Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Satisfaction: the end of desire
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Satisfaction: the end of desire
In order to reach a better theory to address what makes a life go best we must admit that there are things which are worthy of being desired due to some intrinsic properties they have, as opposed to assuming all things which are good for an agent are good only because they are desired by the agent; this notion however, is too far a departure from the idea of Desire Satisfaction Theory, and requires an alternative ethical theory to account for it.
From the deficiencies in Desire Satisfaction Theory Kraut is justified in developing his alternate ethical theory. Kraut’s theory states the following “There are at least three conditions which make a life a good one. A person must first love something [or someone], second, that which is loved must be worth loving, and third, one must be related in the right way to what one loves.”.
Kraut’s includes his first condition because it seems hard for us to think of a person as having a good life if they do not have love for anything. Kraut’s third condition is included because we can certainly think of instances in which a person loves something ...
Premise 1 introduces hedonism, which states that our lives only go well to the extent that we are happy. Hedonism is the ethical theory that pleasure and happiness should be the only aim in life - pleasure is the only thing that is intrinsically valuable, and a good life must be absent of pain. Something that is intrinsically valuable is valuable for its own sake - it does not cause or bring about anything else. When hedonists say that pleasure is the only intrinsic good, this means that pleasure obtained by any means still leads to a good life simply because it is
Humans, throughout recorded history, have searched for a proper way of living which would lead them to ultimate happiness; the Nicomachean Ethics, a compilation of lecture notes on the subject written by Greek philosopher Aristotle, is one of the most celebrated philosophical works dedicated to this study of the way. As he describes it, happiness can only be achieved by acting in conformity with virtues, virtues being established by a particular culture’s ideal person operating at their top capacity. In our current society the duplicity of standards in relation to virtue makes it difficult for anyone to attain. To discover true happiness, man must first discover himself.
From examining ends and goods, Aristotle formulates eudaimonia. He questions “what is the highest of all the goods achievable in action?” (Shafer-Landau 2013, 616). Aristotle argues that the majority of people agree that the highest good is achieving happiness, however, they disagree over what happiness actually is, for example, some claim t...
In this paper, I will argue that Objective List Theory is the best theory of well-being because it answers many questions brought up when discussing someone’s life, such as how someone can determine if a person’s life was good or bad overall or what aspect of their life dicates whether that person 's life was good or bad. Objective List Theory is the theory of well - being that states the only ingredients that are intrinsically valuable to one 's well-being are, accomplishment, freedom, and knowledge. Ultimately meaning, that these three characteristics are the only aspects of life that dictate if a person’s life is a good one or a bad one.
Stocker highlights the constraints that motives impose on both ethical theory and the ethical life in order to show that only when justifications and motives are in harmony can people lead the good life. Stocker believes that mainstream ethical theories, like consequentialism and deontology, make it impossible for people to reconcile their reasons and motives because these theories demand that people perform acts for the sake of duty or for the good, as opposed to because they care about the people who are affected by their actions.
Every human being carries with them a moral code of some kind. For some people it is a way of life, and they consult with their code before making any moral decision. However, for many their personal moral code is either undefined or unclear. Perhaps these people have a code of their own that they abide to, yet fail to recognize that it exists. What I hope to uncover with this paper is my moral theory, and how I apply it in my everyday life. What one does and what one wants to do are often not compatible. Doing what one wants to do would usually bring immediate happiness, but it may not benefit one in the long run. On the other hand, doing what one should do may cause immediate unhappiness, even if it is good for oneself. The whole purpose of morality is to do the right thing just for the sake of it. On my first paper, I did not know what moral theories where; now that I know I can say that these moral theories go in accordance with my moral code. These theories are utilitarianism, natural law theory, and kantianism.
"Such ethical possibility is, however, founded on and coextensive with the subject's movement toward what Foucault calls 'care of the self,' the often very fragile concern to provide the self with pleasure and nourishment in an environment that is perceived not particularly to offer them." -Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick
As a result, three general characteristics were constituted as the basics of his philosophy: the greatest happiness principle, universal egoism and the artificial identification of one’s interests with those of others. The first discusses about producing the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Therefore, the utility principle is completely dependent on the amount of happiness brought about. It can be inferred that actions which don’t produce a content amount of happiness is morally
In his paper Desire and the Human Good, Richard Kraut argues that the typical defense for pluralism, Desire Satisfaction Theory, is too weak; subsequently Kraut offers his own alternative. In this paper I will explain Desire Satisfaction Theory as Kraut opposes it, defend the objections made by Kraut against Desire Satisfaction Theory, and evaluate his alternative theory.
As human beings, we often have desires that are not always consistent with yielding the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. Utilitarianism would argue that putting one’s own desires first and pursuing one’s own interests is wrong and immoral behavior. While some moral theories acknowledge that pursuing one’s own interests can be morally optional, in Utilitarianism, it is always forbidden (Moral Theory, p. 135). This makes the theory overly demanding because one is constantly forced to consider others. Utilitarians can respond to this objection by challenging the claim that pursuing one’s own desires cannot ever be consistent with the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. Certainly there can be times when pursuing one’s own desires is also consistent with producing the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. Utilitarians might also point out that moral theories are meant to be demanding because they are teaching individuals how to act morally and acting morally is not always the desirable course of
The ethical system that I propose has the goal of what is ultimately good for human beings. The ultimate good of human beings lie in going beyond their individual needs because instinctually animals strive to fulfill their individual bio-organic ne...
Philosophers and thinkers from various periods of time have consistently contemplated on the idea of a good life. Evidently, no one answer to the question “What is the good life?” can be declared as correct or accurate, because the answer is based in personal moral and ethics, beliefs, and standards. In his essay titled “What is a Good Life?”, Ronald Dworkin, a renowned legal philosopher, attempts to suggest two types of good lives, one focused on living a life of consequence and one focused on things that are good in themselves. Dworkin suggests that we need a statement of “what we should take our personal goals to be that fits with and justifies our sense of what obligations, duties, and responsibilities we have to others”, implying that
The pursuit for happiness has been a quest for man throughout the ages. In his ethics, Aristotle argues that happiness is the only thing that the rational man desires for its own sake, thus, making it good and natural. Although he lists three types of life for man, enjoyment, statesman, and contemplative, it is the philosopher whom is happiest of all due to his understanding and appreciation of reason. Aristotle’s version of happiness is not perceived to include wealth, honor, or trivial
Suppose one was to record their pleasures down on paper using a graph. At first, one might be confused as to how to go about quantifying their happiness. After consideration of the quality of ones varying pleasures though, one is more able to deduce whether it is a higher or a lower pleasure and graph them. This enables one to distinguish which things promote the greatest pleasure, which translates itself to strive for happiness. For example, consider the attainment of food or sex in contrast to mental and spiritual growth. When one is only interested in satiating their appetite for food or sex, the pleasure acquired is minuscule when compared to the acquisition of mental and spiritual growth. Thus, attaining mental and spiritual growth will bring o...
A moral theory should be one’s guide when deciding whether an action is either good or bad, wrong or right. There are many types of moral theories to choose from, but we will only focus on two: utilitarianism and ancient hedonism. These theories meet in their pursuit of something greater, for hedonism it’s personal pleasure while for utilitarianism it is happiness for the greater number of people. In this work, the differences and the similarities of utilitarianism and hedonism will be pointed out after explaining them separately.