[quote="mymamamary, post:1, topic:304176"]
Hedonism is of course, the Philosophy that Pleasure is the only intrinsic good.
I find a big error in that line of thinking:
If pleasure is the only intrinsic good, then why are Drug addicts among the least happiest of people?
If pleasure is the only intrinsic good, then why do Hollywood movie stars and directors jump off of bridges, when all pleasure is gauranteed to them at a mere whim?
If pleasure is the only intrinisic good, then why do young folks always end up in heartbreak over their BF/GF, even when they share each others body in fornication?
It seems to me that an intrinsic good would be a joyful and fulfilling one, yet all I see is a severe dissatisfaction. :(
Im challenging the Status Quo, as the Status Quo indeed seems fixiated on the idea of Pleasure as the ultimate and supreme good.
Anyone else want to as well?
Most philosophers would agree with you, including the philosopher of hedonism, par excellence -- Epicurus.
The Greek philosophers, in general, understood that physical pleasure alone is not sufficient to happiness -- and, in fact, can be injurious to happiness.
This was a big component of what they called wisdom; wisdom was understanding and discerning that which will make you happy, and that which will not (even if it may appear to promise happiness).
Their basic insight is that happiness is a state of mind, and that physical pleasure and material possessions -- which gratify the body -- are not sufficient to secure the mind a lasting happiness.
Wisdom discerns that it is virtue that secures a lasting happiness -- for example, the virtue of moderation. Gratitude is another virtue, as when Epicurus says, "do not focus continually on what you don't have, but rather realize that what you have now is what you once wanted." Friendliness is a virtue because, by far, the single greatest source of mental suffering -- and the one that is the least guarded against -- is loneliness (unremitting loneliness can lead to thoughts of suicide). Epicurus personally believed that the best defense against loneliness was not romantic passion -- as it was too unstable -- but rather friendship, which can be lifelong (marriage based on the spouses also being "best friends," could also fit this description). Xenophon's Socrates found it telling that most of his interlocuters could tell him precisely how much land and wealth they had, but couldn't tell him how many friends they had (which he considered the greater wealth, in terms of securing happiness).
That being said, these Greek philosophers also counted some measure of self-sufficiency as a virtue. To have as few needs as possible -- not having expensive tastes, nor being incapable of spending time alone, not being incapable of missing a meal -- was a great virtue, insofar as it was a means to happiness, or a defense against unhappiness. As Epicurus put it, "nothing is enough to the man for whom enough is too little." And Socrates, walking through the marketplace, is said to have proclaimed, "how many things there are here, that I do not want!"