Preview

Utilitarianism Vs Hedonism

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1337 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Utilitarianism Vs Hedonism
As a person, does a person have to suffer in order to know what true happiness is? Does a person have to lack of physical or spiritual things in order to know what real pleasure is? What is pleasure? What is happiness? For hedonism philosophers, the main goal has been to reach a state of form of pleasure, while for utilitarianism philosophers the ultimate goal in life is to find happiness. Both, which seem reasonable goals to live by each day. But what does hedonism and utilitarianism mean, what is happiness, would either approve of Nozick’s Experience Machine in order to achieve happieness or pleasure? In this paper, I will explain how utilitarianism and hedonism works, what are their philosophies and will argue if either one would approve …show more content…
Singer defines utilitarianism as also what is ought to be done right ethically; “"If a being suffers there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration. No matter what the nature of the being, the principle of equality requires that its suffering be counted equally with the like suffering—insofar as rough comparisons can be made—of any other being." (Singer p.8) , and this should bring happiness to a person. The fact that the right thing is being done, and a being suffering is being prevented, that should bring enough happiness. For example, he believes that a person should give ninety percent of what someone earns, and live only on their ten percent; that being the way in which he lives. He has a website which helps several causes and helps prevent pain, suffering and death. In this website, a person can donate their money, and by doing so, people’s lives, or whichever organization a person chooses can make an …show more content…
At least for not for a person’s whole life. How can a person know what pleasure is, when they have never experienced pain. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary pain means “the physical feeling caused by disease, injury or something that hurts the body” (Merriam Webster), while emotional or mental pain is “sadness caused by some emotional or mental problem” (Merriam Webster) or just pain in general meaning when “someone or something that causes trouble or makes you feel annoyed or angry” (Merriam Webster). Inside the Experience Machine, according to Nozcik, why would a person feel “distress at all” if the decision a person made “is the best one?” Therefore, technically according, there would be no such thing as

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    If plugging in to the experience machine provides more pleasure, then we should just follow the idea. However, that’s only applicable if pleasure is all that matters to us. Nozick’s reply to this hedonistic argument is that we should not choose to connect to the machine, and thus, pleasure is not the only thing that matters to us.…

    • 1003 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Imagine, for a moment, that you are in a lifeboat. The lifeboat has a limited capacity, say 60 people, and there are 50 people in it now. You are not aware of the capacity of the lifeboat. These 50 people in the boat represent rich Americans, or those with the means to donate to overseas charities. Outside of the boat swimming in the water there are some 100 people hoping to get in. Those are the relatively poor people in need of aid. As those people with means, we must make a decision on what to do. If we operate as Singer believes, we would sacrifice the small chance that the boat will become overcrowded in order to add another person and save a life. However, if we treat all lives as equal and try to add everyone, eventually the boat will capsize and everyone will receive the equal result of death. In order to be helpful to those swimming in the water, we must maintain our position in the boat. This extends to our wealth and donations. In order to maintain our position of being able to help those in need, we must in some way maintain our wealth and our lives of living above necessity. Certainly we assist those who are outside of the boat with the extra capacity that we have, but we do so in measure and not to an extreme. This also raises the question of who to choose to help, which Singer’s morality does not help us with. If…

    • 1712 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    For J.S. Mill, decreasing pain and increasing pleasure is good. However, not all pleasure is the same. Mill argues that intellectual pleasures are superior to bodily pleasures (Mill, Utilitarianism, Chapter 2).…

    • 1095 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    It seems as if Singer isn't giving us an obligation or choosing whether or not one has too. He makes it clear that if one wants to save the lives of a kid then one should give away all the money one has to offer and not use the money to use on themselves. Lets just say, one can't help but save innocent children's lives, one agrees one should, but one also agrees what if one needs money for an emergency but can't help the kids out because one is helping themselves out instead, would one still be a bad person? For example, in paragraph 23. Singer says, "Then, if we value the life of a child more than going to fancy restaurants, the next time we dine out we will know that we could have done something better with our money." Arguing towards this, one would say, the thing is that we have to give all our money to saving a child's life instead of going to dinner or spending any money for themselves. One completely disagrees, how would spending a little money for themselves making one a bad person, rather then saving some money for them, and giving some money away to help the kids. Why not do both, rather then give away all the money one worked hard to get. Another example of this would be, in "World Poverty and Our Obligation" Peter Singers argument is that "people are continuing to have luxurious items without helping other in need. we are not doing what we are meant to…

    • 1356 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Singer asks us to consider this argument. Suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad. “If it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it.. It is in our power to prevent suffering and death by giving money to causes such as famine relief. Therefore, we have a moral obligation to give money to causes such as famine relief. We should give and it is wrong not to give.…

    • 304 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Matrix Movie Essay

    • 723 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Nozick uses the experience machine as a challenge to theories which hold that pleasurable mental…

    • 723 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Singer paper

    • 1267 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Singer is a Utilitarian a who believes that the value of a thing depends on its utility, so Singer believes that…

    • 1267 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    He argues that people have many different reasons to [delete] why they do not donate. His vision is that the people and the government should take care of the problem. He uses a great illustrative imaginative scenario. Basically, let’s say you are walking down the path by the local pond. You have just purchased a brand new pair of running pants worth $100. You see a young child drowning and screaming for help. You have a moral obligation to save that childs[‘s] life and you will sacrifice your brand new pants without question. The child’s life is worth more than your new pair of pants and you do not hesitate to ruin them for the child. Singer says it best, “if it is in our power to prevent something very bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything else morally significant, we ought, morally, to do it.” (Singer, 1972) He is basically saying that if by saving that child you do not sacrifice anything, in this case the rescuer’s life, of equal moral importance you should do it.…

    • 1156 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Arguments of Peter Singer

    • 1026 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Singer’s concept of marginal utility is that one should give as much as possible to the unfortunate; it should never create a hardship to the giver. This would be doing more harm than good. When a person contributes to the poor, it should not financially affect their lifestyle by putting them in debt, homeless, or without food.…

    • 1026 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The basic premise of utilitarianism is we have a moral obligation to produce the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people (Mill, p. 364) and Peter Singer believes we have a moral obligation to help others less fortunate than we to the extent at which no more moral good comes of comparable significance to the bad thing that we “ought” prevent (Singer, p. 874). How is it that we are somehow philosophically indebted to society and required to alleviate suffering? Can such an obligation even be construed moral? I contend that anything deemed a moral obligation, or “ought” as Singer renounces usage of the term obligation in note 2 following the essay (Singer, p. 880), is a liability, not an asset, which in and of itself is immoral. For…

    • 1695 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Peter Singer Famine

    • 1945 Words
    • 8 Pages

    “The second objection to my attack on the present distinction between duty and charity is one which has from time to time been made against utilitarianism” (pg.15). Basically this objection is saying that if we, as a society work so incredibly hard to fight against the misery in the world we will get burned out and ultimately not be able to serve to the best of our ability. The idea behind Singers assumption is to make giving our moral duty and not just something we do out of charity. To combat this objection Singer brings back his main point, “We ought to be preventing as much suffering as we can without sacrificing something else of comparable moral importance” (pg.15). However, this is a very difficult thing for people to grasp. We are self-interested people and don’t want to give up anything of comparable moral importance in order to benefit…

    • 1945 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Peter Singer asserts that utilitarianism implies a moral obligation to be a vegetarian. Utilitarianism holds that the right actions, or what we ought to do, are those actions that are expected to produce the best overall consequences, provide maximum utility, happiness or pleasure and minimize pain and suffering. Utilitarians look at the probable consequences of choices and choose their actions based on whatever they believe will produce the most utility or pleasure. Singer claims that if one is a utilitarian, then one ought to be a vegetarian. He agrees with the principle of equality of interests, which states that states all interests ought to be given equal consideration.…

    • 1278 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Marx and Mills

    • 1200 Words
    • 5 Pages

    John Stuart Mill suggests that a person's ethical decision-making process should be based solely upon the amount of happiness that the person can receive. Although Mill fully justifies himself, his approach lacks certain criteria for which happiness can be considered. Happiness should be judged, not only by pleasure, but by pain as well. This paper will examine Mill's position on happiness, and the reasoning behind it. Showing where there are agreements and where there are disagreements will critique the theory of Utilitarianism. By showing the problems that the theory have will reveal what should make up ethical decision-making. John Stuart Mill supports and explains his reasoning in his book, Utilitarianism. Mill illustrates the guidelines of his theory. Mill defines utilitarianism as the quest for happiness. His main point is that one should guide his or her judgements by what will give pleasure. Mill believes that a person should always seek to gain pleasure and reject pain. Utilitarianism also states that the actions of a person should be based upon the "greatest happiness principle". This principle states that ethical actions command the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Mill further explores the need for pleasure by noting "a being of higher faculties requires more to make him happy." . He acknowledges that some pleasures are more alluring than others are. He adds to this by making known that when placing value in things to calculate pleasure, not only quantity important but quality as well. Mill's criteria for happiness is easily understood, some statements that he gives are questionable. John Stuart Mill plainly laid out what he believes that the basis for ethical decision-making. First, the pursuit of pleasure is directly related to happiness. This idea can be easily accepted. It is natural for a person to focus his goals on things that will bring him pleasure. It would be absurd if someone's goal in life was to be poor and…

    • 1200 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    * On p. 18 of your textbook, the authors present the hypothetical possibility of being hooked up to an ‘experience machine’ that would guarantee a constant state of happiness and positive emotion. Would you choose to be hooked up to such a machine? Why or why not? In your response, differentiate between hedonic and eudaimonic concepts of happiness.…

    • 361 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Pursuit Of Happiness

    • 985 Words
    • 4 Pages

    “Happiness and Misery are the names of two extremes, the utmost bound where we know not…But of some degrees of both, we have very lively impressions, made by several instances of Delight and Joy on the one side and Torment and Sorrow on the other; which, for shortness sake, I shall comprehend under the names of Pleasure and Pain, there being pleasure and pain of the Mind as well as the Body…Happiness then in its full extent is the utmost Pleasure we are capable of, and Misery the utmost pain”. (1894,…

    • 985 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays