= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on Open thread, July 21-27, 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (160)
And you, then, assume that since you wouldn't know, no one could possibly do.
Moreover, you insist that everyone who thinks in more complex terms than just pleasure and pain is mistaken in their beliefs and really wants just pleasure and nothing but pleasure.
Correct?
I've heard numerous people try to justify other values numerous times, but never successfully. Moreover, it's not a matter of me not knowing, it's a matter of someone who says "This is good even though it's not pleasurable" doesn't give any convincingly motivating justification for it.
You are aware that there is, for example, a quite large corpus of world literature which has rather thoroughly and seriously engaged the subject of values other than pleasure and pain?
Emotional states and terminal values have no justification and need no justification. They just are.
Of course, I can't say that I've read absolutely everything that has ever been written on the subject, but I've read enough to identify certain families of arguments, and find none of them persuasive.
True, but when you're doing something instrumental, you should be sure that what you're doing is justified by your terminal values, and people can be mistaken about whether what they do has the effects they prefer.