Thanks for this lengthy reply! I want to emphasise that I enjoyed and learned a lot from reading this book, and that most of my criticism I think of mostly as resulting from a deliberate choice of keeping the book readable, and definitely not something that I have any suggestions for improvements.
I appreciate your clarifications on chapter 7, on the definition of suffering and of using the arguments from chapters 4,5.
Regarding āline of retreatā, I meant something similar to your comment to Michael-
Itās true that I do mention the views of many different philosophers, and note how their views support suffering-focused views, and in some cases I merely identify the moral axioms, if you will, underlying these views. I then leave it to the reader to decide whether these axioms are plausible (this is a way in which I in fact do explain/āpresent views rather than try to āpersuadeā; chapter 2 is very similar, in that it also presents a lot of views in this way).
I think that I felt simply that there were many claims which were supported by various views where I felt that it was difficult for me to judge how to take these into account. I looked back to find a good example of an actual āretreatā and honestly I canāt find any. I think that itās possible that I have read something wrongly in chapter 8 and that tainted my expression of some of the reasoning in the book. In any case, I have clearly overemphasised that and Iāll retract it.
Regarding that feeling of being persuaded, Iām not really sure what to say. It mostly felt that I could easily come up with many counter-intuitions throughout reading the book and that raised some mental alarm bells: these are only the ideas I can come up with, and Iām sure that there are plenty more. I didnāt feel that opposing views were clearly explored, even though they were listed. If thatās how books that defend moral positions are supposed to be written, then my inside view thinks thatās epistemically mistaken.
Iād be very interested in discussing the actual contents of my views on the ethics of suffering, on which Iād really appreciate feedback; Iāve scheduled myself time to write this up here in the weekend. :)
In relation to counterintuitions and counterarguments, I can honestly say that Iāve spent a lot of time searching for good ones, and tried to include as many as I could in a charitable way (especially in Chapter 8).
Iām still keen to find more opposing arguments and intuitions, and to see them explored in depth. As hinted in the post, I hope my book can provoke people to reflect on these issues and to present the strongest case for their views, which Iād really like to see. I believe such arguments can help advance the views of all of us toward greater levels of nuance and sophistication.
Thanks for this lengthy reply! I want to emphasise that I enjoyed and learned a lot from reading this book, and that most of my criticism I think of mostly as resulting from a deliberate choice of keeping the book readable, and definitely not something that I have any suggestions for improvements.
I appreciate your clarifications on chapter 7, on the definition of suffering and of using the arguments from chapters 4,5.
Regarding āline of retreatā, I meant something similar to your comment to Michael-
I think that I felt simply that there were many claims which were supported by various views where I felt that it was difficult for me to judge how to take these into account. I looked back to find a good example of an actual āretreatā and honestly I canāt find any. I think that itās possible that I have read something wrongly in chapter 8 and that tainted my expression of some of the reasoning in the book. In any case, I have clearly overemphasised that and Iāll retract it.
Regarding that feeling of being persuaded, Iām not really sure what to say. It mostly felt that I could easily come up with many counter-intuitions throughout reading the book and that raised some mental alarm bells: these are only the ideas I can come up with, and Iām sure that there are plenty more. I didnāt feel that opposing views were clearly explored, even though they were listed. If thatās how books that defend moral positions are supposed to be written, then my inside view thinks thatās epistemically mistaken.
Iād be very interested in discussing the actual contents of my views on the ethics of suffering, on which Iād really appreciate feedback; Iāve scheduled myself time to write this up here in the weekend. :)
Thanks for your comment. I appreciate it! :-)
In relation to counterintuitions and counterarguments, I can honestly say that Iāve spent a lot of time searching for good ones, and tried to include as many as I could in a charitable way (especially in Chapter 8).
Iām still keen to find more opposing arguments and intuitions, and to see them explored in depth. As hinted in the post, I hope my book can provoke people to reflect on these issues and to present the strongest case for their views, which Iād really like to see. I believe such arguments can help advance the views of all of us toward greater levels of nuance and sophistication.