Here is an argument:
- A character trait aimed at producing what is always intrinsically good is not a vice. (Premise)
- A tendency to Schadenfreude is a character trait aimed at producing pleasure (at the sufferings of others). (Premise)
- A tendency to Schadenfreude is a vice. (Premise)
- Therefore, pleasure is not always intrinsically good.
3 comments:
What of the element of choice, or of one bad choice (toward Schadenfreude) that has reproduced itself as a kind of accident?
Perhaps the "tendency to" in your second premise causes this to violate the four-term fallacy? Just a thought. - TL
TL:
A bad choice that has reproduced itself as a kind of accident can still be a vice. Alas, vices are like that.
I use "tendency" in the same sense in steps 2 and 3, so I don't think I have a fallacy here.
The argument only supports the following conclusion:
(intentionally?) producing pleasure, at the sufferings of others, is not always intrinsically good.
peter
Post a Comment