If S wants to take 3 hours rather than 1 (IE because S enjoys it) then offering help is wrong.
But I was referring to the situation where offering help is appropriate; IE S does not enjoy the task and some help from another would make it much easier. Often people can be helped just by dropping a word of advice. Time is money. Free time is valuable. Excepting help is right. — Devans99
It's about people's preferences, their desires, — Terrapin Station
No its about maths. NET PLEASURE = PLEASURE - PAIN. It's about maximising net pleasure for the individual and the group. — Devans99
Good = the (inter)personal behavior you approve of, the (inter)personal behavior you feel is recommendable, etc.
Evil = the (inter)personal behavior you disapprove of as strongly as you can disapprove of anything. Mere "bad" is weaker--simply the (inter)personal behavior you disapprove of. "Evil" is on an extreme end of the scale. — Terrapin Station
No its about maths. NET PLEASURE = PLEASURE - PAIN. It's about maximising net pleasure for the individual and the group. — Devans99
What if someone doesn't approve of maximizing pleasure for the group, though?
You'd say that they're wrong. Well, again, they're wrong per what? — Terrapin Station
"Evil" would be the product of intent. Bad not necessarily. For instance, someone trying to kill you is evil. Cancer trying to kill you is just "bad". Now, if God existed and created the cancer to kill you, then that would be the act of an evil God. — Harry Hindu
which is detrimental to that individual in the long term. — Devans99
Wouldn't the pertinent info be whether they feel it's negative or positive (or neutral) to be unpopular in the group? — Terrapin Station
Does the group behave in an optimal manner that maximises pleasure and minimises pain for the individuals. — Devans99
Spoken just like someone who responds too quickly to posts without thinking things through and who wants to argue for the sake of arguing.Well, but that only matters with respect to how the person feels about those things, though.
In other words, S says he has goal x. Y inhibits goal x. S winds up not feeling negatively about that, at least not overall, and maybe S even winds up feeling positive about it. What matters there for "good/bad" etc. are how S feels. — Terrapin Station
Let us say that someone starts a war because they believe it will benefit humanity and that by bringing about this war billions of people will die, but in the aftermath a better society rises from teh ashes — I like sushi
One person’s utopia is often hell for many other — I like sushi
Also, in the OP you’ve left out the possibility of short-term good causing long-term good. Do you think that is possible? If not why not mention it? — I like sushi
I am sure you would agree with this claim that "murder is wrong" — princessofdarkness
Maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain are only positive when someone feels that that's the best course of action — Terrapin Station
Spoken just like someone who responds too quickly to posts without thinking things through — Harry Hindu
You've moved the goal posts — Harry Hindu
Let's take your argument and run a variable through it. If someone kills you in your sleep, you no longer have any feelings about it afterwards. So, does that make killing you in your sleep a non-moral act, like mowing your lawn? — Harry Hindu
Someone would have to be seriously maladjusted if they did not seek to maximise pleasure and minimise pain. Such a person needs help. — Devans99
War is wrong? Can you prove this to be correct? — I like sushi
An obvious example would be either fascism or communism — I like sushi
Why do you call it “right squared”? Saying that good can lead to bad or good, and that bad can led to good or bad is not really worth mentioning as far as I can tell. What am I missing? — I like sushi
You could’ve simply said “life is hard.” — I like sushi
You've been responding too quickly to posts without thinking things through for more than 40 years. Yes, I can see how that could be the case.Spoken just like someone who responds too quickly to posts without thinking things through — Harry Hindu
I've been doing this stuff for more than 40 years. — Terrapin Station
I explained that in my previous post. Take the time to read before posting a reply.What were the goal posts? — Terrapin Station
This is total BS. Having your goals inhibited makes you feel wronged, or else you didn't have your goals inhibited. When would anyone feel good about their goals being inhibited? If they feel good about it, it's because they realized that it wasn't necessarily a goal of theirs. How do you feel about your stuff being stolen? Wouldn't you feel wronged because you have the goal of keeping your stuff in your possession?Good and bad are ways that people feel about things. You correlated it to goals/goal achievement, etc. I pointed out that it's only correlated to goals/goal achievement per how an individual feels about it, where not achieving a goal, or being inhibited in achieveing it, can result in feeling any way towards it--positive, negative, anything in between. — Terrapin Station
Having your goals inhibited makes you feel wronged, or else you didn't have your goals inhibited. When would anyone feel good about their goals being inhibited? If they feel good about it, — Harry Hindu
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.