No, It Isn’t: A Response to Law on Evil Pleasure

Ethic@ - An International Journal for Moral Philosophy 17 (1):1-12 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX


In this paper, I engage with Law’s paper ‘Evil Pleasure Is Good For You!’ I argue that, although his criticism of hedonistic utilitarianism may hold some weight, his analysis of the goodness of pleasure is overly simplistic. I highlight some troubling results which would follow from his analysis and then outline a new account which then remedies these problems. Ultimately, I distinguish between Law’s ‘evil pleasures’ and, what I call, ‘virtuous pleasures’ and show how we can accept the goodness of virtuous pleasures without being obliged to say that evil pleasures are also good for us.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 86,273

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

On pleasures.Olivier Massin - 2011 - Dissertation, Geneva
Six theses about pleasure.Stuart Rachels - 2004 - Philosophical Perspectives 18 (1):247-267.
Impure Intellectual Pleasure and the Phaedrus.Kelly E. Arenson - 2016 - Epoché: A Journal for the History of Philosophy 21 (1):21-45.
An Inconsistency in the Philebus?Joachim Aufderheide - 2013 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 21 (5):817 - 837.
How Pleasures Make Life Better.Andrew H. Alwood - 2017 - Kriterion - Journal of Philosophy 31 (1):1-24.
The Nature and Types of Pleasure in Sohrewardi’s View.’Einollah Khademi - 2013 - Journal of Philosophical Theological Research 14 (55-56):75-98.
Aristotle on “Steering the Young by Pleasure and Pain”.Marta Jimenez - 2015 - Journal of Speculative Philosophy 29 (2):137-164.


Added to PP

44 (#302,419)

6 months
4 (#244,000)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references