What do you think is the best response that the hedonist can give to the problem? Is this response adequate?
No offense , a classy western way (no that is not the paradox)
One life make it enjoyable (all planes)
I am confused , because I am not totally for the idea !!!
The paradox of happiness is the puzzling but apparently inescapable fact that regarding happiness as the sole ultimately valuable end or objective, and acting accordingly, often results in less happiness than results from regarding other goods
as ultimately valuable (and acting accordingly). That is, in many circumstances,happiness is more effectively achieved when other objectives are regarded as worth
pursuing for their own sakes than when happiness alone is regarded as worth pursuing for its own sake (see happiness; hedonism; intrinsic value).
These other objectives might be regarded as ultimately valuable instead of happiness, or
merely in addition to happiness; but they must be valued for their own sakes, and not merely as means to the achievement of happiness. These other objectives may include loving family relationships and friendships, meaningful professional relationships, immersion in rewarding work, the exercise of skills and abilities,accomplishments and triumphs, participation in religion or a large cause or movement, and contributions to one’s culture or nation.
The paradox of happiness can be understood as applying to people individually or in groups. With respect to people individually, the paradox of happiness is the fact that any given individual is likely to be less happy if happiness is her sole ultimate
objective than she would be if other goods were among her ultimate objectives. With respect to groups of people, the paradox of happiness is the fact that any given group of people, such as a community or a society, is likely to be less happy, collectively, if happiness is its sole collective ultimate objective than it would be if other goods were among its collective ultimate objectives.
There are two prominent, mutually compatible explanations for the paradox of happiness. The first appeals to the claim that when people have choices to make, they are generally poor judges of their available options’ effects on happiness (both individual and collective). A proponent of this view might claim, for example, that
people generally overestimate the extent to which additional income will increase their happiness, and generally underestimate the extent to which a longer commute between home and work will decrease it. In this view, people are systematically so inept at making happiness-promoting choices that a surer route to happiness is for people to aim, when making choices, at objectives other than the promotion of happiness (Sidgwick 1907: 142; Bradley 1927: 102; Parfit 1984: 5).
By Ben Eggleston.
Regards!
The impulse towards pleasure can be self-defeating. We fail to attain pleasures if we deliberately seek them. This is what Sidgwick (The Methods of Ethics) called the paradox of hedonism. There is a similar paradox concerning happiness.
However, there is something called longterm hedonism. Which mean we can seek pleasure in by smart longterm plan not by impulsive way.
Interesting question and looking forward to read answers and I go with Ayad.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology