Human Value Nonexistent?

[Mystic]

Our instinct to believe in praiseworthy actions. We wouldn't have survived if we didn't. But just because we have the concept of praiseworthy actions and praise an action, it doesn't make it praiseworthy.

Elephant in the room: Of course it does, because as you said directly before making this statement, we set the criteria ourselves. If it meets the criteria we have set it is "praiseworthy".

In the sense we believe it's it's praiseworthy, not that is. We can give worth to an action, it doesn't mean it has any worth. It is praised to us, but it doesn't mean it's actual worthy of being praised. But when we give worth to something, we believe it has worth. I'm only saying do we know there is such a thing or are we naturally inclined to believe in a myth of worth, through pure instinct.

[The Grand Nudger]

Oh IDK, I don't see why setting the criteria for a concept we have manufactured is a big problem. Who else was going to set it?

---

In the sense we believe it's it's praiseworthy, not that is.

Again, nonsense. If someone feels that something has met their criteria for "praiseworthy" it is praiseworthy. That is the only applicable measure.

We can give worth to an action, it doesn't mean it has any worth.

Nonesense, it has whatever worth we've given it.

It is praised to us, but it doesn't mean it's actual worthy of being praised.

Is there something other than "us" that has any say in the matter? I wasn't aware that this was the case.

[Edwardo Piet]

[...] assume we can make of it what we want, but can we?

Well, my personal opinion is that we should only try to improve things that are possible to improve. It's about improvement and possibility therefore.

[Mystic]

Oh IDK, I don't see why setting the criteria for a concept we have manufactured is a big problem. Who else was going to set it?

This is a problem. I will give an example of what I'm trying to say. We are naturally inclined to believe the natural world exists and is not a dream like matrix like world.

Right now we imagine there can be a material like substance. It maybe very well be that it's possible, it may not be possible. Perhaps only spiritual existence is possible to constitute reality.

But we chose to believe in a material world, because it helps you function better or that our instinct is that there is one. But we don't have a rational reason to believe it's even possible let alone that material world exists. At least most of us don't.

When we assume something is of worth or we measure humans in different degrees, we assume there is some measurement constituting their worth. But how that is even possible, we don't know.

Free-will is assumed in all this. That there is a will that has some sort of control and is praised. But we haven't proved free-will exists.

[The Grand Nudger]

This is a problem. I will give an example of what I'm trying to say. We are naturally inclined to believe the natural world exists and is not a dream like matrix like world.

If it were a dream the dream is so convincing as to make the difference moot, eh?

Right now we imagine there can be a material like substance. It maybe very well be that it's possible, it may not be possible. Perhaps only spiritual existence is possible to constitute reality.

Imagination may apply to spirits just a little more than it applies to material, because even supposing that this is a dream..it is curiously absent of spirits, and perhaps less curiously full of material.

But we chose to believe in a material world, because it helps you function better or that our instinct is that there is one. But we don't have a rational reason to believe it's even possible let alone that material world exists. At least most of us don't.

You had a choice in this material world business? Well, fuck me, I didn't.

When we assume something is of worth or we measure humans in different degrees, we assume there is some measurement constituting their worth. But how that is even possible, we don't know.

Because..again, we set the criteria that constitutes the measurement.....

Free-will is assumed in all this. That there is a will that has some sort of control and is praised. But we haven't proved free-will exists.

Why? Perhaps no free will is involved in what criteria is set. That doesn't really change whether or not the criteria -is- set, now does it?

A canary in the mines moment if ever there were one. Rather than sticking to praise you go off on tangents about free will and dream worlds. I think the point that the train went off the tracks was when you started thinking about "praiseworthy" like it was a box that you might find out in a field somewhere "Hey fellas, look, some praiseworthy!" rather then linguistic shorthand for a set of value judgements made by human beings.

[Mystic]

If someone feels that something has met their criteria for "praiseworthy" it is praiseworthy.

So if a Muslim believes killing an apostate in obedience to God is praiseworthy, it's praiseworthy?

That is the only applicable measure.

That it seems to be a delusion.

Nonesense, it has whatever worth we've given it.

Ok, Muslims believe the Night of Qadr is more worth then a thousand months. I guess that means the Night of Qadr is worth more then a thousand months

Is there something other than "us" that has any say in the matter? I wasn't aware that this was the case.

Did we even chose on our own sense of praise or is all muddled up with instinct and culture and ego and actions here and there, and confusing thoughts, and randomness.

That we actually our selves free-willing giving worth to things is also not known or proven.

[Edwardo Piet]

Free-will is assumed in all this.

Please explain. How are you defining "free will"?

---

So if a Muslim believes killing an apostate in obedience to God is praiseworthy, it's praiseworthy?

Subjectively to them, in their opinion, yes. Objectively, no.

[Mystic]

Subjectively to them, in their opinion, yes. Objectively, no.

Subjective praise exists for sure. But if there is even a measurement reality to any actions or if it's even possible for there to be any measurement to actions is not proven.

---

How are you defining "free will"?

It maybe very well be when try to define free-will, we will realize it's a delusion and impossible concept. I rather not try for that reason

[The Grand Nudger]

So if a Muslim believes killing an apostate in obedience to God is praiseworthy, it's praiseworthy?

You answered your own question in the asking of it.

That it seems to be a delusion.

What part of that is a delusion...the act does meet the person in questions criteria for praiseworthy...right? It would be a delusion if the action did not meet their criteria and yet they considered it such nevertheless.

Ok, Muslims believe the Night of Qadr is more worth then a thousand months. I guess that means the Night of Qadr is worth more then a thousand months

If they mean what they say then yes...that's what it means.

Did we even chose on our own sense of praise or is all muddled up with instinct and culture and ego and actions here and there, and confusing thoughts, and randomness.

We may or may not have, and it may be a mix of both...but what would that have to do with whether or not it was delusional?

That we actually our selves free-willing giving worth to things is also not known or proven.

And? They are nevertheless "given worth"...right?

[Mystic]

[...] assume we can make of it what we want, but can we?

Well, my personal opinion is that we should only try to improve things that are possible to improve. It's about improvement and possibility therefore.

Improvement may not be impossible without delusion. An improvement assumes there is better way or worse way.

Is a life of a suffering with patience better then a life of hedonistic fun? Is one an improvement to another.

Our concept of improvement relies on giving worth to things.

The joker himself might belief a chaotic world is an improvement to a non-chaotic world. Or the more chaotic the better.


"Nothing is absolute, everything is permitted" Assassin's creed.