Ethic ch 4: Happiness and Hedonism

What are 3 claims about happiness?

Everyone wants to be happy, happiness is by definition the purpose of all human life, and people only disagree about the ways to find happiness.

What is the argument of Limits of Explanation?

The reasons why we choose to do so and so constitute chains of reasons. All chains of reasons end in one ultimate goal which is always happiness. But our reasons are what make our choices good choices. Therefore the ultimate criterion which makes all choices good (or bad) choices is the pursuit of happiness.

If happiness is the ultimate end then…

Happiness is a good in itself, an intrinsic good as opposed to other goods that are means or instruments to reach happiness. Instrumental goods

Eudaimonism

Happiness is the ultimate purpose of all choices and what makes a life a good life.

What is the intermediate conclusion?

Eudaimonism is true.

Thesis of hedonism

If happiness is determined only by good experiences and good experiences are pleasures, happiness is constituted only by the amount of pleasure we have in our lives.

Argument for hedonsim

Good experiences clearly improve our Happiness. If there's something in the world of which I have no experience at all how could it affect my happiness? If hedonism is true, happiness is just a matter of having pleasures (good experiences).

What are 2 objections to hedonsim

Argument 1: what we want from our children. Argument 2: the experience machine or argument from false happiness

Argument from what we want for our children

A person who just had brain surgery and now spends his life picking up leaves isn't what you want for your child. The person's life isn't considered a happy life (even though it only has good experiences). Therefore: happiness isn't just a matter of having good experiences.

Argument from experience machine

Would you choose to enter a machine that could generate false pleasurable experiences? (like the matrix). Most people wouldn't which shows that most people don't consider living a false reality in VR a happy life even though the experiences in the machine are maximally pleasant. Therefore: happiness isn't just a matter of having pleasant experiences.

Conclusion abt eudaimonism and hedonism?

Eudaimonism may be true, but hedonism is false because happiness isn't just a matter of having pleasures.

Objection to conclusion

A good life is independent from pleasure and from happiness too. A morally good life is one in which you do your moral duty. Do people who've sacrificed themselves for duty or love abandoned the purpose of happiness? Could they've been motivated by something other than happiness.

What are 2 responses to objection?

Deontologism (Kant) and traditional eudaimonism

Deontologism

The ultimate purpose of a good action is to do your duty without consideration for your happiness. Comes from Kant.

Traditional Eudaimonism (from Socrates)

The obligations of moral duty are a way to achieve happiness, never in conflict with one's happiness. Doing our moral duty is another way to strive for happiness

Problems for deontologism

It's not possible to abandon the purpose of happiness

Problems for traditional eudaimonism

2 cases where we have to choose between duty and happiness. Conflict solved by the promise of happiness of the providence

What are 3 possible views of the good life?

Hedonism, deontologism, traditional eudaimonism