what kind of hedon are you?
in addition to events recently (and by recently i’m referring to most of this year) that have sort of upset my comfortability with my social life, it’s nearing the end of the year, which for me means much reflection, as is obvious by these ridiculously long rambling blog posts that are probably boring you to death.
topic du jour, related to my last post about figuring out what makes me happy:
HEDONISMBasic concepts
The basic idea behind hedonistic thought is that all actions can be measured on the basis of how much pleasure and how little pain they produce. In very simple terms, a hedonist strives to maximize this ‘ratio’ (pleasure over pain). The nineteenth-century British philosophers John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham established the fundamental principles of hedonism through their ethical theory of Utilitarianism. Utilitarian value stands as a precursor to hedonistic values in that all action should be directed toward achieving the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Though consistent in their pursuit of happiness, Bentham and Mill’s hedonistic values are faintly divergent in relation to their exposition of the principle of utility. There are two basic schools of thought on hedonism:
* One school, grouped around Jeremy Bentham, argues a quantitative approach. Bentham believed that the value of a pleasure could be quantitatively understood. Essentially, he believed the value of a pleasure to be its intensity multiplied by its duration – so it was not just the number of pleasures, but their intensity and how long they lasted that must be taken into account.
* Other proponents, like John Stuart Mill argue a qualitative approach. Mill believed that there can be different levels of pleasure – higher quality pleasure is better than lower quality pleasure. Mill also argues that simpler beings (he often references pigs) have an easier access to the simpler pleasures; since they do not see other aspects of life, they can simply indulge in their pleasures. The more elaborate beings tend to spend more thought on other matters and hence lessen the time for simple pleasure. It is therefore more difficult for them to indulge in such ‘simple pleasures’ in the same manner.
Critics of the qualitative approach, however, argue that there are several problems with it. They assert that generally, ‘pleasures’ do not necessarily share common traits, besides the fact that they can be seen as “pleasurable”. Because what is ‘pleasant’ is a subjective thing, differing between individuals, such critics claim that ‘qualities’ of pleasures are difficult to study objectively and in terms of universal absolutes. Critics of the qualitative approach cite the fact that the standards of what ought to be “pleasurable” vary between individuals, of which sexual sadism is an example, in support of their claim that pleasures cannot be distinguished with respect to their ‘qualities’.
i tend to be in the second camp. i see the quality of pleasure as far more important than quantity. “simple pleasures”, while enjoyable (sleeping, for example. i LOVE sleeping.), are not enough to make a life pleasurable for me, i don’t think, or at least, it isn’t working that way right now. simple pleasures like getting high, having sex, eating chocolate, loving an art – these are simple to find, simple to do, simple to create. but i’m looking for an entirely other kind of pleasure in my life- not necessarily superfically different than these things in action, but for other reasons more complex. more meaningful.
the question is, then, what makes things more meaningful, and how to make things more meaningful. we all create the meaning; unless you are a theist, meaning doesn’t exist on it’s own. this is why i am envious of those that seem to always just be happy with whatever comes their way; however the cookie crumbles, they simply enjoy being safe, alive, warm, and well. it’s just a difference of how you evaluate life, on a very personal, almost visceral level. we can’t really control what pleases us much, can we? … can we? is the difference in these two philosophies of hedonism less in the action, but in the perception? if i make the simple pleasures more meaningful to me, doesn’t that make it easier to be happy?
one of the things i have been trying to evaluate as of late is the conflict that arises when some people find pleasure – pleasure they believe is harmless – in things that other people find harmful. BDSM, for example, or porn. or shopping at Nordstrom’s. whatever. we all have individual preferences for what brings us pleasure, and what is at issue here is that i find some people use the argument that if something makes them feel good, they should be allowed to do it, even if it is perceived as a “not good” action by someone else, because of this principle of subjectivity in relation to pleasure.
i am completely internally conflicted about this: philosophically i want to agree with the idea that however humans wish to access that portal, that place that allows you to free yourself of moral woes and makes you see the universe in a whole new light- whether it’s trail running up mountains or sitting high in a dark room, surrounded by like-minded souls who reach for your hand with smiles so genuine you can’t help but believe they feel love – should be acceptable form of pleasure, as long as you’re not hurting anyone else. it’s so subjective, this life, that how can you deny someone else their access to pleasure?
but it seems you can’t trust your fellow humans to make good decisions about pleasure – if we could, we wouldn’t have issues in this culture with drug abuse and sex abuse and consumer gluttony. so if we are all allowed to define our own pleasures, where does it end? this of course is the argument of the Church for walking the Narrow Path – once you start down the wide one, it’s hard to turn back.
back to hedonism: is true hedonism, the belief that the seeking and creation of pleasure is the highest pursuit, a successful way of being, a good tenet to live by? if you think about it in more altruistic terms, i think it is. i think spending your life trying to find and create good, valuable pleasures for yourself and for everyone else and minimizing pain is a most excellent venture. seeking out the beauty in the world is no small feat of mind, either, i don’t think.
my problem is that i’d love to be able to live this way without all of the preconceptions judgments that i carry, even about my own decisions. is what i am doing not only pleasurable, but GOOD? it matters a great deal to me.
that word, “good”. it’s been coming up a lot in conversations lately. yes, subjective in some senses, but not so much in others (i.e. even though something might be “good” for you, it quite possibly hurts someone somewhere else via the process of globalization).
if i have a point here at all, it’s that i am very much needing to focus on being a better hedon. i need to be able to find pleasure again in the things in my life, but i want to feel good about it in a much different way than just “this feels good right now – consequences later”. i want to feel GOOD about it, all the way through, without feeling conflicted. this is going to perhaps require some changes in patterns of living and thinking, but there is no change without change.
as for how i feel about other people and their pursuits of pleasure, i just need to get over it, or at the very least stop letting it affect me so. if it means that i need to make adjustments in how i interact with my friends, then i think that some sacrifices are going to have to be made in terms of who/what/where/when. i would rather, however, find a way to not limit myself so much like that and instead allow myself to enjoy my own experience in the context of others. more than anything, this is the goal. this is what i see as a true liberal mind, and i admire those who are able to do this. i feel right now i am living too much by words and less by action. i am letting definitions and meanings weigh in too heavily on how i experience things. i wish to reverse this.
last year, you may recall, my new year’s resolution was to SHINE, and i think, in my own way, i’ve done a good job of that.
this year, i think, it may be more along the lines of ENJOY.
Leave a Reply
