Another Western philosopher 2,000 years and a yawning moral chasm behind the Buddhists
So if you could make yourself happy at the cost of seeing the rest of the world, or interacting with other people, you would do so?
Moreover, we spend a very short period of time in our prime. Most of a person’s life, for those who live to old age, is spent in steady decline.
A Book of Verses underneath the Bough,
A Jug of Wine, a Loaf of Bread--and Thou
Beside me singing in the Wilderness--
Oh, Wilderness were Paradise enow!"
The possibility, stressed by Benatar, of collective human underestimation of what is required for a good life does not strike me as a compelling ground for overturning our human-centered prudential value judgments on the basis of something more perfectionistic and super-humanly impartial. It is not obvious that we are even capable of understanding value sub specie aeternitatis.
The absence of harm is good, even if there is no subject of that good, yet the absence of benefit is not bad unless there is a subject for whom the absence is a deprivation.
« Older Down and out in Toronto and New York | Copying is an act of love. Please copy and share. Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments