Chapter III: Hedonism.
§ 65.
The most
important points which I have endeavoured to establish in this chapter are as
follows. (1) Hedonism must be strictly defined as the doctrine that Pleasure
is the only thing which is good in itself
: this view seems to owe its
prevalence mainly to the naturalistic fallacy, and Mill’s arguments may be taken
as a type of those which are fallacious in this respect; Sidgwick alone has
defended it without committing this fallacy, and its final refutation must
therefore point out the errors in his arguments (36—38). (2) Mill’s Utilitarianism is criticised; it being shewn (a)
that he commits the naturalistic fallacy in identifying desirable
with
desired
; (b) that pleasure is not the only object of desire. The
common arguments for Hedonism seem to rest on those two errors (39—44). (3) Hedonism is considered as an
Intuition,
and it is pointed out (a) that Mill’s allowance
that some pleasures are inferior in quality to others implies both that it is an
Intuition and that it is a false one (46—48);
(b) that Sidgwick fails to distinguish pleasure
from
consciousness of pleasure,
and that it is absurd to regard the former at
all events, as the sole good (49—52); (c)
that it seems equally absurd to regard consciousness of pleasure
as the
sole good, since, if it were so, a world in which nothing else existed might be
absolutely perfect: Sidgwick fails to put to himself this question, which is the
only clear and decisive one (53—57). (4) What are
commonly considered to be the two main types of Hedonism, namely, Egoism and
Utilitarianism, are not only different from, but strictly contradictory of, one
another; since the former asserts My own greatest pleasure is the
sole good,
the latter The greatest pleasure of all is the
sole good.
Egoism seems to owe its plausibility partly to the
failure to observe this contradiction—a failure which is exemplified by
Sidgwick; partly to a confusion of Egoism as a doctrine of end, with the same as
a doctrine of means. If Hedonism is true, Egoism cannot be so; still less can it
be so, if Hedonism is false. The end of Utilitarianism, on the other hand,
would, if Hedonism were true, be, not indeed the best conceivable, but the best
possible for us to promote; but it is refuted by the refutation of Hedonism (58—64) (§ 65 ¶ 1)