The term
hedonism refers to a family of views about the role of
pleasure. These views are often categorized into
psychological,
axiological, and
ethical hedonism depending on whether they study the relation between pleasure and
motivation,
value, or right action, respectively. While these distinctions are common in contemporary philosophy, earlier philosophers did not always clearly differentiate between them and sometimes combined several views in their theories. The word
hedonism derives from the
Ancient Greek word (), meaning . Its earliest known use in the English language is from the 1850s.
Psychological hedonism was a key advocate of psychological hedonism. Psychological or motivational hedonism is the view that all human actions aim at increasing pleasure and avoiding
pain. It is an empirical view about what motivates people, both on the
conscious and the
unconscious levels. Psychological hedonism is usually understood as a form of
egoism, meaning that people strive to increase their own happiness. This implies that a person is only motivated to help others if it is in their
own interest because they expect a personal benefit from it. As a theory of human motivation, psychological hedonism does not claim that all behavior leads to pleasure. For example, if a person holds mistaken beliefs or lacks necessary skills, they may attempt to produce pleasure but fail to attain the intended outcome. The standard form of psychological hedonism asserts that the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain are the only sources of all motivation. Some psychological hedonists propose less wide-reaching formulations, suggesting that considerations of pleasure and pain are not the only source of motivation, do not influence all actions, or are otherwise limited by certain conditions. For example, reflective or rationalizing hedonism says that human motivation is only driven by pleasure and pain when people actively reflect on the overall consequences. Another version is genetic hedonism, which accepts that people desire various things besides pleasure but asserts that each desire has its origin in a desire for pleasure. Darwinian hedonism explains the pleasure-seeking tendency from an
evolutionary perspective, arguing that hedonistic impulses evolved as adaptive strategies to promote survival and reproductive success. Proponents of psychological hedonism often highlight its intuitive appeal and explanatory power. They argue that many desires focus on pleasure directly, while others aim at pleasure indirectly by promoting its causes. A similar argument from
behavioral psychology proposes that
altruistic conduct is learned through
conditioning, which
reinforces behavior that leads to positive rewards. This view asserts that all primary motivation comes from
selfish drives on which all secondary motivation, including altruism, depends. Critics of psychological hedonism often cite apparent counterexamples in which people act for reasons other than their personal pleasure. Proposed examples include acts of genuine altruism, such as a soldier sacrificing themselves on the battlefield to save their comrades or a parent wanting their children to be happy. Critics also mention non-altruistic cases, like a desire for
posthumous fame. It is an open question to what extent these cases can be explained as types of pleasure-seeking behavior. Another criticism from
evolutionary biology argues that altruistic motivation is
conducive to survival and reproduction. It suggests that altruistic motivation produces some necessary behavior, like
parental care, more reliably since it does not depend on additional mechanisms, such as the individual's belief that parental care leads to personal pleasure.
Axiological hedonism Axiological or evaluative hedonism is the view that pleasure is the ultimate source of all value. It states that things other than pleasure only have value insofar as they produce pleasure or reduce pain. This is typically explained through the distinction between
intrinsic and instrumental value. An entity has
intrinsic value if it is good in itself or if its worth does not depend on external factors; conversely, an entity has instrumental value if it leads to other good things. According to axiological hedonism, only pleasure is intrinsically valuable because it is good even when it produces no external benefit. Money, by contrast, is only instrumentally valuable because it can be used to acquire other good things but lacks value apart from these uses. The overall value of something depends on both its intrinsic and instrumental value. In some cases, even unpleasant experiences, like a painful surgery, can be good overall if their positive consequences, like preventing future pain, outweigh the present discomfort. According to quantitative hedonism, the intrinsic value of pleasure depends solely on its intensity and duration. Qualitative hedonists hold that the quality of pleasure is an additional factor. They argue, for instance, that subtle pleasures of the mind, like the enjoyment of fine art and philosophy, can be more valuable than simple bodily pleasures, like enjoying food and drink, even if their intensity is lower. Diverse arguments for and against axiological hedonism have been proposed. Proponents often focus on the intuition that pleasure is valuable and the observation that people naturally desire pleasure for its own sake. The idea that most pleasures are valuable in some form is relatively uncontroversial. Critics usually focus on the stronger claim that all pleasures are valuable or that pleasure is the only source of intrinsic value. Some assert that certain pleasures are worthless or even bad, like disgraceful and
sadistic pleasures. A different criticism comes from
value pluralists, who contend that other things besides pleasure have value. To support the idea that
beauty is an additional source of value,
G. E. Moore used a
thought experiment involving two worlds: one exceedingly beautiful and the other a heap of filth. He argued that the beautiful world is better even if there is no one to enjoy it. Another influential thought experiment, proposed by
Robert Nozick, involves an
experience machine able to create artificial pleasures. Based on his contention that most people would not want to spend the rest of their lives in this type of pleasant illusion, he argued that hedonism cannot account for the values of authenticity and genuine experience. Ethical or
normative hedonism is the thesis that the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain are the highest
moral principles of human behavior. It implies that other moral considerations, like
duty,
justice, or
virtue, are relevant only to the extent that they influence pleasure and pain. Theories of ethical hedonism can be divided into
utilitarian and egoistic versions. Utilitarian hedonism, also called
classical utilitarianism, asserts that everyone's happiness matters. It says that a person should maximize the sum total of happiness of
everybody affected by their actions. This sum total includes the person's own happiness, but it is only one factor among many without any special preference compared to the happiness of others. As a result, utilitarian hedonism sometimes requires people to forego their own enjoyment to benefit others. For example, philosopher
Peter Singer argues that good earners should donate a significant portion of their income to
charities since this money can produce more happiness for people in need. Egoistic hedonism says that each person should only pursue their own pleasure. According to this controversial view, a person only has a moral reason to care about the happiness of others if it impacts their own well-being. For example, if someone experiences unpleasant feelings, such as
guilt, when harming others, then they have a reason to avoid causing harm. However, under this view, a person would be morally permitted—or even obliged—to harm others if doing so increases their own overall pleasure. Ethical hedonism is often combined with
consequentialism, which asserts that an act is right if it has the best consequences. It is typically paired with axiological hedonism, which links the intrinsic value of consequences to pleasure and pain. As a result, many arguments for and against axiological hedonism also apply to ethical hedonism. Additionally, proponents of utilitarian hedonism often emphasize its impartial nature, its simple and objective method for evaluating moral judgments, and its flexibility to apply to any situation. Critics frequently argue that utilitarian hedonism places
too high demands on conduct and leads to injustice in some cases by sacrificing individual rights for the greater good. They also point to practical difficulties in assessing all pleasure-related consequences of actions.
Others 's painting
The Starry Night, is beautiful if it causes aesthetic pleasure. Aesthetic hedonism is a theory about the nature of
aesthetic value or beauty. It states that a thing, like a landscape, a painting, or a song, has aesthetic value if people are pleased by it or get aesthetic pleasure from it. It is a
subjective theory because it focuses on how people respond to aesthetically engaging things. This view contrasts with objective theories, which assert that aesthetic value only depends on objective or mind-independent features of things, like symmetry or harmonic composition. Some aesthetic hedonists believe that any type of pleasure is relevant to the aesthetic value of a thing. Others offer a more nuanced characterization, saying that aesthetic value is only based on how people with a well-developed
taste respond to it. == Central concepts ==