Well the utilitarian principle is pleasure-pain=goodness(Original post by Retired_Messiah)
If my massive poos had no physical pain associated with them I'd feel no sense of relief and happiness when I finished them. I couldn't live in a world like that.
Also what about the poor masochists?
It's not just about minimisation of pain
Posted from TSR Mobile
If you could end all suffering, would you? Watch
- 22-09-2016 22:06
- Thread Starter
- 22-09-2016 22:11
- 22-09-2016 22:26
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicureanism - a long held Western value and belief.
If i 'could' end suffering, like I was an omnipotent being, of course I would.
Can't remember where I read it. But there was an amazing site that argued that amputees, that prayed, and believed in God, proved either his non-existence, or that he was not all benevolent. But instead kinda evil, considering he could prevent natural disasters that massacre innocents also.
Not sure what level you want to discuss this. But bringing it back down to a more human perspective. Don't we all have some 'duty' to at least help alleviate suffering in the world as much as possible.
The outpourings of genuine sympathy, and cash money donations, whenever a tragic world event happens, shows that 'most' humans are really benevolent and charitable in nature. Surely it's a 'hard wired' (hate that term, but useful shorthand), for evolutionary advantage to be warm-hearted and generous to others suffering. Because one day you might be in a similar dire situation.Last edited by 303Pharma; 22-09-2016 at 22:28. Reason: for silly typo's. proof reading for the win
- Section Leader
- Political Ambassador
- Reporter Team
- 23-09-2016 12:01
If there were a choice between doing nothing versus ending all suffering, I'd choose to do away with it. But, if we were offered a dimmer switch, where we could choose to merely scale it down, I think that may be the better way to go. It does depend on what we really mean by suffering.
If suffering is only a feeling that the experiencer would choose to, in all instances given the power, do away with, then it would be better to get rid of all of it. I don't think it's totally that way though. For example, if a loved one is lost, the resultant grief is a type of suffering, but I don't believe many people would choose to get rid of it. The grief is a natural consequence of your connection with the person who was lost, and not to grieve is almost to say that you had no connection with that person.
Another example we could look at is the fatigue one experiences after intense exercise. When running, it starts to burn. When lifting weights, the muscles scream. If you isolated those feelings and applied them to a situation where, for example, someone with ill-intent were inflicting them on you, of course you'd dislike it and want the person to stop. However, the context in which they're naturally received is one where you're pushing yourself in order to grow and strengthen yourself as a person, or achieve the best of your potential. In that context, I don't believe many people would want to get rid of them.
It could be argued that these things aren't 'true' instances of suffering, in which case it'd be prudent to choose to get rid of all suffering. But, if they're considered to be simply low-level instances of suffering, it'd probably be better to keep them.
- 23-09-2016 12:09
You have to go through forms of hardship in order to experience "life" imo, it's all part of the learning curve and makes you a more well-rounded person.