Science vs Morality

[Mozart Link]

Now go ahead and tell me which would be better: 1.) Having no pleasure, but having the thought that you are a human being who has worth, or 2.) Having all the pleasure in the world that you are a human being who has worth? The 2nd choice would obviously be better because you obviously, again, would be a mere emotionless robot with no pleasure with just a thought. The concept of something being "better" means more worth. Therefore, since having pleasure would be better than just having a thought with no pleasure, you would have no worth if you had no pleasure.

Better in what regard? "Better" is not equivalent to "having more worth".

A car is better than a human being in getting us to places. But a human being is better than a car in giving us advices.

A car would have more worth (just in that specific sense) and a human being would have more worth too (again, just in that specific example you gave). But since pleasure is the best part of you better than any amount of other brain function or capabilities combined (again, best meaning having the most worth), then for you to have no pleasure means you basically have no worth. Again, for you to decide that other areas of the brain have more value than pleasure and that you would sacrifice your pleasure in order to keep your intelligence and such means you have no comprehension of what it would feel like to lose all your pleasure. It would be worse than death because at least when you are dead, you don't have any such painful realization that you have lost the greatest part of you.