• MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 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
        ·
        3 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
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 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
            ·
            3 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
              ·
              3 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?