Gjallarhorn & Sum

[The Sum of Awe]

IT'S THE FINAL COUNTDOWNNNNNN!!!

-Gets on boxing gloves-


Anyways, my post still stands until you reply to it in this thread:


In some cases you can, I don't disagree. But in quite a lot of cases happiness contradicts. What do you do in those cases?

A man wishes to be free, but another man wants to enslave him. For example.

Would you let the man be free, why? What makes your decision more important over the slave owner?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

This is a matter of rights. Do you have a right to another's property or person?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

But what makes it right?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

But what makes it right?

That's not an answer.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

That's not an answer.

Okay. No I guess not.

But now you must answer, what makes it a right and why? Is it to fulfill the government's happiness?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Okay. No I guess not.

But now you must answer, what makes it a right and why? Is it to fulfill the government's happiness?

A government is made of people. "The Government" isn't it's own entity, so no I would not say rights are given to make government happy. Rights are given to make people happy. If a sadist wants to torture unwilling beings, is it better for all people involved to allow the sadist his victims, or to deny him victims?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

A government is made of people. "The Government" isn't it's own entity, so no I would not say rights are given to make government happy. Rights are given to make people happy. If a sadist wants to torture unwilling beings, is it better for all people involved to allow the sadist his victims, or to deny him victims?

In my opinion to deny him victims, likely the same as you would choose. Though, it is still zero-sum in that case, it doesn't matter if a majority is happy, someone out there isn't.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

In my opinion to deny him victims, likely the same as you would choose. Though, it is still zero-sum in that case, it doesn't matter if a majority is happy, someone out there isn't.

But it is in equal amounts, and is that unhappiness justified? Envy is not a valid emotion for concern.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

But it is in equal amounts, and is that unhappiness justified?

What do you mean?

Envy is not a valid emotion for concern.

I disagree.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

What do you mean?

Zero-sum means conservation of whatever the thing at hand is. For happiness to be zero-sum, a sadist's anger at being denied victims and the potential victims' happiness must cancel out.

I disagree.

Do people enjoy when others steal their things?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Zero-sum means conservation of whatever the thing at hand is. For happiness to be zero-sum, a sadist's anger at being denied victims and the potential victims' happiness must cancel out.

Do people enjoy when others steal their things?

Obviously not. But sometimes it can be good or useful. Look at animals, we enslave them. It is 'good' to us.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Obviously not. But sometimes it can be good or useful. Look at animals, we enslave them. It is 'good' to us.

If no one enjoys the fruits of envy, how can envy factor in to the happiness of others? If you support stealing, then you should be fine with being the one being stolen from.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

If no one enjoys the fruits of envy, how can envy factor in to the happiness of others? If you support stealing, then you should be fine with being the one being stolen from.

Whether you think that or not, I don't support stealing.

But for people who are happy from stealing, they would be sad if there becomes an absolute rule for no stealing, a powerful rule for it.

The point of this debate was if happiness was a zero-sum game. So if you believe stealing is wrong, and if I do too, there are people who would not be happy from not stealing.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Whether you think that or not, I don't support stealing.

But for people who are happy from stealing, they would be sad if there becomes an absolute rule for no stealing, a powerful rule for it.

The point of this debate was if happiness was a zero-sum game. So if you believe stealing is wrong, and if I do too, there are people who would not be happy from not stealing.

The point of this debate was never about zero-sum, or else I wouldn't have told you to make a separate topic. You want to debate rights and morals. You had already stated that happiness can come from happiness without requiring another's unhappiness. If you want to deny that, so be it.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

The point of this debate was never about zero-sum, or else I wouldn't have told you to make a separate topic. You want to debate rights and morals. You had already stated that happiness can come from happiness without requiring another's unhappiness. If you want to deny that, so be it.

You didn't read me fully; I said it can, but there are some cases in which it cannot.

You asked if Happiness was a Zero-Sum game, and I showed you that it was.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

You didn't read me fully; I said it can, but there are some cases in which it cannot.

You asked if Happiness was a Zero-Sum game, and I showed you that it was.

If there are cases when it can, then happiness can be created from nothing. That alone proves your stance on it. Sure there will be cases of "theft of happiness", but by your very words there are cases of creation ex nihilo. So which is it? Is there an option of mutual happiness, or is everything theft?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

If there are cases when it can, then happiness can be created from nothing. That alone proves your stance on it. Sure there will be cases of "theft of happiness", but by your very words there are cases of creation ex nihilo. So which is it? Is there an option of mutual happiness, or is everything theft?

We cannot always create it from nothing.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

We cannot always create it from nothing.

Having the option is all you need. Either the system is closed or it is open, and given the ability to create ex nihilo, it is most assuredly open.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Having the option is all you need. Either the system is closed or it is open, and given the ability to create ex nihilo, it is most assuredly open.

You cannot create happiness in the conditions such as I described.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

You cannot create happiness in the conditions such as I described.

Doesn't matter. The option to create from nothing exists. Unless you're planning to deny that, you believe happiness isn't zero-sum.