RE: Emotions are intrinsically good and bad
September 29, 2017 at 5:16 pm
(This post was last modified: September 29, 2017 at 5:20 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
(September 29, 2017 at 5:11 pm)bennyboy Wrote: No, it's really not. Without the capacity to suffer, we'd be gone in about two generations.
Which is a better outcome than suffering. Non-existence is neutral.
Yes, suffering to some extent can be an instrumental good but that good is only instrumental with regards to it reducing even greater suffering in the longer run.
E.g. I have a vaccine... which hurts. But it prevents a disease which would make me suffer a lot more. Having a vaccine would be bad if it didn't achieve anything. It's because vaccines prevent even greater suffering that they're good.
I'm an anti-natalist. To me the second best world to a world where everyone is in a constant state of bliss (which is an unrealistic world and yet it seems to be what TD is striving for)... would be a world that didn't exist. The current world we live in contains a lot more bad than good. The extreme suffering that some people go through on this planet... is not worth the everyday 'sort of doing okay' that you and me experience.
(September 29, 2017 at 5:13 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Wouldn't that fall under his header of "some intrinsically bad suffering is better than more intrinsically bad suffering" ?
^
Of course.
The point is there's bad and then there's worse. Bad is still intrinsically bad. But worse is also intrinsically bad but to greater degree. Bad is better than worse.
One thing that always stops me re-attempting suicide is the fact that I am likely to fail and it will cause me greater suffering. I could also survive but end up brain damaged or worse.
