When you say “what is good for us”, could it be translated as “what we are attached to”? If you care about knowledge or relationships, you will experience (dis)satisfaction depending on what relevant events happen in your life, and you will be motivated to achieve goals related to these things, but this is a far cry from what intrinsic value means in my view.
In essence, when I say suffering is intrinsically bad, I don’t mean that it is bad for anyone; I mean that it is bad period. The badness is an inherent feature of the experience.
So from my perspective, the non-hedonist is making an extraordinary and unfalsifiable claim when positing the existence of non-experiential goods.
When you say “what is good for us”, could it be translated as “what we are attached to”? If you care about knowledge or relationships, you will experience (dis)satisfaction depending on what relevant events happen in your life, and you will be motivated to achieve goals related to these things, but this is a far cry from what intrinsic value means in my view.
In essence, when I say suffering is intrinsically bad, I don’t mean that it is bad for anyone; I mean that it is bad period. The badness is an inherent feature of the experience.
So from my perspective, the non-hedonist is making an extraordinary and unfalsifiable claim when positing the existence of non-experiential goods.