Thanks, glad you liked it! Yes, in prepping for a talk on Hedonism given at a restaurant recently, I started compiling a list of various sorts of pleasures -- very specific stuff. It just kept growing and growing
Well, I think you've got quite a lot of good material you can cull out of this video. At its most basic, hedonism is the set of moral theories that say that the good is pleasure
What's particularly interesting about those passages -- they could be expressions of a particular form of hedonism. But, as such, they are equally compatible with other moral theories, a virtue ethics, for example
That's very gratifying to read. We're always in process of adding more -- right now mainly in the Existentialism series and in the new Philosophy Core Concepts series
That's a good question -- it really depends on what we mean by "better," I suppose. If we just mean "more likely to consume," then I would think that hedonists, particularly of the Aristippian sort, would make excellent consumers. Then again, those who are particularly motivated by prestige or exclusivity, rather than just pleasure, would also make good consumers. If we mean something like "being a savvy consumer," then perhaps not. . . . If we mean "moral consumers," probably not. . . .
I just want to say Thank you, you helped me a lot. I was searching for this kind of information but I couldn't find any relevant in my language (Spanish). I hope you continue to make more videos like this, because you are really helping people with your virtual school of philosophy. Thanks a lot again. P. D Sorry for the bad english.
Yes -- you're right -- those who are committed to a state of nature are also committed to some notion of human nature as well. It tends to be a fairly less well-developed one. If you look, by contrast, at someone like Aristotle, who is a teleological thinker, and who thinks that a human being outside of society is either a beast or a god (but not really human), he'd say that human nature is something that we have in some ways, and in other ways, still have to develop
That was a pretty good lecture Greg. I am familiar with Hedonism in the physical sense, And even the term 'Enlightened Hedonism', But I was not aware of the dichotomy of Aristippus and Epicurus. It's intriguing how universal pleasure can be applied. I also liked how you were exhorting your students to define and elucidate solid ideas of pleasure. It certainly accentuates the point you surmised that pleasure is much more than drinks, Girls and the like.
Thank you for the great video! I was originally just perusing for material to use for a highschool project, but I found the lecture to be very interesting and had to watch the whole thing!
Thanks! Glad to hear it. I will be doing that -- for the time being, I'm still shooting Existentialism videos and the new Core Concept series of videos. I'm hoping to get in a few more vids of Plato this semester as well, though
I am not really familiar with Aristotle (I am not a philosophy student but found out your lessons by chance while searching information on deductive and inductive reasoning while being at work haha and watched through other lessons and found them really enjoyable, but only recently got the time to listen to them completely and I must say I would have greatly enjoyed them if I were a student there) I plan to check up on him when I will get the chance
You're welcome -- and your English seems good enough. As to the question -- I would say that moral theories actually do both. I think that one of the "missing pieces" when people ask that sort of question is this: at any given time, there are many different people in the same holding and acting according to at least more than one morality. So, a moral theory will provide a view on what everyone's morality ought to be (but isn't), and about what those who hold it do have as their morality
Well, yes and no. If it's a question of whether I've even set down some of my own views and reflections on matters, I've done that a bit, but done relatively little with that, since I'm not particularly impressed with my own, "on-my-own" thinking! If it's doing something distinctively my own in interpretation of other philosophers -- Aristotle, Ansel, Hobbes, those kinds of guys -- and you're willing to count that as my own philosophical ideas, then Yes, I've done quite a bit of that
Also Epicurus states that besides the pleasure of well being given by simple living and denial of supplementary wants and desires (pretty much like buddhism in my opinion), sharing friendship is crucial to the epicurean hedonist way of life. So that leaves only the Cyrenaics as they cherished unhindered pleasure, and friendship might be a tool to attain pleasure without caring about the level of solidarity, while for Epicurus friendship was the goal, and while achieving it you would get pleasure
You're very welcome. You might be interested to know that there were a number of Christian Epicureans during the Early Modern period -- Pierre Gassendi being the most well-known, I'd say. Yep, there's more to hedonism than just live for today, wine, women, and song, etc.!
After I wrote that i thought i made a mistake by associating those twos...Humans had long progressed since "the state of nature" (social contract) while some still claim there is a certain "human nature". But i somehow wanted to point out that there could have been a certain "human nature" in that "state of nature". Like Rousseau's idea that humans are "naturally good" and that compassion comes naturally.
I also covered Aristippus focusing on his sayings, the video is called "Sayings of the Classical World: Aristippus". Very interesting man, and very funny too
Well, you can go ahead than think Hedonism is not a philosophy. I'll keep on teaching it as such, and teaching those, like Epicurus and Aristippus, who clearly articulated it as a philosophy. You might love a person for all sorts of other reasons, which will not really make sense to someone who is a Hedonist. But, that's definitely not everyone.
Well, it depends on what kind of hedonism you're following. Clearly, there is a fundamentally egoistic basis to these kinds of hedonism. But, that doesn't rule out altruistic behavior or ways of thinking -- if one gets pleasure by helping others, removing their pain, etc., then your hedonism will lead to altruism. Now, as to masochism, generally it involves wanting to suffer pain caused by others, not just oneself -- and could it be compatible with hedonism? Yes, pleasure through pain
Yes, I've read the book, a long while back. The specifics of "Lord Henry Wotton's form of hedonism"? I'd have to go back to the text, which will likely have to wait for summer, once the semester's finished.
Well, I would suppose that the only way to be in total opposition would be to say that pain is the only good and pleasure the only evil. Not too many philosophies of that sort -- and you couldn't get around the issue by talking about getting pleasure out of pain, etc. (that would still just be a refined form of hedonism, if you were still valuing pleasure positively. There are lots of philosophies that differ by saying that pleasure is not the highest good, or even a good
Would you consider an altruistic way of thinking to be in opposition to the hedonism? Or, on the other hand, directly causing yourself pain through masochism. Forgive me for not being very well read on the subjects.
I got a report about Hedonism next week, can you help me pls. how to explain it ( which they can understand what hedonism is all about clearly) to them, to classmates...or what is the best common example that could describe hedonism.. please sir :D Hamsel Estenzo from Philippines
Another great lecture, thank you ! .. After watching some of your videos about ethics .. I think I am a deontologist .. And I have a question though about moral theories .. Do moral theories provide how our morality is, or how our morality ought to be? Exuse my bad english .. Greetings from North Africa, Morocco :)
I don't think human nature is definable as a general rule in the human behaviour. Human Nature is something like a constantly redefined premise where determinism and freedom of choice constantly weave together a basis upon which humans act with the idea that they are genuinely predisposed to certain acts and patterns of thought. When I read about the so called "state of nature" there were philosophers like Rousseau, Hobbes, Hume were in constant contradictions on what the state of nature is.
I think that hedonism is not a philosophy but human nature. Why else would you want friends other than being with them and enjoying their presence? Why else would you want to love somebody if not for the happiness and pleasure that person gives to you?
Thanks, glad you liked it! Yes, in prepping for a talk on Hedonism given at a restaurant recently, I started compiling a list of various sorts of pleasures -- very specific stuff. It just kept growing and growing
That's a great endorsement!
Glad it's useful for you
My heart nearly skipped a beat when I saw how much content you have on your channel. Can't wait to delve into it :)
Just finished Picture of Dorian Gray, as well, which is what led me to search "Hedonism". Happy I did--awesome video, thanks for posting it!
Glad you liked it! Greetings from the other side of the world!
Well, I think you've got quite a lot of good material you can cull out of this video. At its most basic, hedonism is the set of moral theories that say that the good is pleasure
Yep, friendship is among the highest pleasures for Epicurus
Cheers from Romania. Thank for your videos, you do a great job. I sometimes sleep at night listening to your videos.
What's particularly interesting about those passages -- they could be expressions of a particular form of hedonism. But, as such, they are equally compatible with other moral theories, a virtue ethics, for example
That's very gratifying to read. We're always in process of adding more -- right now mainly in the Existentialism series and in the new Philosophy Core Concepts series
That's a good question -- it really depends on what we mean by "better," I suppose.
If we just mean "more likely to consume," then I would think that hedonists, particularly of the Aristippian sort, would make excellent consumers. Then again, those who are particularly motivated by prestige or exclusivity, rather than just pleasure, would also make good consumers.
If we mean something like "being a savvy consumer," then perhaps not. . . . If we mean "moral consumers," probably not. . . .
I just want to say Thank you, you helped me a lot. I was searching for this kind of information but I couldn't find any relevant in my language (Spanish). I hope you continue to make more videos like this, because you are really helping people with your virtual school of philosophy.
Thanks a lot again.
P. D Sorry for the bad english.
Yes -- you're right -- those who are committed to a state of nature are also committed to some notion of human nature as well. It tends to be a fairly less well-developed one.
If you look, by contrast, at someone like Aristotle, who is a teleological thinker, and who thinks that a human being outside of society is either a beast or a god (but not really human), he'd say that human nature is something that we have in some ways, and in other ways, still have to develop
That was a pretty good lecture Greg. I am familiar with Hedonism in the physical sense, And even the term 'Enlightened Hedonism', But I was not aware of the dichotomy of Aristippus and Epicurus. It's intriguing how universal pleasure can be applied. I also liked how you were exhorting your students to define and elucidate solid ideas of pleasure. It certainly accentuates the point you surmised that pleasure is much more than drinks, Girls and the like.
This is a great lecture. The historical pieces are VERY helpful.
Glad it was useful for you!
Thank you for the great video! I was originally just perusing for material to use for a highschool project, but I found the lecture to be very interesting and had to watch the whole thing!
Thanks! Glad to hear it. I will be doing that -- for the time being, I'm still shooting Existentialism videos and the new Core Concept series of videos. I'm hoping to get in a few more vids of Plato this semester as well, though
this is excellent, thank you for posting
You're welcome
I am not really familiar with Aristotle (I am not a philosophy student but found out your lessons by chance while searching information on deductive and inductive reasoning while being at work haha and watched through other lessons and found them really enjoyable, but only recently got the time to listen to them completely and I must say I would have greatly enjoyed them if I were a student there) I plan to check up on him when I will get the chance
Thanks for the video Greg! Greetings from Shanghai, China.
You're welcome -- and your English seems good enough. As to the question -- I would say that moral theories actually do both.
I think that one of the "missing pieces" when people ask that sort of question is this: at any given time, there are many different people in the same holding and acting according to at least more than one morality.
So, a moral theory will provide a view on what everyone's morality ought to be (but isn't), and about what those who hold it do have as their morality
Well, yes and no.
If it's a question of whether I've even set down some of my own views and reflections on matters, I've done that a bit, but done relatively little with that, since I'm not particularly impressed with my own, "on-my-own" thinking!
If it's doing something distinctively my own in interpretation of other philosophers -- Aristotle, Ansel, Hobbes, those kinds of guys -- and you're willing to count that as my own philosophical ideas, then Yes, I've done quite a bit of that
Well, I think happiness is much more than just pleasure. I'm basically a virtue ethicist in this respect
Also Epicurus states that besides the pleasure of well being given by simple living and denial of supplementary wants and desires (pretty much like buddhism in my opinion), sharing friendship is crucial to the epicurean hedonist way of life. So that leaves only the Cyrenaics as they cherished unhindered pleasure, and friendship might be a tool to attain pleasure without caring about the level of solidarity, while for Epicurus friendship was the goal, and while achieving it you would get pleasure
You're very welcome. You might be interested to know that there were a number of Christian Epicureans during the Early Modern period -- Pierre Gassendi being the most well-known, I'd say.
Yep, there's more to hedonism than just live for today, wine, women, and song, etc.!
After I wrote that i thought i made a mistake by associating those twos...Humans had long progressed since "the state of nature" (social contract) while some still claim there is a certain "human nature". But i somehow wanted to point out that there could have been a certain "human nature" in that "state of nature". Like Rousseau's idea that humans are "naturally good" and that compassion comes naturally.
Aristippus starts at 5:18
I also covered Aristippus focusing on his sayings, the video is called "Sayings of the Classical World: Aristippus". Very interesting man, and very funny too
Well, you can go ahead than think Hedonism is not a philosophy. I'll keep on teaching it as such, and teaching those, like Epicurus and Aristippus, who clearly articulated it as a philosophy.
You might love a person for all sorts of other reasons, which will not really make sense to someone who is a Hedonist. But, that's definitely not everyone.
He's definitely worth investing the time to study
Well, it depends on what kind of hedonism you're following. Clearly, there is a fundamentally egoistic basis to these kinds of hedonism.
But, that doesn't rule out altruistic behavior or ways of thinking -- if one gets pleasure by helping others, removing their pain, etc., then your hedonism will lead to altruism.
Now, as to masochism, generally it involves wanting to suffer pain caused by others, not just oneself -- and could it be compatible with hedonism? Yes, pleasure through pain
Yes, I've read the book, a long while back. The specifics of "Lord Henry Wotton's form of hedonism"? I'd have to go back to the text, which will likely have to wait for summer, once the semester's finished.
Well, I would suppose that the only way to be in total opposition would be to say that pain is the only good and pleasure the only evil. Not too many philosophies of that sort -- and you couldn't get around the issue by talking about getting pleasure out of pain, etc. (that would still just be a refined form of hedonism, if you were still valuing pleasure positively.
There are lots of philosophies that differ by saying that pleasure is not the highest good, or even a good
Your English seems just fine to me -- and you're welcome.
When you say "more like this", you mean ones that compare and contrast different thinkers?
You're welcome. I suppose it's good to be a soporific
That's interesting -- you're the second person to find this video in connection with that book
As a philosopher, have you ever written your own philosophical ideas Prof. Sadler?
Would you consider an altruistic way of thinking to be in opposition to the hedonism? Or, on the other hand, directly causing yourself pain through masochism. Forgive me for not being very well read on the subjects.
Well, let me rephrase it. Hedonism is a philosophy that deals with true human nature.
I got a report about Hedonism next week, can you help me pls. how to explain it ( which they can understand what hedonism is all about clearly) to them, to classmates...or what is the best common example that could describe hedonism.. please sir :D
Hamsel Estenzo from Philippines
Another great lecture, thank you ! .. After watching some of your videos about ethics .. I think I am a deontologist .. And I have a question though about moral theories .. Do moral theories provide how our morality is, or how our morality ought to be?
Exuse my bad english .. Greetings from North Africa, Morocco :)
I don't think human nature is definable as a general rule in the human behaviour. Human Nature is something like a constantly redefined premise where determinism and freedom of choice constantly weave together a basis upon which humans act with the idea that they are genuinely predisposed to certain acts and patterns of thought. When I read about the so called "state of nature" there were philosophers like Rousseau, Hobbes, Hume were in constant contradictions on what the state of nature is.
The "state of nature" and "human nature" are not the same concept or reality.
Well, some kinds of hedonism, at least. Definitely not Epicurean hedonism
Awh shucks, I wanted to see if you had published something.
Oh, that? Quite a lot, but all entirely on other people's philosophical work
Ok. I'm not a hedonist myself, by the way
is it safe to say that hedonistic people are better consumers?
I think that hedonism is not a philosophy but human nature. Why else would you want friends other than being with them and enjoying their presence? Why else would you want to love somebody if not for the happiness and pleasure that person gives to you?
so basically hedonism > drug addict lol