What is the opposite of the worst possible suffering for everyone?

 
diding
 
Avatar
 
 
diding
Total Posts:  269
Joined  07-01-2016
 
 
 
05 August 2016 09:47
 

I don’t recall from the book if he mentioned it.  Is it “the greatest ecstasy for everyone”?  Is that a good goal?

[ Edited: 05 August 2016 11:20 by diding]
 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  2875
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
05 August 2016 10:02
 

Actually,  it is: “better than what we currently have”.

 
 
diding
 
Avatar
 
 
diding
Total Posts:  269
Joined  07-01-2016
 
 
 
05 August 2016 11:25
 
Twissel - 05 August 2016 10:02 AM

Actually,  it is: “better than what we currently have”.

What’s the ultimate goal?  Get rid of all suffering or just unnecessary suffering and why?  Seems like it’s more realistic to learn to live with a certain amount of suffering.

 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  2875
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
05 August 2016 11:30
 

There is a theoretical limit to the worst suffering,  but not to greatest happiness.
Hence the best is always “better than now”  no matter how well things already are.

 
 
diding
 
Avatar
 
 
diding
Total Posts:  269
Joined  07-01-2016
 
 
 
05 August 2016 11:48
 
Twissel - 05 August 2016 11:30 AM

There is a theoretical limit to the worst suffering,  but not to greatest happiness.
Hence the best is always “better than now”  no matter how well things already are.

Thanks. That makes sense. But I have a sense that there might be such a thing as too much happiness.  It doesn’t seem like we’re wired for never ending happiness.

[ Edited: 05 August 2016 11:52 by diding]
 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  2875
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
05 August 2016 13:33
 

There is the concept of the Hedonic Treadmill: we humans always return to a baseline of happiness that is mostly independent of our circumstances. So any increase in well-being is quickly adopted as the new baseline of happiness.
But since we always suffer more from losing something than we rejoice in gaining something of similar value,  the concept of ” better than now ” still holds.

 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6832
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
05 August 2016 14:21
 
diding - 05 August 2016 09:47 AM

What is the opposite of the worst possible suffering for everyone?

Hillary thrown in prison, Trump shot dead by the CIA.

 
 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5205
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
05 August 2016 20:34
 

Neither concept is coherent or especially useful in my opinion. We can quantify pain, pleasure, life and death but suffering is a subjective mental state that is unique to each person. Similarly ‘flourishing’ isn’t a rational quantity either. It might contain things we can measure but we can’t measure it as a whole except in terms of our personal experience.

 
sojourner
 
Avatar
 
 
sojourner
Total Posts:  5970
Joined  09-11-2012
 
 
 
06 August 2016 09:02
 

Cake. I assume this is so obvious it’s a rhetorical question, though.

 
 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  2875
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
06 August 2016 13:28
 
NL. - 06 August 2016 09:02 AM

Cake. I assume this is so obvious it’s a rhetorical question, though.

The cake is a lie.

 
 
MARTIN_UK
 
Avatar
 
 
MARTIN_UK
Total Posts:  4914
Joined  19-08-2010
 
 
 
06 August 2016 14:18
 

No worries…

Image Attachments
 
no_worries.jpg
 
 
Hypersoup
 
Avatar
 
 
Hypersoup
Total Posts:  688
Joined  24-01-2013
 
 
 
07 August 2016 01:36
 

Distributed, optimised, rational attraction to being.

 
 
jacobpante
 
Avatar
 
 
jacobpante
Total Posts:  3
Joined  10-11-2016
 
 
 
10 November 2016 09:23
 
diding - 05 August 2016 11:48 AM
Twissel - 05 August 2016 11:30 AM

There is a theoretical limit to the worst suffering,  but not to greatest happiness.
Hence the best is always “better than now”  no matter how well things already are.

Thanks. That makes sense. But I have a sense that there might be such a thing as too much happiness.  It doesn’t seem like we’re wired for never ending happiness.

I agree!