Comment on If suffering is good because it gives life meaning, wouldn't it follow that hurting people is good?
naught101@lemmy.world 6 hours agoNo, it’s not. It’s saying that any amount of suffering is bad, but a tolerable amount of suffering can have good secondary effects (but this is not guaranteed, it’s circumstantial). The secondary good doesn’t mean that the bad part didn’t happen.
dysprosium@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 hours ago
So we agree. Suffering has both good and bad parts.
So you can’t say suffering is (always) bad, because it can have good (secondary) effects.
naught101@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
Goodness in one aspect doesn’t cancel badness in another…
It can be always bad AND sometimes good.
dysprosium@lemmy.dbzer0.com 41 minutes ago
I never said they’d “cancel” whatever that means.
yeah we agree suffering can be both good and bad.