Matt,
One can prove without science that every conscious entity is guided by the Perception of Hope and Threat, PHT. And if one also understands that, in the abstract sense, the feeling of joy/pleasure/happiness is instigated by the perception of progress toward a perceived hope (whether actual or illusion) then it can be said that your "feelings of pleasure" and its antithesis are the complete guide for consciousness. And pedantically that can be called "hedonism". Thus the kind of proof that you seem to desire is available to be made, although I have to question the purpose in doing so.
What is it that you would not call hedonism if the above definitive proof had been established? What theory would you be arguing against? If you imagine it to be an argument against religions, you would be incorrect because of how you defined your hedonism.
It is clear that you currently sense hope to at least a very small degree. And if you could not feel a sense of satisfaction or slight joy/pleasure as you pursued your hopes, you would not be pursuing any action at all, such as writing the OP. The simple fact that you make conscious decisions reveals that you sense a degree of joy/pleasure. But normally that is not what is called "hedonism", even if technically defined as such.
So I would like to know what you envision as non-hedonism or anti-hedonism .. ?
One can prove without science that every conscious entity is guided by the Perception of Hope and Threat, PHT. And if one also understands that, in the abstract sense, the feeling of joy/pleasure/happiness is instigated by the perception of progress toward a perceived hope (whether actual or illusion) then it can be said that your "feelings of pleasure" and its antithesis are the complete guide for consciousness. And pedantically that can be called "hedonism". Thus the kind of proof that you seem to desire is available to be made, although I have to question the purpose in doing so.
What is it that you would not call hedonism if the above definitive proof had been established? What theory would you be arguing against? If you imagine it to be an argument against religions, you would be incorrect because of how you defined your hedonism.
It is clear that you currently sense hope to at least a very small degree. And if you could not feel a sense of satisfaction or slight joy/pleasure as you pursued your hopes, you would not be pursuing any action at all, such as writing the OP. The simple fact that you make conscious decisions reveals that you sense a degree of joy/pleasure. But normally that is not what is called "hedonism", even if technically defined as such.
So I would like to know what you envision as non-hedonism or anti-hedonism .. ?
Last edited: