The theory of hedonism, which has at some point experienced controversy and debate on whether it is the highest natural goodness to experience happiness or pleasure, has hailed from antiquity. In its simplicity, it serves to convey the means to a good life, but it does not manage to convey the whole chaotic nature of a human. The Many Intrinsic Goods Argument viewed it through the lenses of hedonism, which focuses on pleasure and happiness, and questioned whether some of the intrinsic goods of life, such as morality, success, and friendship, would enhance the life of the individual even when their relationship with happiness is not very obvious.
The Many Intrinsic Goods Argument claims that happiness is good because it has its sources in success, friendship, and a sense of virtue. It is because, from pleasure, it would be wickedness. The counterargument, though, follows the logic of a scenario where the intrinsic value results immediately in the betterment of one’s life but does not necessarily increase in enjoying life itself (Andrić, 2019). Therefore, it becomes evident that hedonism is not an ultimate philosophical doctrine because it offers a poor explanation of our complex and multilayered understanding of human well-being.
Understanding the naive argument requires you to analyze it critically before exploring its limits. The hedonistic theory, which maintains that pleasure and happiness are the aim of life, is seen as the correct approach at the beginning of the debate. Accordingly, hedonistic conceptions highlight that the presence of pleasure or the occurrence of pain separates an action as ethically permissible or reprehensible (Andrić, 2019). The Many Intrinsic Goods Argument, on the other side, contradicts this assumption by presenting cases where properties like virtue, success, and friendship are intrinsically good, that is, worthwhile pursuits regardless of the amount of happiness they bring to the individuals involved.
Virtue is considered a collection of traits such as sincerity, integrity, and bravery, frequently regarded as the foundation of a morally driven life. It is the contention of the utilitarian perspective that virtues are suitable for their own sake, which is not dependent on the results they produce, as opposed to the hedonist argument that only consequences should be good or bad (Andrić, 2019). To illustrate, courage may lead to pain or difficulty, and those who act in such a way may be granted praise because those were the virtues they were trying to uphold.
Bearing the same in mind, what is regarded as achievements, like getting a new skill or finishing tough work, is about the very feeling associated with self-worth and self-worth as much as the satisfaction it brings to people. In more advanced societies, the search for success and the creative peak of self-development is above the simple pleasure and enjoyment calculation. People are satisfied and feel significant and self-worth by overcoming challenges and attaining their potential (Framarin et al., 2021). Additionally, friendship has been deemed a bond shared among two or more people, presenting various ways of enhancing life rather than only providing pleasure. The relationships, though, are worth far more than merely helping people acquire a better mood for a short period because they create emotional support and allow them to share everyday experiences. Sincerity in friendship is priceless because it is so rich in intangibles such as empathy, meaningfulness, and the care to belong, which are incomparable with any other practical benefits.
After presenting the Principles of the Many Intrinsic Goods Argument, together with critiques of the viewpoint of hedonism, it is necessary to have an overall assessment of the flawlessness of the said argument. The first point of the argument asserts that hedonism is true. Therefore, only morality, success, and friendship would be valuable and enjoyable if they contributed to your pleasure and consequently to a broader level of your enjoyment (Andrić, 2019). This idea corresponds to hedonism within the broader worldview of gaining the recoil of happiness or pleasure, the highest form of intrinsic value.
The second assumption of the argument is that, in some cases, a person’s virtues, success, and friendship can add a bit to her or his life. There may be possible strategies for supporters of the argument when they consider options without the immediate feeling of happiness or pleasure. They could use specific examples, even if a person became better or more satisfied after doing any activities related to the conscious reason for his or her actions (Oliver, 2021). Consequently, this conclusion is that hedonism is not true as it simply does not consider the various sources of sound and their value, which consist of, for example, virtue, being victorious, and friendship. The argument takes issue with the hedonic conception that the good life is only realized based on pleasure by pointing out instances in which the inherent or intrinsic goods and, hence, the quality of a life either result in greater happiness or are not at all related to pleasure.
The defender of instrumentalism must consider possible counterarguments and remaining constraints on the Many Intrinsic Goods Argument approach. Some philosophers who are against hedonism argue that by returning happiness as a concept that covers more than mere sensual satisfaction or the pursuit of true meaning, happiness can account for the importance of morality, success, and friendship (Oliver, 2021). Hedonistic proponents further contend that the line of argument addresses only first-order pleasures. At the same time, the reasoning represents what happens at the lower level of the continuum, and the definition is of a lower level.
Ultimately, a hedonistic view enriched with an appraisal of morality, success, and friendship, the appreciation of which is based on their intrinsic worth, would strike the following argument as a very compelling defense of hedonism. The argument challenges the idea that happiness is the only factor under consideration in deciding whose life is worthwhile, which causes one to think the matter over and re-appraise the notion of ethical conduct and a flourishing man. Hedonism offers an evident criterion to judge what a good life is, but unfortunately, it cannot manifest the inner life and the full range of human existence.
References
Andrić, V. (2019). Hedonism, Desirability and the Incompleteness Objection. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy, 8(2), 101-109.
Oliver, A. (2021). An unhappy pursuit of happiness. LSE Public Policy Review, 1(3), 3.
Framarin, C., Harris, S. E., Kellner, B., Eltschinger, V., Mills, E., & Ratié, I. (2021). Pleasure, desire and welfare in Buddhist and Hindu texts. B. Kellner, V. Eltschinger, E. Mills, & I. Ratié (Eds.), 127-145.
write