Hedonism is morally correct.

I will be arguing that Hedonism is ethical and morally correct. To go against the principles of Hedonism is unethical and morally incorrect. Hedonism is, generally speaking, the belief that pleasure is the ultimate good and the pursuit of pleasure will lead to ultimate pleasure AKA ultimate happiness. I ask you, why does anyone do anything? Why do people choose to do one thing over the other? Why do people do anything at all as opposed to nothing at all? I believe the obvious answer is: because they want to. Now when I talk about actions people make i am talking about actions people themselves are aware of and execute within their knowledge. I am not talking about reflexes or aberrant thoughts that are not due to conscious decisions. For example, when you choose between 2 drinks, say coke or sprite, the one you choose will be the one you gain the most perceivable pleasure from. Would you choose the one that does not give you any perceivable pleasure? If so, what would incentivize you to do so? Any choice any person makes has an incentive behind it, and what is that incentive? I would argue that it is perceivable pleasure or benefit if you will. Which brings me to my next point. If people act out of perceived benefit then why do people act altruistically? They give up benefits for what seems to be the benefit of others. I would argue that this is not the case. In psychology there is a concept called Maslow's Hierarchy of needs. The concept states that humans have a hierarchy of needs inc which the most basic of needs need to be met before people can start to desire or pursue higher levels of needs. This is not a law in the sense that this idea is concrete and applies to all people flawlessly (as any need can manifest itself at any stage of development of a humans life), but it is a tendency among humans to follow this trend. This seems to indicate that, in general, people pursue their desires and by extension their needs primarily above all else. This does not mean that these needs and desires cannot extend to other people, in fact, as more and more needs are met, your desire to form relationships with people and fufilling their desires will become increacingly apparent. This explains how altruism can form from a hedonistic viewpoint. Now, to address your argument. You ask, "Where is the line drawn? ". This is an excellent question and in fact leads to the most common criticism of Hedonism. To answer this I bring you back to Maslow's hierarchy of needs (bear with me, this runs a little long but i promise its relevant). The lowest level of needs described in this concept are physiological: hunger, thirst, breathing, shelter. These are necessary for survival and incite strong desire, as one would expect in an organism engineered for survival. The second level describes our need and desire to sustain behaviors that ensure survival in the long run AKA Safety Needs: Financial security, Personal security, Health, etc. The third level describes our social need and desire to belong among others. The need for family, intimacy, and friendship all appeal to us due to the fact that others can help us carry on our legacy as well as share resources. This is where I argue that we are motivated to be altruistic. The next level is called Esteem which describes our strong desire to be regarded as competent and respectable by others as well as ourselves, this drives us to become better and function better in a society. The next level is called Self- Actualization in which we set out to master ourselves relative to our past selves, the ultimate pursuit of growth which drives us to become ourselves in a real way. The last one is more theoretical and untested, Self- Transcendence. As far as I understand it, it describes transcending all previous levels to a state undescribable to normal people. Hedonism drives us to become better, for ourselves and others. The line is drawn when our desires limit other desires that would benefit us much more, harming others does not benefit us and would in fact limit our ability to experience more pleasurable experiences intrinsic to human experience. I will admit, certain people are incapable of feeling pleasure in fields other than harming others. Are these people evil? No, they are just incapable, due to certain sociological or neurological factors. if we could accept the intrinsic hedonistic nature of humanity we could see these people as what they are: mentally ill individuals who cannot help but to derive pleasure from hurting others. If people acted hedonistically, we would do what was in our best interest and detain these people or otherwise incapacitate them and see if they can contribute actual benefit to society. Hedonism addresses that people do what they want, and people generally want what is best for them and this leads people to want what is best for others and to limit the amount of suffering in the world. This concludes this section of my argument. Sorry if i rambled a bit, i have a hard time organizing my thoughts. And again, Thank you