/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3662632]

So, /lit/.
Do you agree that pleasure and the Good are different?

[Anonymous No.3662655]

>>3662632
not really, but that's entirely subjective, and relies on some kind of common cultural experience to argue and underlying internalized moral fabric, which you, as the edgy-teer you presumably are, likely wouldn't want to take as axiomatic.

[Anonymous No.3662659]

of course. which idiot would think this?

[Anonymous No.3662662]

I agree that you should do your own homework

[Anonymous No.3662663]

>>3662632

both are just chemical responses to stimuli, mystified and obfuscated using ideologies and symbols.

[Anonymous No.3662669]

>>3662632
The Good is what is worth having for it's own sake. If pleasure is not the only one, it's certainly among them.

[Anonymous No.3662671]

>>3662655
>relies on some kind of common cultural experience to argue and underlying internalized moral fabric
That is some terrible english

[Anonymous No.3662677]

>>3662671
valid. i've had a long fucking day.

[Anonymous No.3662678]

/lit/ pls
I need to answer with reference to Socrates and I've already used the leaky jar argument and the argument from Cowards and Brave Men/Fools and Wise Men

[Anonymous No.3662680]

>>3662678
just come up with your own damn opinion, argue it, profit

[Anonymous No.3662681]

>>3662678
Fuck your homework.

[Anonymous No.3662692]

>>3662681
>>3662662
But I'm stupid and you guys are clever.

[Anonymous No.3662698]

Yeah. When I tell you something is "good" I mean, "I want you to value that thing" when I say something is pleasurable I mean, "I value that thing".

[Anonymous No.3663400]

>>3662655
I don't think you understood the question

[Anonymous No.3663411]

>>3662632

Good and Bad does not exist; they are values, and all values do not exist in nature: they are creations of the human brain. There is no act that can be called good or bad - all of them depends of what people think.

Pleasure is the name given to a series of eletroquimical reactions in the human brain, the reactions responsible for the pleasent feelings that we know as pleasure.

[Anonymous No.3663417]

>>3663411
>>3662663
spot on both of you

[Anonymous No.3663431]

>>3662632
this question sounds suspiciously similar to one from an upcoming DECV philosophy SAC

[Anonymous No.3663433]

>>3663417
let's imagine a situation where we meet a thousand extraterrestial races from all corners of the universe and they'd have the same moral values we do. could then an argument be made that "real" moral values exist because life gravitates towards them?

[Anonymous No.3663441]

>>3663431
It distresses me that either my teacher or one of my classmates browses 4chan.

[Anonymous No.3663448]

>>3662632
Of course, there's no debate on it.

[Anonymous No.3663472]

>>3663411
>all values do not exist in nature

Nature is a creation of the human brain according to your own self-defeating argument.

>>3662663
your thought expressed in that sentence is a "chemical responses to stimuli, mystified and obfuscated using ideologies and symbols" according to your own self-defeating argument.

Nihilist kiddies sure are fun to debate with.

[Anonymous No.3663475]

Yes, I do agree, because pleasure is a tyrant that will ruin a man and if it's given free reign.

[Anonymous No.3663480]

>>3663472
>your thought expressed in that sentence is a "chemical responses to stimuli, mystified and obfuscated using ideologies and symbols"
How does that counter anything he said?

[Anonymous No.3663489]

I wouldn't want to spend the rest of my life in a pleasure machine.

So obviously I care about the way things actually are, not just how pleasurable my experiences are.

[Anonymous No.3663491]

>>3663480
how does "how does that counter anything he said?" counter anything I said?

[Anonymous No.3663500]

>>3663491
Don't get cheeky with me m8

[Anonymous No.3663505]

>>3663500
the brain in a vat argument is pointless because I'm not a brain in a vat I'm a brain in a body that has legs, a vat does not even have any legs

[Anonymous No.3663508]

>>3663505
cont. if i was a brain in a vat I would not be able to go to the shop and by sausage rolls but I am going to go to the shop and buy sausage rolls, and when i eat food i feed my brain which needs legs to go to the shop to buy sausage rolls to feed it

[Anonymous No.3663535]

>>3663489
But because a pleasure machine would be unpleasant, correct?

[Anonymous No.3663582]

>>3662632
Fo' sho'.

[Anonymous No.3663597]

What the fuck is "The Good"?

[Anonymous No.3663601]

>>3662632

Is sadism 'good'?

Is a heroine addiction 'good'?

[Anonymous No.3663602]

>>3663601
>b-but muh relativism! muh materialism!

[Anonymous No.3663603]

define """""good"""""

[AnalCrust !m9jxTLhLcw No.3663607]

>>3663535
hurrr go read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experience_machine

[Anonymous No.3663615]

>>3663607
That thought experiment is just logically flawed as fuck. the reasons why people don't want to plug all have to do with pleasure / displeasure. It wouldn't be painful to know they are in a machine and not in reality, it would be painful knowing they were just floating in a tank separated from their family etc

[Anonymous No.3663621]

>>3663607
That argument does not receive universal assent. I would spend my life in a pleasure machine to be honest. Give the pleasure machine to a suicidal or destitute or friendless man and he would undoubtedly take it.

[Anonymous No.3663623]

>>3663615
That "wouldn't" should have been a "would'

I think the main reason people wouldn't want to be plugged into an experience machine would just be fear, which is a kind of displeasure

[Anonymous No.3663684]

>>3662632
No, pleasure and good are the same in all cases. The pleasure, any pleasure, creates an immediate good in the mind of the individual perpetrating the action. In the future, results may occur from that pleasure which are bad (or displeasurable), but that is separate of the initial good action. But what feels as good or pleasurable is subjective. One must apply good or bad to the individual instead of the whole. In examples such as murder or drugs, the whole scenario cannot be labelled as pleasurable or dis-pleasurable as the individuals involved have different reactions.

[Anonymous No.3663688]

>>3663602

If you don't have anything constructive to reply don't reply with a stupid non-sequiter or 'implying'

[Anonymous No.3663691]

they're different inasmuch as one of those doesn't exist

[Anonymous No.3663702]

within the course of pleasure it is related indirectly to the individual for surely the masses to experience pleasure at one time, which cannot even be done in natural habitat (an orgy) beyond the smallest of moments, is not possible.

the Good, to which you have capitalized, I shall liken to an alignment chart with Good meaning "acting within a set of guidelines that prevents the most suffering from the largest group of individuals one encounters"

to live, sir, as I do. to return to the sky to break through the clouds again throned.
if you must talk of philosophy it would seem you are too far from living it.

and look who's talking. i should be magic busing myself into areas away.

enemy dead
fiancee dead girlfriends dead
engineer dead, passanger dead
unrecognizable body dead: a man's an animal's?
Dog dead, bird dead.
Rosebush dead, orange trees dead.
Air dead, bay dead.
Hope, patience, eyes, sleep, movement of hand's dead.
Man dead. Lights go on.
He works at night as if he were living.
Good morning! He is a stranger ( as if he were living).

Dead without an obituary, secretly dead.
He knows how toi imitate hunger, and how to pretend to love.
And how toi insist on walking and how well he walks.
He could walk through walls, but he uses doors.

[Anonymous No.3663711]

>>3663601
>implying heroin addiction is pleasurable

[Anonymous No.3663764]

>>3662632
yes, but we can create a similar construct revisionistically. Pleasure as conceived by bentham is too simple, enjoyment however, I think is sophisticated enough to encompass all the ends worth pursuing, including in rare cases suffering, if a certain sort of edification is achieved through it. That way, under the banner of preference hedonism, my only contention remaining is that enjoyment is valuable, but is what is valuable good? It would probably end up being yes, so long as I can incorporate a retributive justice model usually more comfortable in deontological ethics.