Hedonism

We use the term “good” in two contexts: as the most general term of evaluation, and to refer to the final ends of life and action. I start from the question what evaluative and final goodness have to do with each other. Do we use the same term because when we talk about final goods, we are evaluating ends and lives? If so, how do we go about doing that? Most things are evaluated with respect to their fitness to perform their function, but ends and lives do not have functions. I contrast three theories of the final good: the intrinsic value theory, the hedonist theory, and Aristotle’s account, which identifies a being’s final good with its well-functioning, a form of evaluative goodness. Aristotle’s theory suggests an illuminating relationship between evaluative and final goodness: a conscious being has a final good when she functions by having conscious states that track, and so enable her to pursue, her functional or evaluative goodness. It is therefore the nature of an animal to have a final good, and there are such things as final goods because there are animals. This theory explains the existence of final goods without any metaphysical appeal to intrinsic values.

SUBJECT & OBJECTIVES : Pleasure motivates humans in pleasant and unpleasant behaviors. Numerous ethical schools have discussed pleasure. Some schools have embraced hedonism. One of these schools is utilitarianism. In the Holy Qur’an, many verses about pleasure are mentioned. These verses are discussed in the form of resurrection, social reform, food and clothing, etc. Since Jeremy Bentham's principles of hedonism have had a great impact on philosophers, thinkers, social laws, and the culture and lifestyle of people, the present article is an explanation of pleasure from Jeremy Bentham's viewpoint and compares it with verses of the Qur’an. METHOD & FINDING : The library data collection and information processing method is descriptive-analytical critical. A finding of this article is to explain the similarities and differences of Jeremy Bentham's view compared to the verses of the Holy Qur’an. CONCLUSION : After the studies, we concluded that in both perspective hedonism and its excitatory aspect in humans with psychological hedonism, there are also points of disagreement: In the verses of the Qur’an, unlike Bentham, the pleasures of the hereafter and its preference over the pleasures of this world have been emphasized and the other that in the Qur’an, hedonism is not accepted in an absolute. Also, some of the blessings of the hereafter are mentioned in the Qur’an