• khaled
    3.5k
    I have learned statistics. What does that have to do with what I said?
  • god must be atheist
    5.1k
    a universe where every want can be satisfied is tantamount to a perfect world, no?Wallows

    What about wanting to want. A goal. A purpose. Something to aim for.

    If have everything I want, I have no motivation to do anything, which is by itself not moral or immoral, or good or bad; but it feels bad. Stagnancy. Stagrob. (Rob being Nancy's husband.)
    ________________

    P.s. i realize this aspect of the topic has already been discussed after the post I responded to.
  • Shawn
    13.2k


    Well, can't an approximation be made for each and every individual? I think China is kinda doing that with a social credit system and I don't hear uproars over that.
  • khaled
    3.5k
    What sort of authority would that approximation have? I don't care what others consider "Best".
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    What sort of authority would that approximation have? I don't care what others consider "Best".khaled

    Uhh, I think your own.
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    Well, I can tell you it has the hallmarks of insanity all around it.Wallows

    How so?

    I'm not quite clear on the matter. Heaven is advertised as a place of perpetual bliss but I wonder if that's the truth or a misunderstanding of the concept. What I mean is that perpetual bliss can be achieved through maintaining all conditions within a desirable range: to use a temperature analogy, we could have a heating/cooling system that keeps the temperature at a comfortable 25 degrees celsius. However, suffering-happiness are conditions too and also should be maintained at an intermediate state between the extremes of abject suffering and ecstatic joy.

    It's plain to see that abject suffering is anti-life; after all suicide which is generally due to extreme suffering is positively detrimental to life and I've heard of animals subjected to cruelty failing to thrive. However, there isn't much evidence for "extreme" happiness being a problem for existence, for life. Either there are no problems with being in perpetual bliss or there are but we're just not aware of them.

    If there are no problems with being in an "extreme" state of happiness then happiness becomes an exception to the rule that it's preferable to exist in the Buddhist middle path or the Aristotelean golden mean. If the Buddha and Aristotle were correct, we should be trying to achieve a balance between suffering and happiness and not reject the former outright and devote all our efforts to the latter. However, this isn't what reality looks like; everyone's aim is to reduce suffering to zero and max out on happiness.

    If we express all conditions for life as existing between extremes/limits and that there's a lower limit and an upper limit to all of them at which and beyond which life simply can't exist, then we must come to the inevitable conclusion that, "extreme" happiness is deletorious to life. In other words, heaven is a "bad" thing, just as hell is.

    Then it must be that this world, sandwiched between hell and heaven, is the best of all possible worlds. It's midway between the extremes of suffering and happiness, just like life prefers it to be.
  • BC
    13.6k
    What the Trump, Putin, Xi, et al administrations show is that a rather large pile of crap is compatible with the best of all possible worlds formula. What we have here is the most improvable of worlds.
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    However, this isn't what reality looks like; everyone's aim is to reduce suffering to zero and max out on happiness.TheMadFool

    Are you sure about that?
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    What the Trump, Putin, Xi, et al administrations show is that a rather large pile of crap is compatible with the best of all possible worlds formula. What we have here is the most improvable of worldsBitter Crank

    That doesn't sound bad either...
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    Are you sure about that?Wallows

    As "proof" I refer you to the ubiquitous nature of paradise-hell concept in all cultures. Disregarding minor religions like nature worship, the dominant faiths in the 21st century all have a concept of heaven and hell with the prime directive to earn a ticket to the former and avoid the latter as far as possible.

    Do you think I'm wrong? I'd like to know. Thanks.
123Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

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.