Hierarchical Enjoyment

[SOLDIER #819]

I say that more is necessary. For example, I challenge you to prove your words. Prove to me that there is a Hierarchical experience. Can you do so? Do you know someone who can? Someone who can take an experience that is intangible to everyone but the one who experience it and then qualitatively assign a level of enjoyment is someone who is selling something. If you say you can approximate it, then I agree. If you say you can generalize it, fine. But you will never create a system that conforms to the human race.

Rather than that, why don't you prove that it does not exist? Logically speaking, it is just as viable to prove something invalid by proving its perceived opposite. But I think that would prove just as difficult for you as it would for me to prove that my assertion (which is a "maybe" and not a "it can be done") is true. Furthermore, even if I couldn't find a single person on this earth that could prove what I am saying, given that your own words hold no inherent priority over mine it is illogical to conclude that this method would solve anything. We are pushing at each other with equal force and that won't change with things as they currently are.

I also do not know why you insist on classifying "experience" as intangible, nor what parts of experience you are referring to. Are you saying that, as an example, all of experience remains relative despite the similarity of its physical component? Are you saying that people are completely different from one another simply because they do not exactly resemble one another? I am trying to give the respect your opinions deserve by attempting to get to know them, but that is proving very difficult as I don't even know what they are.

I can say that the concept that smoking hurts my help does not decrease my enjoyment. You cannot tell me that is true for everyone. You cannot say that moral enjoyment is higher than physical pleasure or vice versa apart from your own experience. Therein lies the assumption. You want to generalize and put things in tight little neat packages that cannot possibly describe the experience that is your prerogative. You are fooling yourself and consequently anyone who listens to you. You are searching for a truth that exists in this rift. That's a vagary and is only useful in describing an experience that is inaccurate in any possible explanation.

This is all very well and good, but what you were asking in the OP works with different factors. Enjoyment of smoking for an individual is a matter of trade-offs, no matter what may be considered one. The moral enjoyment/physical pleasure example puts the priority on the activity, hinting at some inherent hierarchy that humans merely react to, and the consequences of believing this are VERY different. What the OP asks is, given that you define what an intellectual, an ignorant person, and enjoyment are, is it possible to determine who enjoys a certain activity more. I say that this may be possible given what I perceive to be the definitions. This may change if we actually came to a consensus on such definitions.

I have never said that I want to categorize things. I've only said that it may be possible to do something, and never once said it would be absolutely precise. You tell me what is or isn't, and even my intentions. This is commonplace and fine and whatnot, but you don't provide rationale and that is questionable. Far be it for me to say anything of one's opinions I don't even know, but if you don't want to discuss them then this won't go anywhere. But I guess that most philosophical debate leads there regardless.