listening to music, mastering an intellectual discipline etc
— Wayfarer
I would count the good or bad feelings one gets from those, and emotional states generally, as well within the domain of pleasure/pain/hedonic experience. — Pfhorrest
By my definition, hedonism requires the pursuit of my wants, regardless of anyone, or anything else — counterpunch
Prefer the other way around. ("Cognitivism"? Not that it matters.) — bongo fury
I would have thought that the most obviously hedonist of the Greek schools was Epicurianism: 'The school rejected determinism and advocated hedonism (pleasure as the highest good), but of a restrained kind: mental pleasure was regarded more highly than physical, and the ultimate pleasure was held to be freedom from anxiety and mental pain, especially that arising from needless fear of death and of the gods.'
That state of freedom from anxiety was ataraxia, I believe. — Wayfarer
“Nobody is relevant” sounds quite selfish. — javi2541997
For anyone to say it is irrelevant to morality must have said so with good reason ... I cannot fathom what that is and will be simply down to their personal understanding of what ‘morality’ means. — I like sushi
what I'm particularly interested in is hedonism's need for a, to use a computer metaphor, patch to make it morality-apt. Hedonism by itself doesn't cut it so to speak. — TheMadFool
Socrates had spoken of the higher pleasures of the intellect; the Cyrenaics denied the validity of this distinction and said that bodily pleasures, being more simple and more intense, were preferable.
For anyone to say it is irrelevant to morality must have said so with good reason ... I cannot fathom what that is and will be simply down to their personal understanding of what ‘morality’ means. I can understand the view that the ‘pleasure’ is in the journey, but the ‘pleasure’ is still ‘pleasure’ rather than some cold-reasoned way of living morally that may actively pursue pain and suffering ... — I like sushi
How can we talk about morality without considering what feels good or bad (for me, you or anyone else). — I like sushi
Sometimes, it is moral to speak truth to power, for example — unenlightened
To what end, if not to (set into motion or contribute to some movement to) get said power to behave differently, in such a way said power hurts less (inflicts less suffering) or helps more (enables more enjoyment)? — Pfhorrest
What makes conduct moral, if not refraining from hurting people (not inflicting suffering), and helping them (enabling enjoyment)? — Pfhorrest
The obvious example is from monotheistic religions: moral is that which is in line with God's commandments. Acting in line with God's commandments can lead to (other) people's happiness or suffering. But making (other) people's happiness or suffering the reference point for what counts as moral or not would be a grave mistake in the context of monotheism.What makes conduct moral, if not refraining from hurting people (not inflicting suffering), and helping them (enabling enjoyment)? — Pfhorrest
Yet it's an idea that can be found in some major religions. Like when Christians say that believing in God and following his commandments has nothing to do with your happiness. In fact, doing the morally right thing is possibly going to or is even supposed to make you feel crappy (a burden you should gladly accept, given the massive sacrifice God has already made for you).I find myself just flabbergasted at the notion of reckoning something as good or bad regardless of (or even in spite of) whether it makes anybody feel good or bad. — Pfhorrest
The truth usually makes us sad (the bitter truth) and lies seem to be very good at making us happy (sweet, little lies) — TheMadFool
Truth is bitter. Why say that? — TheMadFool
But what would justify this difference?Seems to me that hedonism always wants to avoid this conclusion - to say there’s no real difference between pleasant sensations and eudomonaic happiness (which is the happiness that comes from the pursuit of virtue.) One can, for example, attain happiness in the contemplation of verities, which surely can’t be reduced to sensation alone, and which only a rational mind can entertain. — Wayfarer
From the perspective of traditional cultures, both the desire for pleasure and the fear of pain are natural instincts that have to be moderated. In Greek philosophy, the appetites were to be subdued by reason which Christian philosophy inherited and modified. In Buddhism, there is an icon of the pig, rooster and chicken chasing each other, signifying want (pig), hatred (snake), stupidity (chicken). I read the other day the definition of asceticism as 'the skilful use of discomfort'. — Wayfarer
I don't think it has to be necessarily that egocentric. I can imagine a hedonistic lifestyle that nevertheless makes room for other's wants. What if you were in a care-giving profession, like nursing or veterinary science, but after hours you were into BDSM? Not hard to imagine. — Wayfarer
1. All truths cause happiness
As counterexamples: disease, murder, apathy, corruption, rape, child labor, human trafficking, racism, slavery, discrimination, the list is longer but I'd like to see how you respond to these. — TheMadFool
I see. What explains our innate susceptibility to deception of the kind that involves some degree of self-aggrandizement which I interpret as a, probably dangerous, proclivity on our part to build a world of sweet lies in which we happily live out our lives? — TheMadFool
It's not about never having been exposed to the truth as you seem to think. It's about not being able to face it. — TheMadFool
And one fine day, we come face to face with the bitter truth and our world, the one made of lies, comes crashing down around our ears. — TheMadFool
That's an unusual definition then, and not the one this thread is about, an article about which I linked to in the OP. That definition is, shortly put, "what matters, morally speaking, is that people feel good rather than bad, experience pleasure rather than pain, enjoyment rather than suffering", — Pfhorrest
I can feed my child all the sugar it wants, and I am sure they will enjoy it greatly, however I would be slowly poisoning them, regardless of their enjoyment. — Tzeentch
The obvious example is from monotheistic religions: moral is that which is in line with God's commandments. — baker
I keep trying to answer your post from 8 hours ago, but then something happens - like someone was responding right now, and I just couldn't get to it. Now I have things to do out in the world. So please don't take this personally, like some sort of snub. It's not that at all. I'll get back to you. — counterpunch
Utilitarianism is a kind of hedonism. It's a consequentialist altruistic hedonism. (This poll's two questions are about hedonism yes or no, and if yes, altruism yes or no; I'm not asking about consequentialism yes or not at this point). — Pfhorrest
That's an unusual definition then, and not the one this thread is about, an article about which I linked to in the OP. — Pfhorrest
Ethical hedonism on Wikipedia (because apparently body text is required for a poll). — Pfhorrest
What is bad about being poisoned if not the suffering it causes? — Pfhorrest
You complained in the OP about having to reference a text, and now you depend on it??? — counterpunch
Our senses are simply too easy to fool. — Tzeentch
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.