This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: should
we think those reasons are false.
If they were true, would those reasons be sufficient grounds to reject Mill’s “Expert Judge”
test? If not, explain why not. Robert Nozick argued against hedonism by claiming that we would all prefer to live our real lives,
rather than the life inside a simulated reality, even if the simulated life was guaranteed to include more
pleasure overall. Similarly, many people—including Susan Wolf—have argued against hedonism by
claiming that a life with meaning would be a better life for us than a life without meaning, even if the
life with meaning includes somewhat less pleasure overall. Reconstruct Nozick’s and Wolf’s objections to hedonism and defend hedonism against these objections.
In order to completely answer this question, you should:
i.) Explain IN YOUR OWN WORDS and IN AS MUCH DETAIL AS YOU CAN what hedonism says.
ii.) IN YOUR OWN WORDS and IN AS MUCH DETAIL AS YOU CAN Nozick’s objection to hedonism.
Make sure that you explain why this objection seems to undermine hedonism.
View Full Document
This essay was uploaded on 04/03/2014 for the course PHIL 101 taught by Professor Dowell during the Spring '08 term at UNL.
- Spring '08