How do The Three theories define well-being?

An annotation for Roger Crisp’s “Well-Being”
How do The Three theories define well-being?

          The three theories of well-being, which mentioned in the published article, are successively the Hedonism, the Desire Theory, and the Objective List Theory. Since, if we are to get better understanding and discussion about well-beings, it is indispensable to be aware of these three major theories.

          Firstly, the author talked about the Hedonism. From Jeremy Bentham’s view, who is one of the most well-known of the more recent hedonist, he began his writing An Introduction to the Principle of Moral and Legislation thus, “Nature has placed mankind under the government of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do.” As under most considerations, human beings always acted in pursuit of what they believe will give them the greatest balance of pleasure over pain. Hedonism therefore supposed that the greatest balance of pleasure over pain is what well-being consists in. Likewise, what makes pleasure good and pain bad is simply the pleasantness of pleasure and the painfulness of pain in the view of hedonist. Yet, how are we to measure the value of the two experiences? That is pleasure and pain in this situation. Once again, according to Bentham, the duration and intensity seem as a kind of sensation that decides the value. However, problems rose against this kind of hedonism cognition. For example, “There does not appear to be a single common strand of pleasantness running through all the different experience people enjoy.” To explain this problem more practical is to ask one-self, how is it possible to compare the pleasure one get from eating a great meal with their families in a restaurant to reading Shakespeare alone in a quiet corner of the library? There is obvious different aspect of pleasure one can gain from these two incidents. Therefore, other scholar argued that Bentham seemed to be placing all pleasure on a par, and further ignore the distinctions between. Yet, in reality, it certainly does not work in that way.

            What about the Desire Theory, can it be more precise in defining well-being to human beings? Therefore, Roger Crisp, the author, brought up suppose which is known as the experience machine to explain how Desire Theory works in individual behavior. By planning a lifetime of experience before hand, one can later on plug in and live out their life in a virtual reality machine. In such case, one can go through whatever experience they think might possibly bring out the most enjoyment and pleasantness. Thus for, question arise. Is it the experience that people seeks for or the result of it people look forward to? If we discuss this doubt under the consideration of Desire Theory, we can eventually figure out that the central define to which is that people yearn more for the result rather than going through experiences. Therefore, due to the state of desire-satisfaction, Aristotle commented, “Desire is consequent on opinion, rather than opinion on desire.” To simplify this contention an example might be well enough. That is, for instinct, nowadays teenagers seemed to be pursuit eagerly of fame and wealth. However, did they ever consider the difficulties they had to encounter through the pursuance? To reach their own desire-satisfaction, they skipped over tough process and dreamed of the outcome impracticable. By doing so, they be satisfied by the desire of fame and wealth, for they think of fame and wealth as independently goods beforehand.

           The third theory, which is the Objective List Theory surmise that list item-constituting well-being consists neither merely in the pleasurable experience hedonism believed, not in desire-satisfaction as Desire Theory suggested. Other items, such as knowledge and friendships considered in the constitution of well-being, for that it is important that all kinds of good should be included even for those thing people will not enjoy or do not even want.
As we learned about the three theories, we may figure out that each of them considered well-being by their own perspective and explanation. Yet, there is no definably right or wrong in each theory. Since, similarly in reality, we face situations with two sides to it, too. Like while one let go of something, they are gaining other things at the same time even they may not be aware of. Even in the slangs, people used to say a blessing in disguise.        

References:

Crisp, Roger, "Well-Being", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/well-being/>.