• MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    No, it’s a definition. I’m a utilitarian, so I only value pleasure and avoiding suffering.

    • yetiftw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      but what about a general definition of value that encapsulates everyone’s experiences and not only yours?

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t care who experiences the pleasure or suffering. Individual ego is an illusion. The self is a social construct. The divisions between oneself and others are a lie.

        • yetiftw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          you misunderstand. you told me what you value. I asked for a definition of value. something can be valuable (by being valuable to someone else) even if you yourself do not value it

          • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Why would I agree that Harry Potter is valuable if I don’t and cannot value it, even for its net effect on others?