Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[smigenboger]

I sometimes think I live my life one interesting tingling sensation to the next, but I'm open to many things.

My philosophy class says there's nilhistic hedonism and lawful. (not sure the fancy greek names) One does whatever no matter what, such as those who overindulge in tasty food, or kill people because it's fun. A good excuse for the rampant bad behaviors in ancient Greece. Then the lawful ones, saying life is for happiness, but you must keep it under control, or put some off, so you can continue feeling good later.

A horrible example: You can hold your breath if its fun for you. Nilhistics will hold it until they die (in example) and lawfuls will breathe out so they can breathe in again.

The LeVeyans, as I understand, seek for human perfection, in theory. They do what they can to create a more perfect being, and essentially prefer to worship themselves, over worshiping an outside source. Idealisms aside, their basic code for behavior is as good, if not maybe a little better, than Christianity, without the guilt and fear of otherworldly punishment

[Blargityblarg]

A horrible example: You can hold your breath if its fun for you. Nilhistics will hold it until they die (in example) and lawfuls will breathe out so they can breathe in again.

Apparently, if you hold your breath, you fall unconscious and your brain stem takes over again. I can't tell if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

[Siquo]

Third form: The original greek hedonists (Epicureanism) were smarter. But also a lot less fun. They went for minimising grief instead of maximising happiness, so they relinquished anything and everything, and lived poor and posessionless (because you can lose what you posess, bringing you grief).
Although they might fall in the "lawful hedonist" category, there's a difference between minimising unhappiness and maximising happiness.

For instance:

He lauded the enjoyment of simple pleasures, by which he meant abstaining from bodily desires, such as sex and appetites, verging on asceticism. He argued that when eating, one should not eat too richly, for it could lead to dissatisfaction later, such as the grim realization that one could not afford such delicacies in the future. Likewise, sex could lead to increased lust and dissatisfaction with the sexual partner.

So: Don't have sex because it can cause dissatisfaction later. Not quite what we know now as "hedonism".

[smigenboger]

For the horrible example, you knew what I mean't, of course, I guess replace holding in air with holding your breath underwater or something.

I think the first one is Cyreanian or some C-word and the other was Epicurian.

For contrasting hedonism, the stoics are the ones who look for the positive side of things, and don't engage in, well, anything pleasurable, in its extreme form.