Do you think that size and intensity are reducible to a common factor? Somewhat metaphorically, one could say that, ultimately, there are only atoms of pleasantness and unpleasantness, which may be more or less concentrated in phenomenal space. When the atoms are concentrated, we call it ‘intensity’; when they are dispersed, we call it ‘size’. But when all is said and done, the value of a state of affairs is entirely determined by its net hedonic “quantity” (i.e., the number of pleasantness atoms minus the number of unpleasantness atoms).
Thanks! That’s a really interesting thought. I hadn’t thought of that possibility—I’ve been working on the assumption that they’re not reducible—but now that you mention it, I don’t have very strong intuitions about whether it seems more or less likely than there being two dimensions “at bottom”.
One intuition against is that it seems a bit weirdly discrete to suppose that a “hedonic atom” can just be +1, 0, or −1. But I guess there’s some discreteness at bottom with literal atoms (or perhaps a better analogy would be electrical charge) as well...
Very nice post.
Do you think that size and intensity are reducible to a common factor? Somewhat metaphorically, one could say that, ultimately, there are only atoms of pleasantness and unpleasantness, which may be more or less concentrated in phenomenal space. When the atoms are concentrated, we call it ‘intensity’; when they are dispersed, we call it ‘size’. But when all is said and done, the value of a state of affairs is entirely determined by its net hedonic “quantity” (i.e., the number of pleasantness atoms minus the number of unpleasantness atoms).
Thanks! That’s a really interesting thought. I hadn’t thought of that possibility—I’ve been working on the assumption that they’re not reducible—but now that you mention it, I don’t have very strong intuitions about whether it seems more or less likely than there being two dimensions “at bottom”.
One intuition against is that it seems a bit weirdly discrete to suppose that a “hedonic atom” can just be +1, 0, or −1. But I guess there’s some discreteness at bottom with literal atoms (or perhaps a better analogy would be electrical charge) as well...