I’ve been asked, more times than I can count, about the history of my erudite hedonism, and what, exactly, it means. The phrase itself seems to perplex people, as if the marriage of learning and pleasure were somehow contradictory. But that confusion, I’ve come to realize, reveals something profound about how we’ve come to misunderstand pleasure itself.

For our opening column, we’re going to examine what hedonism isn’t, and where the line falls between hedonism and debauchery. While both pursue pleasure, they are as different as night and day, one a philosophy of refinement, the other a descent into excess.

The word “hedonism” has been dragged through the mud of popular culture, reduced to images of champagne-soaked excess and mindless indulgence. But true hedonism, the kind practiced by ancient philosophers, was never about excess. It was about discernment.

The original hedonists understood that pleasure, pursued intelligently, required cultivation. It demanded knowledge, restraint, and above all, attention. To truly enjoy a meal, one must understand flavors. To appreciate wine, one must educate the palate. To find joy in conversation, one must first fill the mind with worthy thoughts.

Debauchery is hedonism’s careless cousin: pleasure pursued without thought, without consequence, without art. It’s the difference between savoring a perfectly aged Bordeaux and drinking to forget. One is an act of presence; the other, an act of escape.

The debauchee seeks quantity; the hedonist seeks quality. The debauchee numbs; the hedonist awakens. And perhaps most importantly, the debauchee wakes with regret, while the hedonist wakes with memories worth keeping.

Join us next Sunday as we explore the origins of Epicureanism and why its founder has been so thoroughly misrepresented throughout history.