Indeed, just as when Will Durant critiques his “epistemologists”, he in turn seems to suggest that good and bad are within reach of the philosophers.
Well, if either of them were still around, I would confront them no less with the components of my own frame of mind here: dasein, conflicting goods and political economy.
But only out in the world of actual conflicted human behaviors. And they too could choose the actual context.
As for the subjunctive elements involved, how are they in turn not embodied in dasein, conflicting goods and political economy?
Can you cite examples from your own life?
The problem with your very narrow and shallow view is you cherry picked only the evil* bits from Barrett’s discussion and embedded those evil elements in your psyche. This is why you are trying to spread evil in dragging others into your deep evil hole.
Speaking of cherries being picked, you ignored all of the points and questions that I raised with you above and focused only on this one.
Or are we to just accept your own assumptions regarding the “evil” hole that I am dragging others down into?
I define ‘evil’ as related to any acts that are net-negative to the well being of the individual, therefrom to society and humanity.
Note to others:
Can you believe this?!!
Is it even possible to be more abstract in encompassing evil in human interactions?
I would challenge him to yank these words down into an actual existential context but, perhaps, one of you might suggest it instead.