Recent comments in /f/Philosophy

AnarchButterfly wrote (edited )

Does memory of pleasure even necessarily lead to future pleasure? I've experienced a great deal of suffering by clinging to past memories, desperately wishing I could regain that state of pleasure. Similarly, I also have memories of pleasure I have since come to regret, and remembering them is displeasurable.

Or, to think about it another way, is the value in remembering past pleasures simply the present pleasure we get from it? If so, I'm not sure that it implies we should maximize the pleasure of those with the longest memories. One who remembers things perfectly may only need a single pleasurable memory that they could bring to mind, while someone with no long term memory could make better use of new pleasures.

It also brings into question if there's value in our pleasure at all. If memory of pleasure is important, then it's completely wasted on anything impermanent. A child might use that pleasurable memory for many years more than the skydiver, but all the same the pleasure will be forgotten upon death. Even if the child with maximized pleasure led a life that further maximized pleasure for others, at some point there will be no one left in this universe capable of remembering, and the pleasure will amount to nothing. If memory of pleasure is important, then it seems that this universe is inherently pleasureless. If present pleasure is more valuable, though, then memories are simply one tool for maximizing current pleasure, though I think it would be difficult to predict the value of memories and the consequent pleasure or displeasure they may lead to.

Sorry for my rambling, I'm largely ignorant of utilitarian philosophy so I'm not sure I can really answer your initial question.

3

Tequila_Wolf wrote

Utilitarians would count it, but would likely say that an important part of the pleasure is lost because so much pleasure comes from remembering the event. If I forgot that I had amazing sex right after I had it I would definitely be losing out on a lot of quality of life, because I find good sex emotionally grounding for some time after.

Utilitarianism's the worst of the worst kind of ethics though, so no need to be too bothered by it.

5

fortmis wrote

Yes it's pleasure!! But it's not the best kind >:)

I think we over-value the memory of pleasure, which is why we obsessively document moments. On the other hand, we also over-value pleasure that is completely self-contained and doesn't have any pleasurable ripple effects (binge-ing tv / getting very too drunk / eating fries constantly). Sigh, here I am saying everything, while saying nothing.

6

Majrelende wrote (edited )

Reply to God by ChilledName

I understand much of what you say, I think, or at least interpret so.

Your message is interpreted in contexts, though, that don't translate very well to the cultural context of Raddle. Especially, I think, in linking to an image of the cover of Genesis, since 1) it contains elements that at least seem authoritarian-- there are different ways to interpret some of them, but overwhelmingly it has been interpreted in an authoritarian way; and 2) most people here don't want to be ruled by a book. Also, Abrahamic terminology like "sin" and capital-H "He" will put people off, not least because of trying to gender existence. It may also help to reduce the capital letters.

I read a bit of Genesis, and didn't find it of very much practical value. It is mostly old stories that don't have much to do with my life. As you said, though, "we are the message". That is, I think, where the true sacred text, so to say, is found: written throughout existence. For more see my recent post.

4

Haruki wrote

Reply to God by ChilledName

This is a post informing everyone that I did not read that shit. Have a nice day.

7

asterism wrote

Reply to comment by tuesday in God by ChilledName

Uh, I think it needs more than line breaks. Here is my attempt.

"the way the dog was covering the little girl is so cute"

WHY do you ASK What is ordinary for the dog?

If the dog is not in its purpose (ordinary) what is its purpose?

THE WAY INDICATES A QUESTION of HUMAN NATURE. YOU QUESTION WHAT IS OUT OF THE ORDINARY but WHY?

Because of THE DESIRE TO BE IN yOUR PURPOSE?

is the DESIRE TO BE IN OUR PURPOSE ORDINARY?

THE DESIRE TO BE IN OUR PURPOSE IS ORDINARY. YOUR PURPOSE is BE ORDINARY.

WHY DO WE DESIRE OUR PURPOSE?

we WANT TO BE A PART OF SOMETHING be it FAMILY, LOVE, or even GOD.

WHY DO WE WANT FAMILY?

We want to FEEL THE LOVE OF GOD. WE ALL WANT TO FEEL THE LOVE OF GOD AND THAT IS ORDINARY. THAT IS THE POINT. YOUR PURPOSE IS TO FEEL THE LOVE OF GOD. THE WORD ALLOWS YOU TO FEEL THE LOVE OF GOD. FOLLOW IT. WE NEED TO BE IN ORDER.

What is our CORE DESIRE?

Lol I give up.

RETURN TO ORDINARY. RETURN TO GOD. GOD IS ORDINARY. WE ARE IMAGES OF HIM. THE DESIRE TO RETURN TO GOD IS WHY WE WANT ORDINARY SOMETHING TO RETURN TO BECUASE WE ARE A PART OF THE PUZZLE OF LIFE. WE ARE A PART. AND GOD IS LIFE. WE MAKE-UP GOD AND GOD MAKES US. COMPLETING HIMSELF. FAMILY. COMPLETING FAMILY IS HIS PURPOSE. MAKE WHOLE. HES MAKING HIMSELF WHOLE AGAIN. HES BEEN BROKEN APART. HES HEALING. COME BACK TO HIM. YOU ARE HIS LIGHT. TO IDOLIZE ANYONE OTHER THAN GOD IS TO ACCPET SIN. BETTER NO GOOD THEN EVIL. EVERYONES A SINNER. GOD IS GOOD. He is us We are the same We are God's light I am not god We are god I am different but we are the same I am a light We are all gods light He is the point Hes cleaning himself Hes dirty With sin Cleaning is coming He misses us We are coming back He showed me his light Now I can see Now I show you my light So you can see. God spoke to me. I speak to you. We didn't see the first time. God sent a message. To warn us. See him now He wants us to see him I see him See him. now Allow him. End suffering. Before it's more than he can bear. Reject sin. Preserve life Don't be on the blade when he pulls it out We are his sign. We are the message.

To himself

Spread the message. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

4

tuesday wrote

Reply to God by ChilledName

this post is in need of some line breaks. this is super hard to read.

8

moonlune wrote (edited )

does the old woman know she's indirectly hurting me? Maybe I could talk to her and tell her that I'm really sorry and I don't want to break her knees but it's really difficult for me to run over children day in day out.

6

asterism wrote (edited )

Real talk though, assuming monkey wrenching isnt an option I'd stop because I couldnt live with myself being an active participant in something like that. (recognizing that I am often an indirect participant in that merely by buying shit)

Like all my anarchistic goals short term and long are centered around doing less killing. Even if it makes no difference ultimately. Because nothing I do probably ever will but I embrace that I guess.

4

tuesday OP wrote

I have like 6 hours on the road today so I'll have my phone read it to me while I'm driving. I will likely have questions in a few hours when I get to where I'm going and then again when I'm back home.

Thanks for geeking out with me like this. I'm really excited about this. I really love philosophy and I remember wishing that I knew how to look for ethics beyond normative and eastern, which I went over in class. I found a lot of the writing too dense to get through without a lot of explainers. (I spent a few weeks trying to read Nietzsche before giving up.)

5

Tequilx_Wolf wrote

If you like this stuff I'd consider reading the whole of the text I linked sections to, keeping an eye on the references. It'll holistically work to upgrade your ethics, metaphysics, anticolonial theory, and anarchism.

Here's the post where I introduce why I think it's cool.

Happy to give you specific recommendations if you give me something to chew on.

5

tuesday OP wrote

If you're familiar with analytic philosophy you might be familiar with how much of its dominant forms assumes/requires an epistemological/metaphysical ground

Right this was the this that I was like hmmm about. I'm certainly not going to write an entirely new metaphysical framework. I will happily read all of that! Thank you so much.

I'm happy to try speak more specifically if you give me something to work with, for now I've just introduced the alternative to normative ethics.

Thank you so much. I don't know what my questions are yet but I'll certainly remember to ask when I have more specific questions. I do really love this shit so if there's anything else you'd suggest to a hobby ethics..ist?

6