Exotic Journeys: A Tourist's Guide to Philosophy

brought to you by Ron Yezzi

Emeritus Professor of Philosophy

Minnesota State University, Mankato

© Copyright 1986, 1994, 2015, 2020 by Ron Yezzi

Return to Start Page

Return to Philosophical Issues Page

(Author's Note: The account below, with slight modifications, is taken from Ron Yezzi, Philosophical Problems: The Good Life (Mankato: G. Bruno & Co., 1994), pp. 7-24.)

Topics

Introduction

Psychological vs. Ethical Hedonism (Jeremy Bentham)

Quality of Pleasure

Sensual Hedonism

Intellectual Hedonism

Egoistic vs. Universalistic Hedonism (Jeremy Bentham)

Utilitarianism

Controversies: Some Objections and Possible Replies

Thought Excursions

Hedonism and Strong Drink

Can One Pleasure Be Qualitatively Superior to Another?

Sacrificial Utilitarianism?

The Good Life:

Hedonism

Epicurus, Omar Khayyam, Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill

Introduction

A student once asked, “Why is it that, when philosophers talk about the good life, they never mention lounging in a boat with a six-pack of beer and fishing for awhile on a lake in northern Minnesota?” Here was a student with a vision of the good life. Although many may appreciate the attractiveness of his vision, we may still question its value as the ultimate goal to guide us in all we do. Ordinarily, we expect ultimate goals to be less specific so they apply to more situations. There is however an ancient, general ethical position, hedonism, that encompasses this student's “vision” as well as many similar ones.

According to hedonism, the good life consists in striving for and achieving pleasure, while avoiding pain. Hedonism is very probably the simplest and most popular conception of the good life. Nevertheless the relation between human beings and pleasure is complex enough to have spawned a variety of interpretations. Hedonists disagree about (a) how hedonism is grounded in human nature, (b) the kinds of pleasures to be sought, and (c) the range of persons to be included. In addition, there are differences between pursuit of pleasures of the moment and of long-range pleasures, which further complicates our understanding of hedonism. For example, persons pursuing long-range pleasures often forgo pleasures of the moment, and even endure pain in the present, for the sake of greater pleasure at some time in the future—as happens when they struggle through any trials or frustrations in their work for the sake of pleasurable rewards later on.

The popular association of hedonism simply and solely with sensual pleasures is a mistake. This popular misconception is especially evident in the use of the word “epicurean” that means, according to the dictionary, “given or adapted to luxury, or indulgence in sensual pleasures.” The hedonistic philosopher Epicurus can hardly be described as being “epicurean.” For example, in his “Letter to Menoeceus,” he says,

When, therefore, we maintain that pleasure is the end, we do not mean the pleasures of profligates and those that consist in sensuality, as is supposed by some who are either ignorant or disagree with us or do not understand, but freedom from pain in the body and from trouble in the mind. For it is not continuous drinking and revellings, nor the satisfaction of the wealthy table which produce a pleasant life, but sober reasoning, searching out the motives for all choice and avoidance, and banishing mere opinions, to which are due the greatest disturbance of the spirit.1

Contrary to popular expectations, Epicurus also advocated a negative form of hedonism—that is, we achieve pleasure, not by seeking it, but rather, by avoiding pain.