Later in this book I will suggest that it is not at all clear that this thought is true.
Most human beings who consider the issue will have this thought, and most will think it is actually true. Ruffles is just a dog, and I suggested that behind this thought was another: that because she was just a dog her misery was somehow not as bad, not as disvaluable, as Billy’s. That was a mundane case of competing miseries. Let’s return to the case of Billy and Mrs. I cannot answer you, Socrates the argument has taken away from me the power of speech.
Living thus, you would always throughout your life enjoy the greatest pleasures?īut if you had neither mind, nor memory, nor knowledge, nor true opinion, you would in the first place be utterly ignorant of whether you were pleased or not, because you would be entirely devoid of intelligence.Īnd similarly, if you had no memory you would not recollect that you had ever been pleased, nor would the slightest recollection of the pleasure which you feel at any moment remain with you and if you had no true opinion you would not think that you were pleased when you were and if you had no power of calculation you would not be able to calculate on future pleasure, and your life would be the life, not of a man, but of an oyster or pulmo marinus. Why should I? Having pleasure I should have all things. Reflect would you not want wisdom and intelligence and forethought, and similar qualities? Would you not at any rate want sight?
Would you consider that there was still anything wanting to you if you had perfect pleasure?
0 kommentar(er)
