Intrinsic vs instrumental value | Page 3 | INFJ Forum

Intrinsic vs instrumental value

Discussion in 'Philosophy and Religion' started by tovlo, Jan 8, 2019.

Share This Page

Watchers:
This thread is being watched by 11 users.
More threads by tovlo
  1. charlatan

    charlatan Community Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2015
    Threads:
    0
    Messages:
    898
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    682
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    Ne-ILE-H
    Enneagram:
    6 spsx
    Well for the definition, it is of course potentially a little hard to fully capture qualia in language.
    However, there are noncontroversial instances -- stuff like pure physical torture, being crucified, etc.

    But basically, I think I'm very far from Nietzsche type philosophers, who emphasize things like strength, will, and so on over things like truth.
    I generally find the typical paradoxes in 'free will' debates (can you be the cause of yourself) come up here too -- if you're dependent on the life experience of suffering to develop your strength, isn't a being who could do the same exertion without suffering somehow even more in command, powerful, willful?
    Generally, when it comes to gaining skill we lack, I wonder why couldn't we just instantiate a being with the same skills that they lacked, without ever having to go through the treadmill of learning, without suffering, and so on.
    Basically, sure such a person doesn't 'learn what it's like to not know,' but that seems similar to the criticisms of God for not knowing what it's like to be limited....which it seems to me isn't a genuine criticism.

    If there is nothing suffering truly gives you besides the experience itself, which is what I tend to believe of such qualitative experiences, it seems there are no arguments for asking for suffering, and at least one very powerful one against it, i.e. the intrinsic nature of suffering, by definition.


    Now there may be PRACTICAL situations where going through hardship is a necessary condition for gaining some skill where we decide the lesser evil is to undergo this suffering for that end. That, however, seems to be a flaw of how the world is set up--I can't think of arguments why such suffering would be necessary that don't smell of the 'Well you're greater than God because he just had it all for free!'
     
    Ren, JennyDaniella, Headstorm and 3 others like this.
  2. charlatan

    charlatan Community Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2015
    Threads:
    0
    Messages:
    898
    Likes Received:
    1,646
    Trophy Points:
    682
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    Ne-ILE-H
    Enneagram:
    6 spsx
    I am SORT of guessing @Ren you ain't a nietzsche flavored philosopher either, but I'd be interested to know!

    For me, 'oughts' are all about what I can self-consistently justify. I take very seriously that many things are 'subjective' in the sense that the subject's nature plays an integral role in deciding what they can self-consistently pursue.
    However, a more thoroughgoing, genuine relativism would say the subject itself doesn't have a nature, so there is no fact as to what it can self-consistently pursue, and it is all completely and utterly made up.
    That last step is where I don't go...
     
    #42 charlatan, Jan 14, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2019
    Ren, JennyDaniella, Headstorm and 2 others like this.
  3. Headstorm

    Headstorm On a mountain path.

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Threads:
    5
    Messages:
    306
    Featured Threads:
    3
    Likes Received:
    1,720
    Trophy Points:
    902
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    Ixxx
    Enneagram:
    5 9 x
    I object, objectively positive things?
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  4. Zola

    Zola Regular Poster

    Joined:
    May 29, 2018
    Threads:
    3
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    383
    Trophy Points:
    802
    Gender:
    Female
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    The answers people have written here are beautiful. I have enjoyed reading them.
    I have a superficial reply, which I hope doesn't sound stupid, but here it is:

    I can't see the difference between intrinsic and utilitarian value because I cannot imagine existence without usefulness. It's the All-One concept -- both spirituality and ecologically.

    My main problem with human beings, as a species, is that we've tried to bow out of the equation by making everything serve our purposes, and what do we do for the Earth and its other inhabitants?
     
  5. Wyote

    Wyote Con Risa Absoluta
    Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2008
    Threads:
    224
    Messages:
    26,311
    Featured Threads:
    14
    Likes Received:
    108,691
    Trophy Points:
    4,271
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    Ni Space
    Enneagram:
    9 Seas
    We've done quite a lot. All we ever hear about is bad stuff though. But that in turn causes more improvements, generally.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
    tovlo, JennyDaniella and Sandie33 like this.
  6. Zola

    Zola Regular Poster

    Joined:
    May 29, 2018
    Threads:
    3
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    383
    Trophy Points:
    802
    Gender:
    Female
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    (By "other inhabitants" I meant non-humans.) I do hope you're right, and our improvements end up making the whole ecosystem function better in the long run.
     
    Sandie33 likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page