A person inherits the inner conscience, but its development takes place in society. In the development of society and the individual, the laws of behaviour are constantly changeable.

2. Problems of egoism and altruism:

Evolutionism treats both egoism and altruism as the inseparable parts and tendencies of human behaviour in this way, Evolution solves successfully the problem of passage from egoism to altruism, whereas Bentham, Mill and other Utilitarian’s fail to explain it with reason. According to Spencer, egoism has been dependent upon altruism from the dawn of life as altruism has been dependent upon egoism and in the course of evolution; the reciprocal services of the two have been increasing.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

The pure egoism and pure altruism are both illegitimate. General pleasure depends to a large extent upon the person’s obtaining his own pleasure. Extreme egoism and altruism are both illegitimate. It is necessary to assimilate and harmonies the two.


Relation of society and individual:

Utilitarianism of Mill and Bentham is stagnant and lifeless. They have looked upon society as merely a mechanical group of individuals. It is due to this reason that their approach has been individualistic even though they have supported Utilitarianism. Here, by assuming society to be a body and the individual its part Spencer has been more successful in explaining the relation of interdependence between society and the individual. The relation between society and the individual is not external and accidental but rather internal and necessary. The individual forms an indivisible part of society. His good and well-being is dependent upon the good and well-being of the society in much the same way as that of part on that of the body. Although the simile of body and its part does not hold good in the case of society and the individual to a high degree of precision, it still shows the interdependent relation between society and the individual in a far better way than the Utilitarian assumptions.

4. Fallacy of hedonistic paradox:

Evolutionary Hedonism is preserved from the Paradox of Hedonism by relegating to the back the search for pleasure, and making the attempts at social equilibrium and social health duties. Pleasure is, of course, an end but it is the result of the harmony of the individual and pocket.

It increases the life energy and thus to call pleasure an end is to mean or imply the increase of life energy and the adjustment to society or the environment with the consequent increase in pleasure. In this way, Evolutionary Hedonism refines empirical Hedonism.

5. Qualitative distinctions in pleasure:

Evolutionary Hedonism makes qualitative distinctions in pleasure. According to it, pleasure is net itself an end but the means of the existence of life and its development. The standard of morality is to be of assistance in the preservation of life.

Pleasure assists life preservation; it is thus a moral end. In this way, the more assistance a pleasure renders in life preservation, the more it is desirable. Evolutionism also distinguishes between life preserving pleasures, and life destroying pleasures. Pleasures augmenting life are desirable, while those destroying life are not. In this way, Evolutionary Hedonism cannot be charged with sensual preoccupations.