Autonomy and Hedonism

Something that we discussed in class about particular objections to the hedonistic theory to what constitutes a good life is that you can obtain happiness and pleasure without having the autonomy, or agency to make your own choices. Shafer-Landau makes the argument that autonomy is intrinsically valuable, in that that it’s not merely the happiness we obtain from having autonomy that gives us a good life. Its autonomy in it’s own right that gives value and is essential to a good life. Is it possible to break down some of Shafer-Landau’s examples that support this conclusion that he puts forth? Is it possible to discern whether or not autonomy is intrinsically valuable? Could it be that it’s the perception of the lack of autonomy (rather than the autonomy itself, or intrinsically) is what causes this man pain or lack of unhappiness? 

SL brings up the scenarios in The Brave New World, where the citizens lose their autonomy to experience upsetting or painful things in their life by taking the drug, soma, and other avoidance mechanisms put forth by the governmental agencies. SL argues that the loss of autonomy is intrinsically valuable, and despite experiencing only pleasure in this world, it is still not enough for a good life. However, what if this new world seems worse off not because of the lack of autonomy but rather the lack of diversity or expression we see in our world today? In other examples that SL provides, he discusses how the independence of the people is crushed, which would lead to a less happy life, which is something we would perceive as a life that is not as good. But what if it is not the lack of autonomy that is abhorrent but rather the morality of taking away someone’s autonomy? It seems apparent that it is morally wrong to take away someone’s autonomy but what if someone willingly gives it up? There is no reason to say that this person is will be less happy without autonomy, but if someone who appreciates and values their autonomy is forced to give it up it is understandable that they would have less happiness in their life.

Consider the case where an average person seems to be living “the good life,” which is full of whatever the person would consider qualities of the good life. However, the person feels like he has no control over what is happening in his life; everything happens is destiny (even if these are good things). In reality, the person does have the autonomy to make the decisions in his life; he just doesn’t perceive that he does. This perceived lack of control over his life is what makes this person unhappy. Could it be argued that the perception of autonomy is what would make the person happy? Not the autonomy itself? Or, to take it one step further, does this scenario suggest that some pain or displeasure is essential quality to the good life (as some have argued in class) even if it may be due to one’s own choices?