From: Blunderov (squooker@mweb.co.za)
Date: Fri Jan 11 2002 - 11:50:24 MST
I am deeply complimented that L'Ermit was amused by my 2 pence worth on
Hedonism. I am enjoying the warm waters here at the CoV but must confess to
feeling more comfortable in the shallow end. That said:
I thought, at first,that I must have shot my bolt on the proposition that
pleasure is the most important thing in life.(I must agree by the way that
it isn't likely that there could be any single thing that is "the most
important thing in life". Except maybe life. Let's not go there for now.)
But cannot a case be made for the proposition that: no (conscious!)action
can ever be entirely devoid of self interest? If action requires intention,
and intention is the purpose of a unique individual, it must follow that
every action is intended to abet the purpose of that individual.
I realise that "self-interest" is not necessarily the same as "pleasure",
and I am mindful of your post on the reversible polarity of pleasure and
pain, but if you will allow me a broaden the concept of pleasure to include
"perceived self= interest", then perhaps I can claim that, because it is
impossible to perform and altruistic act, pleasure is the most important
thing in life because it informs every action ever undertaken.
(BTW even a suicide could be said to be acting in in own perceived self
interest. Sort of)
Does altruism exist and if not, what does this mean to the huddled masses of
hedonists?
Yours not quite ready to resign.
Excelsior
Blunderov
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:39 MDT