(October 1, 2017 at 2:01 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Oh boy, now The Only Real Good™ changes with perspective. How does your model account for those whose perspective is that the only Real Good is stoic good? How about people whose perspective is that positive emotional reinforcement is not a uniform indication of goodness or decency in the first place. That addiction is not a moral good, for example, just because heroin gives you the good feels.
Is it really so difficult, so painful for you...to just say that you think the sex offenders satisfaction is a bad thing..that you would prevent..and that just maybe, you hadn't really thought this through? That you don't want to convince anyone of your wordview..if they plan on applying your worldview....to you......
\
If this is going to devolve into an invocation of absolute moral relativism...when it started out as a claim that there was only one real type of good.....then why seek enlighentment in your worldview, particularly when you could achieve the same euphoria from sex offense?
My model would say that those stoic people are deluding themselves and have the wrong definition of good. All those other people you've mentioned would, again, be like blind people thinking of the color red, but having no red in their lives. So, again, they would be deluding themselves into thinking they have a real version of good value independent of positive emotions. As for people using my worldview against me such as calling me names since it makes them feel positive emotions, then I still have no objections to my worldview. In regards to the question in your final sentence, I would still not make foolish choices such as being a sex offender just to get enhanced euphoric states from raping someone. If enlightenment in my worldview made me feel a positive emotion, then that would be real good value in my life along with doing all of my other hobbies which would also have real good value in my life as well providing that I could feel positive emotions from them.
