(September 25, 2017 at 5:38 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:(September 25, 2017 at 5:22 pm)Transcended Dimensions Wrote: The reason why my idea sounds false is only because you are using positive and good/bad the wrong way. The thought the pedophile would be having would be the thought of something good. He thought it was a good thing to molest the child, but it wouldn't be a good thought. Furthermore, the scenario itself wouldn't be objectively good. Rather, the pedophile would be able to perceive good value in his harmful actions by feeling a positive emotion. There is the difference between perceiving value as opposed to simply acknowledging it. A blind person can only acknowledge objects, but would not be able to perceive (see) them. As for my final paragraph, I was just making it clear what positive and negative emotions were.
bold mine
Can you explain to me what the right way is?
To the pedophile it's a good thought. If it were a bad thought to them, they wouldn't be a pedophile. If we lived in a society of mostly pedophiles the scenario would be considered good.
Blind people perceive objects all of the time, just not with vision. I don't understand what you mean by "acknowledge".
Again, "perception" of value, good or bad is subjective.
I'll agree that both positive and negative emotions involve neurotransmitters. Is there something else?
You are right. To the pedophile, it would be a good thought then. But to us, it would be a bad thought. When I mean "acknowledge," I mean how a blind person cannot see through vision. This blind person could only acknowledge objects.