العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
EspañolPARADOX OF HEDONISM
The 'paradox of hedonism', also called the 'pleasure paradox', is the idea in the study of ethics which points out on that pleasure and happiness are strange phenomena that do not obey normal principles.
First explicitly noted by the philosopher Henry Sidgwick in ''The Methods of Ethics'', the paradox of hedonism points out that pleasure cannot be acquired directly, it can only be acquired indirectly.
Suppose John likes to collect stamps. According to most models of behavior, including not only utilitarianism, but most economic, psychological and social conceptions of behaviour, it is believed that John likes collecting stamps because he gets pleasure from collecting stamps. Stamp collecting is an avenue towards acquiring pleasure. However, if you tell John this, he will likely disagree. He does get pleasure from collecting stamps, but this is not the process that explains why he collects stamps. It is not as though he says, ''“Aw man, now I have to collect stamps so I can get pleasure”''. Collecting stamps is not just a means toward pleasure. He likes collecting stamps.
This paradox is often spun around backwards, to illustrate that pleasure and happiness cannot be reverse-engineered. If for example you heard that collecting stamps was very pleasurable, and began a stamp collection as a means towards this happiness, it would inevitably be in vain. To achieve happiness, you must not seek happiness directly, you must strangely motivate yourself towards things unrelated to happiness, like the collection of stamps.
We fail to attain pleasures if we deliberately seek them.
----
Among other thinkers, John Stuart Mill, a Utilitarian philosopher, noted this sentiment in his autobiography:
:"But I now thought that this end [one's happiness] was only to be attained by not making it the direct end. Those only are happy (I thought) who have their minds fixed on some object other than their own happiness[....] Aiming thus at something else, they find happiness along the way[....] Ask yourself whether you are happy, and you cease to be so." (p. 94)
''Happiness'' is often wrongly equated with ''pleasure'', though sometimes the identification of the two concepts has been questioned. If, whether for good or bad reasons, one does equate happiness with pleasure, then the paradox of hedonism arises. When one aims solely towards pleasure itself, one's aim is frustrated. Sidgwick comments on such frustration after a discussion of self-love in the above-mentioned work:
:"I should not, however, infer from this that the pursuit of pleasure is necessarily self-defeating and futile; but merely that the principle of Egoistic Hedonism, when applied with a due knowledge of the laws of human nature, is practically self-limiting; i.e., that a rational method of attaining the end at which it aims requires that we should to some extent put it out of sight and not directly aim at it." (p. 3)
Aristotle might possibly have also noted the paradoxical side of pursuing pleasure, though not, at any rate, as clearly as Sidgwick. Human beings are actors whose endeavors bring about consequences, and among these are pleasure. Aristotle then argues as follows:
:"How, then, is it that no one is continuously pleased? Is it that we grow weary? Certainly all human things are incapable of continuous activity. Therefore pleasure also is not continuous; for it accompanies activity." (p. 1099)
Here Aristotle might be interpreted as noting how eventually the spirit is willing [to pursue pleasure], but the flesh is weak [in obtaining pleasure]. Perhaps this is at the root of what causes the paradox to arise. Sooner or later, finite beings will be unable to acquire and expend the resources necessary to maintain their sole goal of pleasure; thus, they find themselves in the company of misery. On the other hand, David Pearce argues in his treatise ''The Hedonistic Imperative'' that humans might be able to use genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and neuroscience to eliminate suffering in all sentient life.
A hedonist may not acknowledge the paradox of hedonism existence as a paradox.
His or her criticism of the paradox points that postponement of pleasure (in that one does not seek pleasure) in the long run can provoke alienation, weariness, and boredom in everyday life. Even worse, if one's job fails or close relationship dissolves, a very profound disillusionment might occur and the possibly very long time which was spent on that could be seen as a waste. This is the reason why hedonists suggest pursuing happiness every moment one can.
However, this particular viewpoint can also be criticized. The question the paradox of hedonism highlights is "How does one seek happiness?" While the hedonist may seek actions of pleasure, happy, content people have been observed to feel pleasure in their (routine) actions. So one answer that would seem to resolve the paradox may be that instead of seeking actions of pleasure, one should seek pleasure in one's actions.
Paradox of value
★ Aristotle!, ''Nichomachean Ethics'' 1175, 3-6 in ''The Basic Works of Aristotle'', Richard McKeon ed. (New York: Random House, 1941)
★ John Stuart Mill, ''Autobiography'' in ''The Harvard Classics'', Vol. 25, Charles Eliot Norton, ed. (New York: P. F. Collier & Son Company, 1909)
★ Henry Sidgwick, ''The Methods of Ethics'' (London: Macmillan & Co. Ltd., 1874/1963)
First explicitly noted by the philosopher Henry Sidgwick in ''The Methods of Ethics'', the paradox of hedonism points out that pleasure cannot be acquired directly, it can only be acquired indirectly.
| Contents |
| Example |
| Possible explanations |
| Hedonistic Criticism |
| See also |
| Further reading |
Example
Suppose John likes to collect stamps. According to most models of behavior, including not only utilitarianism, but most economic, psychological and social conceptions of behaviour, it is believed that John likes collecting stamps because he gets pleasure from collecting stamps. Stamp collecting is an avenue towards acquiring pleasure. However, if you tell John this, he will likely disagree. He does get pleasure from collecting stamps, but this is not the process that explains why he collects stamps. It is not as though he says, ''“Aw man, now I have to collect stamps so I can get pleasure”''. Collecting stamps is not just a means toward pleasure. He likes collecting stamps.
This paradox is often spun around backwards, to illustrate that pleasure and happiness cannot be reverse-engineered. If for example you heard that collecting stamps was very pleasurable, and began a stamp collection as a means towards this happiness, it would inevitably be in vain. To achieve happiness, you must not seek happiness directly, you must strangely motivate yourself towards things unrelated to happiness, like the collection of stamps.
We fail to attain pleasures if we deliberately seek them.
----
Among other thinkers, John Stuart Mill, a Utilitarian philosopher, noted this sentiment in his autobiography:
:"But I now thought that this end [one's happiness] was only to be attained by not making it the direct end. Those only are happy (I thought) who have their minds fixed on some object other than their own happiness[....] Aiming thus at something else, they find happiness along the way[....] Ask yourself whether you are happy, and you cease to be so." (p. 94)
Possible explanations
''Happiness'' is often wrongly equated with ''pleasure'', though sometimes the identification of the two concepts has been questioned. If, whether for good or bad reasons, one does equate happiness with pleasure, then the paradox of hedonism arises. When one aims solely towards pleasure itself, one's aim is frustrated. Sidgwick comments on such frustration after a discussion of self-love in the above-mentioned work:
:"I should not, however, infer from this that the pursuit of pleasure is necessarily self-defeating and futile; but merely that the principle of Egoistic Hedonism, when applied with a due knowledge of the laws of human nature, is practically self-limiting; i.e., that a rational method of attaining the end at which it aims requires that we should to some extent put it out of sight and not directly aim at it." (p. 3)
Aristotle might possibly have also noted the paradoxical side of pursuing pleasure, though not, at any rate, as clearly as Sidgwick. Human beings are actors whose endeavors bring about consequences, and among these are pleasure. Aristotle then argues as follows:
:"How, then, is it that no one is continuously pleased? Is it that we grow weary? Certainly all human things are incapable of continuous activity. Therefore pleasure also is not continuous; for it accompanies activity." (p. 1099)
Here Aristotle might be interpreted as noting how eventually the spirit is willing [to pursue pleasure], but the flesh is weak [in obtaining pleasure]. Perhaps this is at the root of what causes the paradox to arise. Sooner or later, finite beings will be unable to acquire and expend the resources necessary to maintain their sole goal of pleasure; thus, they find themselves in the company of misery. On the other hand, David Pearce argues in his treatise ''The Hedonistic Imperative'' that humans might be able to use genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and neuroscience to eliminate suffering in all sentient life.
Hedonistic Criticism
A hedonist may not acknowledge the paradox of hedonism existence as a paradox.
His or her criticism of the paradox points that postponement of pleasure (in that one does not seek pleasure) in the long run can provoke alienation, weariness, and boredom in everyday life. Even worse, if one's job fails or close relationship dissolves, a very profound disillusionment might occur and the possibly very long time which was spent on that could be seen as a waste. This is the reason why hedonists suggest pursuing happiness every moment one can.
However, this particular viewpoint can also be criticized. The question the paradox of hedonism highlights is "How does one seek happiness?" While the hedonist may seek actions of pleasure, happy, content people have been observed to feel pleasure in their (routine) actions. So one answer that would seem to resolve the paradox may be that instead of seeking actions of pleasure, one should seek pleasure in one's actions.
See also
Paradox of value
Further reading
★ Aristotle!, ''Nichomachean Ethics'' 1175, 3-6 in ''The Basic Works of Aristotle'', Richard McKeon ed. (New York: Random House, 1941)
★ John Stuart Mill, ''Autobiography'' in ''The Harvard Classics'', Vol. 25, Charles Eliot Norton, ed. (New York: P. F. Collier & Son Company, 1909)
★ Henry Sidgwick, ''The Methods of Ethics'' (London: Macmillan & Co. Ltd., 1874/1963)
This article provided by Wikipedia. To edit the contents of this article, click here for original source.
psst.. try this: add to faves
