Is everyone a Hedonist? : Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Ethics » Is everyone a Hedonist? » Is everyone a Hedonist?

Is everyone a Hedonist?

jsawvel
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 25, 2009

Total Topics: 108
Total Posts: 269

Posted 07/04/09 - 12:26 AM: Subject: Is everyone a Hedonist?	#1
I just got to thinking about the fact that if you are having a good time you don't ask about the purpose of what you are doing. You do something for the sake of doing it. If someone says, "Why are you having sex?," you don't say, "so I can make the world a better place." You probably say, "because it feels good." The purpose of doing the thing is "the thing," not some future "reward." My question is as to whether people are motivated by pleasure and pain alone or they may have other motives. (assuming everyone is the same). Some may say that "Christians" or someone who is pursuing "the greater good" is not pursuing their own pleasure, but I am not sure this is true. After all, what Christian would pursue their mission without the promise of heaven? And why do Christians hope on heaven?, because they have not found something worthwhile now. (I know "Christians is a massive generalization, but I hope you get my point). I guess it really comes down to "human motivation." Why do humans do what they do? Do they base their decisions solely on pleasure and pain or is their something else at play. Is there something better than pleasure and pain? The Buddha claimed that most people simply chase pleasure or run from pain. He called this something like, "the independent generation of action." In other words, most people are not really in control of their actions, but they are prodded by their environment. If it is hot they go outside. So, their actions are dictated by their environment. So, is everyone a hedonist? If they are, then they are not free. But, that is beside the point. Are altruists and Christians simply holding out for pleasure that they can't get now?

Crackers
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 28, 2009

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 519

Posted 07/04/09 - 07:17 AM:	#2
I would say that most people have hedonistic tendencies; would prefer pleasure over pain. Although, I believe that the morality of most people cannot be described as hedonism alone because most people have a more egalitarian morality. For example, most people would say that murder is evil regardless of the amount of pleasure or pain inflicted on that person caused by any given murder. I would say that the people who are closest to hedonists as possible are alot of the people that call themselves nihilists, i.e. people who don't believe in any conventional morality/justice, like "murder is wrong." These people reject moral codes but still seem to prefer pleasure over pain. There are people who don't believe in any divine rewards and who still can exhibit selflessness. The fact that Christians believe in "sin" proves that they are not hedonists; sex is pleasurable but Christians, in certain circumstances, regard sex as a sin. I believe that they are motivated by hedonism to an extent though, taking into account that they regard this life as suffering and do everything to get away from it. wikipedia wrote: Deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek δέον, deon, "obligation, duty"; and -λογία, -logia) is an approach to ethics that holds that acts are inherently good or evil, regardless of the consequences of the acts. A central theme among deontological theorists is that we have a duty to do those things that are inherently good ("truth-telling" for example); while the ends or consequences of our actions are important, our obligation or duty is to take the right action, even if the consequences of a given act may be bad. Alot of people subscribe to these sort of ethics, although what "duties" people have may be relative from society to society and person to person. For example, some people would argue that they are always obliged to be honest while others would say that lying is acceptable under given circumstances. Although, many would regard it as their duty not to steal or kill and to report those who do such things.

MarchHare
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 23, 2009

Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 179

Posted 07/04/09 - 11:48 AM:	#3
As a simple matter of terms, I would question using "hedonist" to apply to anyone who sometimes/frequentely pursues pleasure and avoids pain. Such a use just confuses things, since "hedonist" is usually used to describe a person living a lifestyle that is of a broad and indefined nature but which is a workable category. To paraphrase Bishop Butler: if we were to use "hedonist" to describe all lifestyles, we would then need a new word to distinguish the people who we currentely describe as hedonistic. "jsawvel" wrote: My question is as to whether people are motivated by pleasure and pain alone or they may have other motives. (assuming everyone is the same). To some extent, this depends on what one means by "pleasure and pain". The feelings of a good deed done and getting blind drunk are both pleasant, but I don't see the sense in grouping them together in the same category of motivating experiences. Furthermore, sometimes people pursue something in spite of the fact that they know it will cause pain or not be pleasurable. Human behaviour is far too complex to be reduced to a simple pseudo-scientific formula. "jsawvel" wrote: The purpose of doing the thing is "the thing," not some future "reward." But this is the key problem with hedonism as a psychological theory, I think: people don't generally pursue pleasure or pain, but things. One doesn't choose one's food on the basis of the net amount of pleasure one experiences in eating it, but on a wide variety of (typically) subconscious motivators. "jsawvel" wrote: The Buddha claimed that most people simply chase pleasure or run from pain. He called this something like, "the independent generation of action." In other words, most people are not really in control of their actions, but they are prodded by their environment. If it is hot they go outside. So, their actions are dictated by their environment. Few things are more enticing than a claim to having a catch-all theory of human thought and few things are more disappointing. Psychological hedonism tells one nothing about how people will act and usually seems to leave people more confused than before they were told it. "jsawvel" wrote: Are altruists and Christians simply holding out for pleasure that they can't get now? Nope. They're being altruistic and/or Christian, which are specific kinds of human behaviour.
Doubt requires a reason to doubt. Nothing is immune from potential doubt. The correct response to a question isn't always to try to give the question's answer.

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.