Outlines of a Critical Theory of EthicsDewey, John
Philosophy
Outlines of a Critical Theory of Ethics
Dewey, John
Ethics
We have been dealing with hedonism in its strict form--that which makes
_a_ pleasure, considered as to its intensity, certainty, etc., the
end of an act. Hedonism in this form fails to unify life, and fails,
therefore, to supply any standard. But the end of conduct is often
stated to be the greatest possible sum of pleasures thus introducing a
certain element of generality. Mill goes further and brings in the idea
of quality of pleasure.
Regarding the sum of pleasures the following from Sidgwick
(Op. cit., p. 382; see also p. 114) gives the hedonistic
statement. "The assumption is involved that all pleasures
are capable of being compared qualitatively with one
another and with all pains; that every feeling has a
certain intensive quality, positive or negative (or perhaps
zero) in respect to its desirableness and that the quantity
may be known, so that each may be weighed in ethical scales
against any other. This assumption is involved in the very
motion of maximum happiness," as the attempt to make "as
great as possible a sum of elements not quantitatively
commensurable would be a mathematical absurdity."
I. Sum of pleasures as the moral end. This, first, taken as criterion,
comes into conflict with the hedonistic psychology of pleasure as the
motive of acts; and, secondly, it requires some objective standard by
means of which pleasure is to be summed, and is, in so far, a surrender
of the whole hedonistic position.
1. If the object of desire is pleasure or a state of feeling which
exists only as it is felt, it is impossible that we should desire a
greatest sum of pleasures. We can desire a pleasure and that only. It
is not even possible that we should ever desire a continuous series of
pleasures. We can desire one pleasure and when that is gone, another,
but we can not unify our desires enough to aim at even a sum of
pleasures.
This is well put by Green (Op. cit, p. 236). "For the
feeling of a pleased person, or in relation to his sense
of enjoyment, pleasure cannot form a sum. However numerous
the sources of a state of pleasant feeling, it is one
and is over before another can be enjoyed. It and its
successors can be added together in thought, but not in
enjoyment or in imagination of an enjoyment. If the desire
is only for pleasure, _i. e._, for an enjoyment or feeling
of pleasure, we are simply victims of words when we talk of
desire for a sum of pleasures, much more when we take the
greatest imaginable sum to be the most desirable." See the
whole passage, pp. 235-246.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account