Aside from that, pleasure and pain don't by conventional definition pertain to moral good and bad — Terrapin Station

Moral good/bad is about whether we inflict emotional or physical pain on ourselves and each other. So morality is fundamentally about pleasure/pain.

Moral good/bad is about whether we inflict emotional or physical pain on ourselves and each other. So morality is fundamentally about pleasure/pain. — Devans99

I define morality in more of a meta fashion than that.

Something is right or good if net pleasure is positive:

net pleasure = pleasure - pain

Or wrong/bad if net pleasure is negative (same calculation obviously).

A moral act is net pleasurable for the individual. If its net pleasurable for the individual its net pleasurable for the group.

An immoral act is net painful for the individual. If its net painful for the individual its net painful for the group.

Group dynamics reenforce the above. If you do something popular in the group, you feel pleasure. If you do something unpopular in the group you feel pain. So the presence of the group encourages individuals to act in the right way for the entire group.

Don't you think that what people are doing in defining it is attempting an abstraction/general/overarching conception of their intuitions? — Terrapin Station

I think it is more labeling as opposed to abstracting.

Think of how many times groups of people have been vilified by negative language, women, Jews, gays, blacks and so on.

Another things that happens is when natural occurrences are labelled evil then described as punishments or karma. It is a too black and white world view. If people think pain is evil or disaster and misfortune are then they wonder what did Ii or we do to deserve this evil.

It can be argued that the process of moralizing causes its own sets of serious harms.

You would certainly not call a painful injury good so by process of elimination it must be evil? — Devans99

The irony about physical pain is it prevents serious Injury. People with congenital pain conditions or who lose pain sensation later die younger of serious injuries.

Personally I do not judge illness and pains I experience as evil in themselves I tend to attribute evil to things with motives.

I think that you cannot justify the step of going from pain to evil and pleasure to good. Pain and pleasure refer to feelings/sensations whereas good and evil are more conceptual and evaluative.

Another example is that people including Michael J Fox claim that a serious illness turned them into a better person. Hedonism can be seen as selfish and debauched or shallow.

I agree with this, and you put it so well. I believe there definitely is a right and wrong, but like everything else in life, it's objective. You have to be willing to comprehend, to accept. I've more then once caught my self attempting to be prideful or what have you, and nearly not be willing to put thought into an idea. Nearly choosing to throw away any idea of its possibility for success. But the momemt I chose to resist that urge, and put thought into the idea, nearly always it will open up a whole new series of ideas or thoughts. In my opinion there simply is a greater good. There is the option, in every decision, to be considerate of all others. The rule SIMPLY is! All for one, and one for all. Treat all others, as you wish to be treated!!! As long as one is willing to consider others, a conclusion Is nearly always easily achievable. Of course there is a exception to every rule, but that is life. Nothing is perfect. Accepting that is crucial to developing a correct way of thinking in my opinion.

I think that you cannot justify the step of going from pain to evil and pleasure to good. Pain and pleasure refer to feelings/sensations whereas good and evil are more conceptual and evaluative — Andrew4Handel

I'm including emotional pain and pleasure in my definition of good and evil.

How do we judge if an action is good or evil? It has to be its impact on people/animals that we use to judge it. The only way to judge that impact is emotional/physical pain/pleasure. These sensations/emotions are the only way people/animals react to an action.

What about an evil act against the environment? That would cause emotional and physical pain for people/animals so it still fits with my definition.

Another example is that people including Michael J Fox claim that a serious illness turned them into a better person. Hedonism can be seen as selfish and debauched or shallow — Andrew4Handel

A serious illness turning someone into a better person fits with the pattern of good/right. Short term pain followed by long term pleasure. The period of adversity has benefited them in the long term.

There are two types of hedonism. If you are not harming anyone else whilst enjoying yourself, its a good/right action. If you are harming others its a evil/wrong action and you will regret it in the long term.

Treat all others, as you wish to be treated!!! — NotesOfAMan

Jesus said much the same. It's such a simple rule but if everyone in society followed it, the world would be a much happier place.

"How do we judge if an action is good or evil? It has to be its impact on people/animals that we use to judge it. The only way to judge that impact is emotional/physical pain/pleasure. These sensations/emotions are the only way people/animals react to an action."

I must strongly disagree, respectfully. Overcoming that barrier of basing opinions off of personal feelings is likely a huge step in personal progression. More specifically, emotional reaction and/or physical reaction, absolutely are not the only base for decision making for all people and animals.

"Jesus said much the same. It's such a simple rule but if everyone in society followed it, the world would be a much happier place."


This was known as the "Golden Rule" where I was in kindergarten. They were pretty serious about instilling it lol.

But what are the motivations of humans/animals? They seek physical/emotional pleasure and shun physical/emotional pain. There are no other motives.

More specifically, emotional reaction absolutely is not the only base for decision making for all people and animals — NotesOfAMan

We have a mental reaction to events as well, but it simply is a mental calculation we do to maximise physical/emotional pleasure and minimise pain.

So why is it only in this thread and from me that there's nothing useful for you if I'm not falsifying something you said, but in other contexts and/or from other people, they can be useful if they're not falsifying something you said? — Terrapin Station

Because one must have a goal to find something useful. My goal was to see whether or not my idea holds up by exposing it to criticism. You have yet to provide reasonable criticism or reasonable approval. Therefore, you have yet to say anything useful regarding my goal.

Try again. — hks

So new, and already a Mod. :chin:

Can you stop trying to define me please. When you judge me, you do not define me, you merely define yourself.

I can't speak on behalf of Good, though...

I think it is more labeling as opposed to abstracting. — Andrew4Handel

We're talking about someone defining something though, right? What do you think they're labeling when they're forwarding a definition?

Or are you saying that you were using "defining" more loosely?

So are you given over to satisfying short term impulses, rather than long term planning (my definition of evil)?

Perhaps you could describe what makes you so evil so I can see if it fits in with my idea?

Your definition is evilly narrow, and actually evil in itself as it denies many other forms of evil.

deleted

But what are the motivations of humans/animals? They seek physical/emotional pleasure and shun physical/emotional pain. There are no other motives. — Devans99

I have the motive of gaining knowledge and finding the truth.

I have the motive of gaining knowledge and finding the truth. — Andrew4Handel

OK, those things give you pleasure then. So pleasure is a super category of these types of motivations

- They used to be called your right hand and wrong hand.
- Then it was changed to your right hand and left hand.
- Remember that right is what is right in the long-term and wrong is is what is right in the short-term.
- Then in politics, we have left and right parties.
- But the left-wing are longer term than the right-wing (more infrastructure investment, higher taxes).
- So actually left and right-wing are the wrong way around.
- And they are also misnamed: It politics it should not be left-wing and right-wing; it should be right-wing and wrong-wing.

Which makes it a lot clearer who should vote for! (the right party not the wrong party).