The Pros And Cons Of Hedonism

Improved Essays
Discuss any objections to hedonism of which you are aware of and explain whether there is an alternative theory of well being that is preferable to hedonism.
Within the following essay I will discuss objections to hedonism and I will further explain whether there is an alternative theory of well being that is preferable to hedonism. Firstly we have to identify what hedonism is, hedonism has been typically expressed by certain quotes as “Pleasure is the only thing worth seeking for its own sake”, “Pleasure is The Good” and “Pleasure alone is intrinsically good”. Hedonism talks about pleasure, however what is hedonism? According to G.M Moor, take pleasure to be a single, phenomenologically uniform, directly sensory feeling. According to hedonic pluralists, they think that feelings of many different sorts may correctly be called pleasures. One line of objection to hedonism is that perhaps there are some pleasures that are “bad”. Example: the pleasure that a person gets from slowly torturing people. Such things, as we would morally say, should not get counted as “intrinsically valuable”.
Some of the objections to hedonism are:
 Pleasure is not the only source of intrinsic value:
This is one of the most frequent argument against
…show more content…
The objection to this argument discards its claim “that only pleasure is good”, or its claim that “only displeasure is bad”. This hypothesis therefore states “that pleasure is not necessary for positive value, or that displeasure is not necessary for negative value, or both”. The central idea to this hypothesis is that something other than pleasure has value, and that something other than displeasure has disvalue. Any cases that are hedonic equals but value unequal’s would deliver what the non-necessity objector

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Separateness Of Persons

    • 788 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Rawls and Nozick argue that utilitarianism does not consider that beings are individuals in their own right and “does not take seriously the distinction between persons”. Utilitarianism focuses solely on achieving maximal total utility. In order to do this, it sacrifices an even distribution of utility and ‘sanctions injustice’. It directs us to act unjustly to a few in order to achieve happiness on a larger scale- failing to respect individuals needs and rights. According to Nozick this notion is flawed as “to use a person [for another’s benefit] does not sufficiently respect and take account of the fact that he is a separate person, that his is the only life he has.…

    • 788 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    There are more cases regarding those whose desires do not coincide with their self-interest and these contradict the theory of psychological egoism. In cases where a psychological egoists would claim that everyone would expect even just a little bit of benefit, does not take into account pessimistic people or people who know that the action will not benefit them at all (Shafer-Landau, 2015). Using sincere love as an example, the claim that our actions are motivated our strongest desire would not hold up because our self-interested desires would not be our priority; rather, you would want the other person to be happy even if it caused you pain (Jorati, 2014). There are times that people go after their own self-interest, however if they did it all the time, there would be no sense of morality. Even Shafer Landau (2015) states “If all we can do is look out for Number One, then there is little point in demanding we do otherwise.” (pg.104).…

    • 782 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Hedonism is an objective Value Theory which asserts that the only intrinsically valuable thing is pleasure. However, it does not mean pleasure in the sense it is typically thought of. Hedonists believe there are two types of pleasure: physical pleasure and attitudinal pleasure. Many people believe that physical pleasure is the important pleasure for modern Hedonists; however, this is not the case. Though physical pleasure may contribute to your attitudinal pleasure, they are not good in and of themselves.…

    • 2068 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    There are many glaring holes in his hypothesi as well as a lack of significant proof behind his conclusions, other than vague definitions by default, and generalizations of a moral good. I object Bentham’s theory of Utilitarianism and his belief that it is morally correct to preserve the greater good for the most number of people, while neglecting those who that “good” affects negatively. His theory disregards the wants, needs, and pleasures of the minority of people by principle. That in itself is both unfair and unjust. Ironically cancelling out Bentham’s idea of a greater good, because what is good about people suffering?…

    • 1444 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Does that mean somebody who acts with wrong motive moral? Furthermore, utilitarianism focuses on happiness and pleasure only; sometimes an act can be moral for reasons other than happiness. Although there are some weakness to utilitarianism theory of morality, this theory is most persuasive to me. Least persuasive: Egoism Egoism, as the name suggests, focuses on I, me and myself mentality. In egoism, unlike utilitarianism, it is my pleasures or pains that matter not the happiness of other people.…

    • 1088 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Moral rule is not a determining factor for the rightness or wrongness of an action, but the consequence of the action is. As Bentham says, “By the principle of utility is meant that principle which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever, according to the tendency which it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question: or, what is the same thing in other words, to promote or to oppose that happiness." Based on Bentham’s idea, people against him argue that utilitarian devalues and distorts the meaning of morality. It instills a selfish concept in humans encouraging them to become unscrupulous in order to benefit themselves. Besides, the idea that human being is to pursue pleasure and avoid from pain based on hedonism.…

    • 1203 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    J.S Mill idea of classical utilitarianism changed the idea of morality of actions. Conferring to this philosophy, an action is ethically veracious if its penalizations lead to pleasure at the widespread absence of pain, and wrong if it ends in displeasure. Classical utilitarianism authorizes hedonism as a philosophy of significance. Hedonism, then, is destined to influence what is suitable. Since the connection amongst activities and their joyful or unfortunate consequences varies on the environments, no ethical opinion is supreme or essential in the situation underneath utilitarianism.…

    • 798 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He easily shows radical autonomism to be fatally flawed due to its 'common denominator' argument (Carroll 1996: 226). Alternatively, the moderate autonomist position is far more promising, as it accepts that some artworks do possess moral components, and that it makes sense to talk about, and evaluate them, on moral grounds. However, such an autonomist asserts that aesthetic evaluation remains independent from moral judgements, regardless of the moral judgements or emotions an artwork draws from a viewer (Carroll 1996: 231-232). Carroll considers this wrong, because, if narratives require moral responses to be intelligible and aesthetically successful, aesthetic judgements cannot be sealed off from moral evaluations (Carroll 1996: 232-233). So, for Carroll, narratives result in moral and aesthetic components being wed, not being independent, as the autonomist…

    • 544 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Unlike utility, the principle of asceticism approves of any action that diminishes happiness. Asceticism can be divided by two kinds the psychological(moralists) and the religious. The former holds the more moderate view in which they don’t view pain as necessarily bad. This theory was reached with evidence that some pleasures such as sexual pleasures and physical pleasures produce pain, as a result they condemned pleasure all together. The latter is the somewhat more radical view that not only views pain as “not necessarily bad”, the religious go even further by claiming that pain is actually good.…

    • 786 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It seems to me that Kant wants someone who hates virtuous acts but still performs them to be the virtuous person, but if someone enjoys the act, they are not virtuous at all. That is not the type of person I would want to give that credit to. If both people perform the same activity, but one person has a good attitude and will perform that activity again, and the other hated it and will avoid that situation in the future, I would say that the first person was the virtuous one. But Aristotle goes further than this by saying that happiness is more than just a factor in…

    • 1242 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays