Maslow's hierarchy of needs still provides the most complete taxonomy of what we need to be wholly happy (https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs). EA concerns itself most with physiological needs and some safety needs, perhaps correctly viewing them as low hanging preconditions for human flourishing. EÆs address cogni…
Maslow's hierarchy of needs still provides the most complete taxonomy of what we need to be wholly happy (https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs). EA concerns itself most with physiological needs and some safety needs, perhaps correctly viewing them as low hanging preconditions for human flourishing. EÆs address cognitive and aesthetic needs. Belonging and love, esteem, self actualization and transcendence are omitted in by both moral accounting systems. Perhaps they are too hard to measure and not secular enough? Or they're considered first world problems? Nevertheless, we intuitively understand these needs are real, especially the many among us who confront ennui despite first world material abundance and the accessibility of great culture in the internet age.
Maslow's hierarchy of needs still provides the most complete taxonomy of what we need to be wholly happy (https://en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs). EA concerns itself most with physiological needs and some safety needs, perhaps correctly viewing them as low hanging preconditions for human flourishing. EÆs address cognitive and aesthetic needs. Belonging and love, esteem, self actualization and transcendence are omitted in by both moral accounting systems. Perhaps they are too hard to measure and not secular enough? Or they're considered first world problems? Nevertheless, we intuitively understand these needs are real, especially the many among us who confront ennui despite first world material abundance and the accessibility of great culture in the internet age.