如何理解伦理享乐主义

How to Make Sense of Ethical Hedonism

日常生活中遵循享乐主义的人不在少数,然而伦理享乐主义在学术界一直颇有争议。为了解决两者间的张力,我们有必要区分开伦理享乐主义包含的三个不同命题以及其受到的不同直觉挑战:同质性命题受到苏格拉底式挑战,唯一性命题受到康德式挑战,全称性命题受到罗尔斯式挑战。密尔放弃同质性命题来挽救享乐主义,但他对高级与低级快乐的区分难以得到辩护。不仅如此,诺齐克的体验机思想实验表明,任何只以快乐为唯一价值的理论在直观上都让人难以接受,从而进一步巩固了康德式挑战。挽救享乐主义比较可行的新策略是放弃唯一性命题,承认快乐之外还有其他内在价值。这一策略不仅可以接受康德式挑战,而且可以阐明同质性命题的合理性。此外,通过区分初定理由与初步理由,我们可以较好地回应针对全称性命题的罗尔斯式挑战。

There are many people who follow hedonism in daily life,but ethical hedonism has been controversial in academia.To resolve the tension between the two,it is necessary to distinguish three different propositions within ethical hedonism and the various intuitive challenges they pose:the homogeneity proposition is subject to Socratic challenge,the uniqueness proposition Kantian challenge and the universal proposition Rawlsian challenge.Mill relinquishes the homogeneity proposition in his attempt at salvage hedonism,yet his distinction between higher and lower pleasures is hardly defendable.Furthermore,Nozick's thought experiment of experience machine demonstrates that any theory solely based on pleasure as the ultimate value is intuitively unacceptable,thus further consolidating the Kantian challenge.Therefore,a new strategy more feasible to save hedonism is to abandon the uniqueness proposition and acknowledge the existence of other intrinsic values alongside pleasure.Thus,it is natural for us to accept Kantian challenge and illustrate the plausibility of the homogeneity proposition.Furthermore,we can meet Rawlsian challenges to universal proposition by distinguishing prima facie reasons from pro tanto reasons.