And value is simply a comparison in my mind. — ISeeIDoIAm
what goal are you trying to achieve? — ISeeIDoIAm
What outcome? — ISeeIDoIAm
If knowledge determines truth, how is value determined?
It seems to me that when we value something that one might automatically assume it is a good. In one of my other two threads I talked about the dangers of superfluous valuation of happiness. In yet another thread, I talked about how can one go about discounting what one already values to make room for coinciding wants that are separate from needs.
I take it upon myself to try and answer my own question. So, my take is that in general rational egotism might seem like the automatic choice here; but, hedonism does not precede the determination of worth.
Would anyone care to expand on this thesis, whether you agree with it or not? — Shawn
I've been waiting to, in fact am dying to, know what non-hedonistic values would look like? — TheMadFool
What could be so valuable that happiness doesn't matter? Whatever it is, the fact that happiness is the challenge it must overcome is eye-opening no? — TheMadFool
"What could be so valuable that happiness doesn't matter?"
Abstaining from eating all of my food today so as to not starve later. Aka: rationing.
That is not to say people don't hold self destructive behaviors, but we don't talk about them anymore, they didn't make it. (waka waka) — ISeeIDoIAm
From an old thread discussion, I speculate ...If knowledge determines truth, how is value determined? — Shawn
To live is to evaluate.
In Spinoza's terms, every life seeks to persist in its existence - continue, survive, grow-develop (à la 'will to power'); thus, every life values - is valuable to - herself; and insofar as a life recognizes other lives as valuable to themselves, a life enters into reciprocal valuing with and among them, to value and be valued by other lives. Thus, value, or meaning, does not come "out of nothing"; it comes from community - natality, eusociality, fatality - and reinforced, or enriched, by communicative practices (e.g. cooperative labors, crafts-arts, rituals, trade, discursive dialectics (e.g. scientific / historical / philosophical inquiries)). — 180 Proof
You act as if happiness is something that's static. — ISeeIDoIAm
To live is to evaluate.
In Spinoza's terms, every life seeks to persist in its existence - continue, survive, grow-develop (à la 'will to power'); thus, every life values - is valuable to - herself; and insofar a life recognizes other lives as valuable to themselves, a life enters into reciprocal valuing with and among them, to value and be valued by other lives. Thus, value, or meaning, does not come "out of nothing"; it comes from community - natality, sociality, fatality - and reinforced, or enriched, by communicative practices (e.g. cooperative labors, crafts-arts, rituals, trade, discursive dialectics (e.g. scientific / historical / philosophical inquiries)). — 180 Proof
it seems to accurately characterise a healthy attitude to one's own existence: to seek to continue it and develop it, to increase the things one is able to do with oneself, increase one's functional efficacy; — bert1
From "other's" what?Has the thought occurred that you ask too much from other's? — ISeeIDoIAm
I didn't want to mention that as 180 and I disagree sharply on that, and I was enjoying being able to agree with him on something. — bert1
"Relations determine value."
Care to elaborate? I read that as: things can't have value without a comparison. — ISeeIDoIAm
Look, as sentient meat, however illusory our identities are, we craft those identities by making value judgments: everybody judges, all the time. Now, you got a problem with that... You're livin' wrong. — Rust
thus, every life values - is valuable to - herself; and insofar as a life recognizes other lives as valuable to themselves, a life enters into reciprocal valuing with and among them, to value and be valued by other lives. — 180 Proof
If knowledge determines truth, how is value determined?
It seems to me that when we value something that one might automatically assume it is a good. In one of my other two threads I talked about the dangers of superfluous valuation of happiness. In yet another thread, I talked about how can one go about discounting what one already values to make room for coinciding wants that are separate from needs.
I take it upon myself to try and answer my own question. So, my take is that in general rational egotism might seem like the automatic choice here; but, hedonism does not precede the determination of worth.
Would anyone care to expand on this thesis, whether you agree with it or not? — Shawn
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.