The good part about hedonism being so vague is that it allows for many models to the good life. The third strength for hedonism is how it follows common sense, those who practice hedonism do only what they believe is good and stay away from anything that is bad or brings pain. This being said hedonism argues that a good life is full of pleasure with a minimum amount of unhappiness. .
The theory of hedonism sounds perfect with only focusing on happiness and pleasure, but it does in fact have its weaknesses. One of the best arguments against hedonism is that pleasure isn't the only good in life because if it was then, "it is rational to single-mindedly pursue"(FE 33). Unfortunately single-mindedly pursuing happiness isn't rational and therefore happiness or pleasure isn't the only thing that makes us better off. A second weakness towards hedonism is that if happiness doesn't always come from doing good deeds it can also come from horrible actions. What is someone considers harming others as a form of pleasure? This means there is no difference between the pleasure of doing good and the pleasure obtained from causing harm to others.
The strength for the theory of desire satisfaction is that it clarifies what makes up a good life. Desire satisfaction doesn't focus on pleasure as the primary good to enhance one's life, but instead it blends all of our desires that don't necessarily have to bring pleasure. Take exercising for example, the pain caused by working out isn't pleasurable to many, yet people still desire to workout because it enhances their lives and body. Another strength is that desire satisfaction avoids objective values. This makes the values different for each person and maintains relativity towards each person. The main argument against desire satisfaction is that it focuses only on satisfying our desires. The good relies on objective values, "things that are valuable even if we fail to value them" (FE 59).
