There have been several mentions of the term "hedonic calculus," and in doing some reading I find this quote from DeWitt which in which he criticizes this term (in the form of "calculus of pleasure":
Cite is to the letter to Meneoceus, which Bailey has as:
[130] Yet by a scale of comparison and by the consideration of advantages and disadvantages we must form our judgment on all these matters. For the good on certain occasions we treat as bad, and conversely the bad as good.
Agreed. The term is definitely not ancient. It appears to have started with Bentham:
Felicific calculus - Wikipedia
The Epicureans seemed to have consistently used "choices and rejections" as the key phrase: αἵρεσιν καὶ φυγὴν (hairesin (kai "and") phugēn).
Here's my translation of 130, maybe a little more literal than Bailey:
[130] So, all pleasure, through its nature, belongs to us as a good; however, not all are elected; and just as all pains are entirely evil by their nature, so not all are always to be shunned.It is proper when judging these things to consider what is advantageous and what is not advantageous for you; in other words, what the consequences will be. We consult the consequences of our actions; because, on the one hand, pleasure over time can lead to pain; and on the other hand, pain can lead to pleasure.
Hedonic calculus also seems to be popular with positive psychology researchers, as well as hedonic treadmill. I think we can potentially learn a lot from this field of research as long as we don't get hung up on terms and approach with a critical eye.
Hedonic calculus also seems to be popular with positive psychology researchers, as well as hedonic treadmill. I think we can potentially learn a lot from this field of research as long as we don't get hung up on terms and approach with a critical eye.
Also agreed. Unfortunately the associations those guys and most people attached to the word are almost uniformly negative. I remember when I was much younger some of the older people would call unruly children "You little Hedon!"
unruly children "You little Hedon!"
LOL! I always thought that was "little Heathens" 
I think BOTH and maybe you're right that I have heard "heathen" more than hedon - but I know I have heard "you little hedon" and googling produces other instances beyond what I posted.
We're going to have to find ways to rehabilitate the word -- maybe name some cats and dogs "Hedon" and post cute pictures of them across the internet 
A problem that I have with the term "hedonic calculus" is that, to me, it implies a degree of mathematical precision in the consideration. Such precision generally doesn't exist, and tends to send people down a very mechanistic path of decision making when in fact there's a large intuitive component to these considerations.
It makes perfect sense that it started with Bentham!
implies a degree of mathematical precision
Wasn't it literally adding up the hedons and the dolors?
There are different levels of choices in life. There are simple everyday decisions that we can easily use our "gut" to decide, such as whether to cook beans or chicken for dinner. And many simple decisions don't cause much of a long-term impact.
But for big life decisions, it can require some decision making "calculus". And some big decisions can be very difficult to make when they are "hard choices" -- meaning that either one will greatly impact your life, but yet neither one seems better than the other (both are on par).
The only way through is to ask yourself "Who do I want to be?" -- to see that each choice will create something new in your life. Then you commit to get behind that choice to become that person. (These ideas come from Ruth Chang, professor of jurisprudence at the University of Oxford).
I still think there is something useful about the "hedonic calculus"... Martin, you are really good with explaining "hedonic calculus" for big decisions, can you help out by adding in your explanation to this thread?
For a thought experiment, how do you calculate who is the single poorest person in the world?
Interesting question, Godfrey! Here are a few of the many potential answers I can think of;
"The poorest person in the world is the person with the..."
The pecuniary answers are the most obvious, but for many may turn out to be the least important.
he Don e
LOL! Well played, Eikadistes , well played! If you put it that way, what other philosophy *could* I have been attracted to!
That was an out-of-left-field example of calculating something nebulous; I was thinking of it as an example of the issues that I have with "hedonic calculus". Joshua most ably listed the types of factors that I would consider. How can you calculate 6, 7, 8 or even 5? On the other hand, it's relatively straightforward to calculate highest net worth individual: just add up the dollars. To me, "hedonic calculus" implies a straightforwardness that is deceptive, and as per Joshua's list is a great example of the shortcomings of utilitarianism vs EP.
There are times when it's useful to make lists of pros and cons of various options that one is considering. One could even attempt to weight them to account for one's feelings and intuitions. There is information to be gleaned from this exercise, but often the conclusion reached by doing such an exercise is overridden by one's feelings and intuitions (at least in my experience!)
While there some situations where you can just add up hedons and dolors, often it's not that simple and almost always the "equation" needs confirmation from the Feelings. I gravitate toward the phrase "choices and rejections" as it seems to me to imply a more open-ended process than "hedonic calculus". At the same time it seems to me to be a more direct statement of the actual process. I guess the Epicureans were on to something!
And not just summing the hedons and the dolors, but submitting the decision to the test of 7 other variables!
To be included in this calculation are several variables (or vectors), which Bentham called "circumstances". These are:
- Intensity: How strong is the pleasure?
- Duration: How long will the pleasure last?
- Certainty or uncertainty: How likely or unlikely is it that the pleasure will occur?
- Propinquity or remoteness: How soon will the pleasure occur?
- Fecundity: The probability that the action will be followed by sensations of the same kind.
- Purity: The probability that it will not be followed by sensations of the opposite kind.
- Extent: How many people will be affected?
I keep using the term "hedonic calculus" because I do not know a better currently used term although I fully agree with Godfrey's comment #6.
The listed considerations in other comments of this thread are all useful. My description is meant to complement them:
We use our knowledge and experience to estimate whether it is likely that the considered action produces the desired outcome and that this outcome actually produces the expected pleasure. A severely adverse outcome needs to be expected to be very unlikely to take the risk.
We consider this for all feasible options we would consider and choose the one which appears to be the most efficient or which we simply like the most among several good options.
We should not worry too much about actually hitting the maximum pleasure. It is enough if the result provides considerable net pleasure which is worth the pain in preparations or consequences.
Here are some examples:
I occasionally go for a zipline adventure because before the first time I knew from other experiences that viewing nature from an elevated but close perspective and gravitational and inertial sliding are pleasurable, and I have only moderate fear of height, and I know from the first time that a zipline flight is indeed extremely pleasurable and because I expect the probability of a serious accident to be very low based on that I read about only 2 serious accidents (one high impact with bone fractures under circumstances which do not apply to me, one fatal impact which could have been mitigated by appropriate action of the victim, no falls from snapped lines or harness failures so far) and because the way the lines, break systems, harnesses and procedures are set up appears to be safe.
Already as a kid, I felt great pleasure from knowing stuff and noticed that learning was mostly pleasure but manual work was mostly unpleasant. I figured out that a university degree would facilitate finding a job which I mostly enjoy and which would pay enough to get me out of the somewhat adverse working-class environment in which I grew up. So I put in a lot of effort in studying the subjects which I liked the most to a high degree for maximum choice although the long study would keep me poor for an extended period.
A case where math can actually contribute to the hedonic calculus is the consideration to buy a car: The total cost of acceptable alternatives for my transport needs is much lower than cost of ownership of a car. Other reasons against a car are the displeasure about its carbon foot print, feeling guilty if I cause an accident, the risk of injury from an accident, the worry about deterioration, theft and sabotage. For me, the greater flexibility in transport and the maybe only imagined facilitation of getting a girl-friend do not weigh up all these disadvantages. Therefore, I never owned a car and currently, I have no plan to ever buy one. Only unexpected changes in circumstances might change that.
I chose based on hedonic calculus to have no fridge, no TV, no washing-machine, no dish washer and no other expensive status symbols in the apartments where I stay alone. However, I am not a minimalist because my rooms are full of stuff which I bought or collected mostly for pleasure.
We use our knowledge and experience to estimate whether it is likely that the considered action produces the desired outcome and that this outcome actually produces the expected pleasure. A severely adverse outcome needs to be expected to be very unlikely to take the risk.
We consider this for all feasible options we would consider and choose the one which appears to be the most efficient or which we simply like the most among several good options.
We should not worry too much about actually hitting the maximum pleasure. It is enough if the result provides considerable net pleasure which is worth the pain in preparations or consequences.
Thank you Martin 
And I think this looks like a mix of reason and intuition, which is helpful for me to see. With certain decisions we will want to take into account and consider our values regarding safety and economic costs -- which makes sense with big important decisions.
Don and Joshua, hedons and dolors, and these Bentham variables are generally only in regard to bodily sensations? And I would propose that the phrase "hedonic calculus" is good for bodily sensation, such as to decide if one would benefit from a second helping at dinnertime -- or how likely will a second helping cause one to feel unpleasantly full -- but then the shortcoming here is that one could still gain too much weight over time because the brain often delays the fullness signal (and it is a subjective decision about what weight is unhealthy). Over-eating makes one feel sleepy and lethargic. Extra pounds make exercise more difficult. You could argue regarding the "extent" -- everyone you know and who sees you will judge whether or not you are carrying extra pounds. You are what you eat in that sense. Also this shows how the variables aren't broad enough, because of extended time and personal values. There is a time component missing and a long-term happiness or long-term pain variable.
But when it comes to purely mental pleasures, then instead of the phrase "calculus of advantage" maybe the phrase "calculus of enjoyment"? -- Such as when deciding which hobbies to pursue, since we only have limited time.
But when it comes to purely mental pleasures, then instead of the phrase "calculus of advantage" maybe the phrase "calculus of enjoyment"? -- Such as when deciding which hobbies to pursue, since we only have limited time.
Personally, I'd replace the word "calculus". "Consideration" maybe? Although "choices and rejections" per Don might be the most historically accurate, and it seems like the best phrase to me. It describes exactly what is being dealt with rather than trying to invent a term for the process. As per Epicurus, it should be immediately clear what our words mean.
I'm currently listening to the book The Knowledge Illusion
The Knowledge Illusion — Philip Fernbach
I'm only on chapter 4, but they've been talking about the unique capacity of humans to engage in "causal reasoning"
with an eye to the consequences/effects of one's actions or diagnosing the causes of one's current situation to determine future actions.
This whole thing struck me as linked to making choices and rejections.
Liked I said, just started the book but felt it's food for thought.
