Without evil there'd be no good ...

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Gawdzilla, Nice try. I didn't say there's nothing more than subjective experiences. What I did say...or, if I didn't say it...let me make it clear now. I seriously doubt that you can differentiate, with absolute certainty, between that which is subjective or objective in your life. If you can, let's see you do it. You words "I couldn't care either way" are a subjective viewpoint on your part.

So, you fail.

[RuleBritannia]

Gawdzilla and RuleBritannia, Yes, 'six foot' is an objective measure, and many other things (i.e. happy and sad) are not. However, they are real experiences for us, and, more than that, there's considerable agreement in the world about many of these parts of life. People on these fora love to talk about their take on objective reality, but, so far, I have not run into anybody who can definitively separate their subjective perceptions from their take on objectivity. That real world that we live in involves interactions with other beings who are subjectively making decisions based on what they perceive, and the experiences we have based on those decisions are quite real for each of us.

Simply dismissing something as subjective when you can't conclusively prove your take on objective reality doesn't cut it. You live in a world of subjective experiences and what you'd like to believe is objective reality. You can and do have both; it's not "either/or."

I'm not dismissing anything, but if good and evil are subjective then there is no way to answer "without evil there'd be no good", because "good" and "evil" aren't defined. It's the same as asking "is there a god?", but not defining what god is.

[charlou]

Feck, Yes, I did read your post. You use the words "I don't think," which means that's that a viewpoint that's a product of your thinking, it's about a decision you made. More than that, you're not completely sure.

I mentally preface all your comments with "I think" and "I don't think" to make them a more accurate representation of your comments. I don't think you're in a position to be sure about anything, either.

[Feck]

Gawdzilla and RuleBritannia, Yes, 'six foot' is an objective measure, and many other things (i.e. happy and sad) are not. However, they are real experiences for us, and, more than that, there's considerable agreement in the world about many of these parts of life. People on these fora love to talk about their take on objective reality, but, so far, I have not run into anybody who can definitively separate their subjective perceptions from their take on objectivity. That real world that we live in involves interactions with other beings who are subjectively making decisions based on what they perceive, and the experiences we have based on those decisions are quite real for each of us.

Simply dismissing something as subjective when you can't conclusively prove your take on objective reality doesn't cut it. You live in a world of subjective experiences and what you'd like to believe is objective reality. You can and do have both; it's not "either/or."

I'm not dismissing anything, but if good and evil are subjective then there is no way to answer "without evil there'd be no good", because "good" and "evil" aren't defined. It's the same as asking "is there a god?", but not defining what god is.

OH welcome to Meta_ physics the land of the vague concept and the long posts .....oh shit if you thought you had a clear shot then the posts moved

[LaMont Cranston]

Charlou, Well, what it comes down to is just what any of us can know with absolute certainty. "I think" it's a good idea that you mentally preface my comments in that manner. While we're on the subject, just what is it that you are absolutely sure about?

I've got to go out in the world for a few hours, but I'll be back later. It looks like this has the makings of a lively discussion. Or, at least, I think it does...

[Feck]

An the goal post just moved ..we started on Pain is necessary and now we seem to have taken the side road to subjective/objective .

I think I prefer the theists This method of arguement may work in RL because we do not have perfect recall ... shame it is all down in text here .

[FedUpWithFaith]

Seems to me we're confusing good with pleasure and evil with pain. While I have no doubt the two are associated in many ways, the equating leads to some faulty conclusions.

If somebody suffers to prevent the suffering of another, why is that good or evil? If somebody is a hedonist, lives in a hedonistic society, and all enjoy lives of unproductive pleasure is that good? What questions does this beg? For instance, what if all that pleasure is "good" but not sustainable? What if it is sustainable but leads to a Brave New World of undereducated superficial, apathetic people who nonetheless enjoy constant pleasure and no pain. Why is your book-learnin', creativity, and suffering to reach goals better? Is it? Not on the basis of pain and pleasure it ain't.

I agree with Charlou that pleasure and pain are neural perceptions - shared by most animals. But good and evil are sentient concepts and they do hide a multiplicity of implicit and explicit dichotomies. Some of this could be hard-wired but that might be part of an as yet undiscovered essential dichotomy as well. Perhaps one is not essential for the other, but I don't see how we could even conceive of a human being that can fully understand and appreciate one without the other. Although I can conceive of societies that could minimize pain and maximize pleasure via any number of metrics (one being like the Brave New World), I have to wonder how far we could go without losing an essential part of our humanity and what we value as the best in ourselves as a species.

[LaMont Cranston]

Feck, OK, I have returned from out in the rainy world. You ask "SO tell me again WHY should I subjectively feel pain and loneliness and hunger. What I'm saying to you is that "should" has absolutely nothing to do with what you're asking about. The point is that you do feel those things as part of your life, and a lot of other things besides, including love, hate, gratitude, envy...and on and on.

What exists exists; what is is...and that's merely a description of the way things are. Do you have some control over how much of these things you have in your life? We can talk about that, if you care to. Do the decisions you make, based on rational principles, alter and effect how much loneliness, etc. you have?

For what it's worth, I happen to agree with you thing about food...as it applies to you...and I've already said I'm a huge fan of cuddling dogs.

[LaMont Cranston]

Gawdzilla, That's a lamer attempt than your last one. If we're using your subjective yardshick, I fail. If we're using my subjective yardstick, I am succeeding greatly. Excuse me, but why the fuck would I want to measure my life with your yardstick?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Gawdzilla, That's a lamer attempt than your last one. If we're using your subjective yardshick, I fail. If we're using my subjective yardstick, I am succeeding greatly. Excuse me, but why the fuck would I want to measure my life with your yardstick?

Because mine's 36 inches and yours is 18"?

[LaMont Cranston]

RuleBritannia, I'm glad you're not dismissing anything, including the subjective part of your life. If you know of some way to actually dismiss that, I hope you're share it with all the rest of us. Most of us are able to make rational choices, no matter how subjective they might be, that work pretty well for us when it comes to differentiating between good and bad.

For example, most of us would prefer not to spend the rest of our lives in jail. However, if, for some reason, you've arrived at the goal of being behind bars with a bunch a humans who are the same gender as you, being behind bars might look like a reasonable option. It's like that with a lot of things, whether we want to label them subjective or objective. The point is, we live with both of them, and, in all likelihood, it will continue to be that way. If, in the world of what we'd like to believe is objective reality, we can subjectively formulate certain goals (i.e. better relationships with other beings), we can and do use rational principles to achieve those goals.

Some of the choices might appear to be difficult, but a lot of them are pretty simple. The Golden Rule is a good place to start.

[LaMont Cranston]

Gawdzilla, I see that's a question on your part. If there's any way that you can produce any evidence that you're playing with a more accurate measuring device, let's see it. Otherwise, you can keep playing with however many inches you have available at the moment.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Gawdzilla, I see that's a question on your part. If there's any way that you can produce any evidence that you're playing with a more accurate measuring device, let's see it. Otherwise, you can keep playing with however many inches you have available at the moment.

You see, I haven't any need to do what you tell me to do. Live with that. Or not. Machs nicht to me.

[RuleBritannia]

RuleBritannia, I'm glad you're not dismissing anything, including the subjective part of your life. If you know of some way to actually dismiss that, I hope you're share it with all the rest of us. Most of us are able to make rational choices, no matter how subjective they might be, that work pretty well for us when it comes to differentiating between good and bad.

For example, most of us would prefer not to spend the rest of our lives in jail. However, if, for some reason, you've arrived at the goal of being behind bars with a bunch a humans who are the same gender as you, being behind bars might look like a reasonable option. It's like that with a lot of things, whether we want to label them subjective or objective. The point is, we live with both of them, and, in all likelihood, it will continue to be that way. If, in the world of what we'd like to believe is objective reality, we can subjectively formulate certain goals (i.e. better relationships with other beings), we can and do use rational principles to achieve those goals.

Some of the choices might appear to be difficult, but a lot of them are pretty simple. The Golden Rule is a good place to start.

I really don't know what you're blabbering on about.

[jamest]

Hi.
You don't know anything about what it is like to die as a new-born baby, so you shouldn't be asserting that you have knowledge about 'their pain'.

You do know what "pain" is right?
It's fairly easy to have knowledge about the pain a new born baby can go through, and through their lives, and considering many people know what it's like to "die" in general, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that dying in pain as a new born is no fun at all.

Another assertion. If there was any proof for this, then 'metaphysics' would be out of business.

Your post is nothing other than a specific individual's subjective take on a specific issue. There was no justification for posting this in the philosophy forum.

And yours isn't?

Sorry, I was being an arse last night. I've apologised to Charlou, but I guess that I should apologise to you guys too.