Would you say the discrepancy between preferences and hedonism is because humans can (and do) achieve much greater highs than nonhuman animals under preferences, but human and nonhuman lows aren’t so different?
Something like that. Maybe the key idea here is my ranking of possible lives:
Amazing hedonic state + all personal preferences satisfied >> amazing hedonic state.
Terrible hedonic state ≈ terrible hedonic state + all personal preferences violated.
In other words, if I imagine myself suffering enough hedonically I don’t really care about any other preferences I have about my life any more by comparison. Whereas that isn’t true for feelings of bliss.
I imagine things being more symmetrical for animals, I guess because I don’t consider their preferences to be as complex or core to their identities.
Something like that. Maybe the key idea here is my ranking of possible lives:
Amazing hedonic state + all personal preferences satisfied >> amazing hedonic state.
Terrible hedonic state ≈ terrible hedonic state + all personal preferences violated.
In other words, if I imagine myself suffering enough hedonically I don’t really care about any other preferences I have about my life any more by comparison. Whereas that isn’t true for feelings of bliss.
I imagine things being more symmetrical for animals, I guess because I don’t consider their preferences to be as complex or core to their identities.