Krimel said: I think "betterness" is not a word and for good reason.
dmb says: I think there are good reasons why "betterness" is a word we can use. It's like "good" is a word we usually just use to say something nice about a thing, but in philosophy its more like THE Good. Then it becomes a noun. The second one is a little better, we're looking for a word that that doesn't make goodness itself just sit there like a mountain. The word "better" itslef is too dependent on context, too relational. But "betterness" is like the Good, but it implies a sense of movement. "Betterness" describes a general direction that can be applied to any context and any relation. It's like the universal motive. [Krimel] Wow, you make it sound so yummy. Like since we can't decide on The Good maybe we could get by with The Good-lite. So seriously, is it less filling or more tasty than The Good Classic? This is what comes from focusing on "Quality" instead of "The Way". One of the generally established rules is that nature follows the Path of Least Resistance. We as beings-aware may perceive this as Good. We might agree collectively that it is Good. But as they say history may prove us wrong. We judge the past and gamble on the future. We place our bets based on our evaluation of our experiences in the past. But nature itself is neutral it is just a path and what is Good for nature or Good for The Way or Good for the furry critters sleeping in the bushes along The Way, may not be Good for us at all. Good or Good-lite is estimated before hand and judged after the fact. But neither are the driving forces behind evolution. They merely put a Pollyanna face on the fact that Lite or not, if you drink too much of it, you will be hugging the commode by midnight and rubbing your temples in the morning. moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
