Vitrano interprets Nozick as arguing against hedonism, but defined as the view that happiness is pleasure. She thinks he's saying that in the experience machine you would have pleasure, but not happiness. This might be because of the way she defines some of these terms and they passages of Nozick she focusses on.
I've explained Nozick as arguing against hedonism, defined as the view that happiness is all that matters. He's saying that happiness is not all that matters, based on the argument that you would have happiness in the experience machine, but wouldn't have a good life. That's how he puts his point in many of the passages in our PDF.
 |
| Nozick p. 29 |
 |
| Nozick p. 29 |
 |
| Nozick p. 30 |
 |
| Nozick p. 31 |
 |
| Nozick p. 31 |
 |
| Nozick p. 31 |
 |
| Nozick p. 32 |
