Submitted by ADefiniteDescription t3_122l5st in philosophy
dolphin37 t1_jdt3i81 wrote
Reply to comment by DDWingert in Examining what makes a life worth living according to the ancient philosophers by ADefiniteDescription
I’m sure you would have a view on how your life should interact with other lives. I think that’s the crux of the issue here. In a world with an array of interacting life, some kind of hierarchy is inevitably created. It’s perfectly fine to say your own value of your own life is all that matters to you, but there is more going on and it’s just whether you choose to make an attempt to define some standards in that space or whether you just leave it to the individual in every case. The result could be a pedophiles life is worth living because it means something to them, which is a legitimate outcome but might have some objections!
To your first question though, it’s definitely the interpretation of the reader. As with anything, a lot of translation and interpretation has to happen. Even if you asked the men themselves, they may give you a different response at a different stage in life. It’s rare we settle on something forever!
DDWingert t1_jdtjd8i wrote
>I’m sure you would have a view on how your life should interact with other lives. I think that’s the crux of the issue here.
"I’m sure you would have a view on how your life should interact with other lives. I think that’s the crux of the issue here."
Actually, no. I do not have a view on how my life should react to others'. The point, as I understand it is, as whether the ancients thought "a self-examined life is worth living." My answer did not agree. It is not the act of self-examination that gives our life meaning.
dolphin37 t1_jdtok3x wrote
Hmm well you said it means something to you and your opinion is all that matters, which isn’t a disagreement to self-examination. It’s actually in the path to agreement. Disregarding that, you’re now saying you have no view on interaction with other lives. So to you murdering somebody would be the same as helping somebody? If I assume the answer is that there is a difference, you are assigning a value to other lives and it’s a natural step to say that taking a life would be a bad use of life. It’s then a natural step to discourage that bad use of life, as it has a negative affect on life overall
Like I said it’s fine to take different views such as value not being dependent on self examination. But I don’t think it adds up to say we just live in an option-less silo. It seems to quite evidently not be the case
EasternArm2352 t1_jdu9fb7 wrote
You can murder to help someone. Assault victims for example. They aren't mutually exclusive
dolphin37 t1_jduhucl wrote
Sure, it was just a simple example
MrCW64 t1_jduqr1j wrote
> you’re now saying you have no view on interaction with other lives. So to you murdering somebody would be the same as helping somebody?
No. You are taking it out of context. You omitted the word "how"
The point that was being made is that there is no preconceived idea. Not that nothing matters.
dolphin37 t1_jdus2dv wrote
Can you explain why you think that makes any difference?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments