..and it would be misleading for you to do so because whereas hedonism is inherently atavistic, it does depend on social structure in order to fully exploit a wider spectrum of pleasure. As to your original question, DrewKatsikas, no, I do not feel using proper terminology when dealing with philosophy harms one's point in any way. Language is faulty enough a method of communication as it is without having to dumb down one's vocabulary. As long as we'e using the same definitions for our philosophical terms, then we're going to be okay. For example, your definition of hedonism below is faulty in many ways. What you described more likely is some sort of nonholistic egoism. I suggest research on your part.
As if there's some other sort ?... I do not see how you were confused.
Threaded Mode
