4 ms·
I think the issue with saying “make good new things” is that things themselves aren’t inherently good or bad—they’re just things. It’s the person who makes them
by tlogan 2y ago
I think the issue with saying “make good new things” is that things themselves aren’t inherently good or bad—they’re just things. It’s the person who makes them that can be good or bad.
I have a saying (among others from my dad) that captures a similar idea: “Make things, and be good.”
- ulbu 2y agoa dish from made bad food is bad food. a program that deletes your important data is a bad program. so no: things relate to each other and in this relation, they can be objectively bad (bad to the object subjected to its effects). Things don't exist without the effects their existence exerts. Rephrased: the question of their goodness is, commonly, a question of fitness.
- tediousgraffit1 2y agoThat just pushes the question off a step; a chair fit for sitting isn't fit for sleeping, etc. Fitness assumes a purpose.
- allie1 2y agoI think it’s good in the sense of things that are positively affecting others’ lives.
- FloorEgg 2y agoThings can be good or bad when put in a value system context. There is tremendous overlap between everyone's value system, it just doesn't feel this way because the majority of most people's attention is on where they don't overlap. A loaf of bread is good for a person who is starving, but less good to someone with celiac disease. A bowl or rice is more good to a starving person with celiac than a loaf of bread, etc.