REPLY to REPLY BY GIANFRANCO/1: on the language used to express the thesis
Gianfranco's criticism is correct. It is true that X being a necessary condition for Y to be a value does not imply that X is what it is in virtue of which that Y has value, etc. It is also true that certain views that adopt the Experience Requirement do not reduce to Experientialism, because the Experience Machine scenario can be excluded by some of them. Yet there are problems for such a view as well, as I will show in the next post.
Now I want to correct the language used in the previous formulation of the Experience Requirement:
As I stated it, the Experience Requirement was
“1. Experience Requirement: something (some state of affairs) can be good for the subject only if it enters the subject’s experience.”
But what does it mean that an (obtaining) state of affairs enters a subject’s experience?
It seems that a much better formulation of the Experience Requirement should be something along these lines:
1’ (Experience Requirement) an obtaining state of affairs is good for the subject S only if it is a state of the world in which A. there is something intrinsically valuable, and 2. the subject has an experience of something intrinsically valuable.
Now some things follow from this formulation: what does it mean to say that in this world there is something intrinsically valuable (say, real friendship)? It means that the existence of some instances of friendships are good absolutely (they make the world a better, or intrinsically preferable, world.)
It certainly does not mean that the existence of friendship, in itself, is good for the subject S.
According to the experience requirement, the only states that can be good for a subejct are states that include subjects having experiences.
Thus one may say that according to the experience requirement all states of affairs that can be good for a subject are, or better, include experiences.
Does this view suffer from the Experience Machine objection? The answer is clearly no, as shown in "Can we use the experience requirement in a reasonable way?".