The difference between an emotion and an idea

I didn’t understand the question. What do you mean by idea? Value?
——————————————————————————————
Asks:
Yes, but more like Lewis’s Tao in the abolition of man.
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
I don’t understand the question nor the concepts. Please try to explain more.
——————————————————————————————
Asks:
When I say that a picture is a beautiful picture, what do I mean? Is the picture beautiful in itself or does the picture evoke feelings of beauty in me, etc.
I understood from some of your articles that you hold the first opinion and even call it a loaded fact, and thus your perception can justify absolute values.
My question is how can one distinguish between a charged fact and an emotion, and is it possible to develop that charged fact through education, etc.?
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
If you have read Lewis’s book, he explains well the difference between saying that the picture is beautiful and saying that the picture evokes some emotion in me. The first claim claims something about the world. And yet this does not necessarily mean that beauty is objective, but that you claim something about the world (and not just about yourself), and it can still be a subjective claim. In addition to Lewis’s words, I claim that there are indeed objective concepts of beauty and goodness (although there may be gaps where there is room for several opinions). These concepts can be expressed in different forms in different circumstances. Beautiful music among us and beautiful music among the Hottentots can be different, but beauty in both cases is the same. In other words, beauty does not belong to the music per se, but rather it expresses a correspondence between it and its circumstances and audience. Just as logic does not say that any conclusion is correct, but that it follows from the premises. But given circumstances and an audience, there is a concept of objective beauty (just as there is an objective logical inference given the premises). These audiences and circumstances have objectively beautiful and unbeautiful (which is not the same as a relative perception of beauty).
And hence, education can certainly develop aesthetic judgment just as much as logical and ethical judgment. If beauty were only the feeling that I feel – then there would be no room to talk about education’s contribution to this, because at most, education would change me and then I would feel differently. But the new feeling is in no sense better than its predecessor. But in light of my definition above, there is objective beauty, and therefore there is room for aesthetic and ethical education that would refine and refine them.
I will only note that the development is not of the loaded facts but of our ability to reach the correct facts.
——————————————————————————————
Asks:
Thank you very much for the quick answer, but I still don’t understand two things that may be related to each other.
First, how can one distinguish between an emotion and a “charged fact”? And second, how can one know whether education will improve or destroy, because when you say it will improve and establish, you assume a specific trait that one should strive for. On the other hand, could it be that when I received a values-based education, I destroyed the original trait that I should have strived for, which is destruction, pride, and killing people, etc.?
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
1. In the physical world too, one can ask how you distinguish between factual recognition and hallucination? For me, it is very similar. When you understand that what is inside you is an emotion – then it is an emotion, and if you diagnose it as a charged fact, then it is a charged fact. Of course, mistakes can occur, but we have no other tool than our immediate perception.
2. Here too, there are no clear algorithms, and it is clear that there can be errors. How will you ensure that your moral education is not destructive? To the best of your understanding. What lies at the heart of this question is skepticism (because you are not asking how to achieve humility, but whether humility is indeed the right thing), and skepticism has no answer. If you do not accept your immediate acquaintances, any answer I give you will be exposed to the same difficulties. This is a dead-end debate, and you must decide what your view of it is.
——————————————————————————————
Asks:

So I have another question: Is it possible to morally judge people who do not have this direct knowledge, and how can we know that they are wrong and we are the ones who are wrong (those who have direct knowledge)?
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
You can’t judge such people if they really don’t have this awareness (I’m not sure there are such people), because they are coercive. How can you know? You can’t, except with your best judgment. Just as if you meet people who claim that what you see doesn’t really exist, you won’t be able to know whether you are right or they are. What you can do is formulate a position to the best of your judgment.