Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Immanuel Kant famously rejected hedonism. It is, however, much less known that Kant himself – despite his rejection of hedonism in moral matters – puts forward a hedonistic theory when he talks about human happiness. While this essay is primarily concerned with a discussion of what I shall call Kant’s „prudential hedonism“, my findings are also systematically relevant, in at least two ways: Firstly, Kant’s argumentative strategy – dismissing hedonism with regard to morality, while endorsing it with regard to human happiness– suggests that hedonism as a philosophical approach deserves a nuanced treatment. Secondly, Kant’s own hedonism suggests that this approach might have a considerably higher systematic potential as hedonism is frequently granted in contemporary debates. In this essay, I will start by sketching Kant’s prudential hedonism. Then, I will discuss three difficulties my reading encounters – the indeterminacy of pleasure, the possibility of something like a „theory“ of well-being in Kantian terms, and the problem of a deficit in autonomy –, before returning to the two systematic implications of my interpretation in the conclusion.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moritz Hildt (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 9 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: