic actions.
The main tenant of Epicurus’ …show more content…
When one is only concerned with his/her own personal interests, it means that, therefore, they do not care about the interests of others. So if this idea is applied to the world where several billions of people are interacting, it means that each and every interaction between beings is just a means for an individual to please personal desires. This removes the capability of the human being to experience compassion or empathy since by logic each being is concerned with no one but the self. So the idea of thinking about others, the idea of empathy, fails to exist within the argument because other beings are simply used as a means to satisfy one’s own desires. The lack of empathy for others dehumanizes human beings as a whole and demotes and likens the entire human race to animals. In fact, Epicurus even asserts that “as soon as every animal is born, it seeks after pleasure and rejoices in it as the greatest good, while it rejects pain as the greatest bad” (CP pg1, LHS, p1). There fails to be a clear distinction between human beings and animals in this view as the only superiority humans seem to have is not automatically submitting to each and every …show more content…
A hedonist would argue that morals are developed through conditioning of being rewarded with pleasure when performing ‘good’ behavior and being punished with pain when displaying ‘bad’ behavior (Frankfurt, pg490, RHS). Nevertheless, the origin of morals is hard to pinpoint because they can easily be attributed to predisposed genetic markers but experiences in life can just as easily have a huge effect in shaping a person’s moral standards. Professor Langsam added to the idea by asserting that it takes time for a human to understand why acting morally has value and this is done through
The main tenant of Epicurus’ …show more content…
When one is only concerned with his/her own personal interests, it means that, therefore, they do not care about the interests of others. So if this idea is applied to the world where several billions of people are interacting, it means that each and every interaction between beings is just a means for an individual to please personal desires. This removes the capability of the human being to experience compassion or empathy since by logic each being is concerned with no one but the self. So the idea of thinking about others, the idea of empathy, fails to exist within the argument because other beings are simply used as a means to satisfy one’s own desires. The lack of empathy for others dehumanizes human beings as a whole and demotes and likens the entire human race to animals. In fact, Epicurus even asserts that “as soon as every animal is born, it seeks after pleasure and rejoices in it as the greatest good, while it rejects pain as the greatest bad” (CP pg1, LHS, p1). There fails to be a clear distinction between human beings and animals in this view as the only superiority humans seem to have is not automatically submitting to each and every …show more content…
A hedonist would argue that morals are developed through conditioning of being rewarded with pleasure when performing ‘good’ behavior and being punished with pain when displaying ‘bad’ behavior (Frankfurt, pg490, RHS). Nevertheless, the origin of morals is hard to pinpoint because they can easily be attributed to predisposed genetic markers but experiences in life can just as easily have a huge effect in shaping a person’s moral standards. Professor Langsam added to the idea by asserting that it takes time for a human to understand why acting morally has value and this is done through