Hedonists about well-being believe that the only thing that is non-instrumentall

Question

Hedonists about well-being believe that the only thing that is non-instrumentally good for you is pleasure. Suppose you could choose between living a very happy life in a computer-generated dreamworld and living a moderately happy life in the "real" world Which option would you choose? Why? Hedonistic act utilitarians believe that we are morally obligated to perform the act that maximizes the amount of happiness in the world. The theory, when conjoined with other facts about our world, implies that we who live in relatively comfortable conditions in affluent countries have a moral duty to refrain from eating factory-raised meat and a moral duty to donate a substantial portion of our income to effective aid agencies. Do you agree or disagree? Give evidence to support your answers.

Explanation / Answer

If I was asked to choose between the two options, I would choose to live in the real world, despite being less happy. Even if I regard pleasure as an important value, it is not the only value that I consider to be significant to me. I would rather attempt to live an unhappy life where I try to forge my own sense of purpose of this otherwise meaningless world, pursue my passions relentlessly and experience the whole range of emotions that I as a human am capable of. As it is said, “I would rather be a Socrates dissatisfied than a pig satisfied.”

Please post the other questions separately as we are supposed to answer just one question or four sub parts of a question.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse H
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.