Because it’s like speaking Chinese to these folks…
Ultimately though, aside from details…
It’s existential dispair, which everyone can relate to…
The manner of it however, is hard to translate
I know, boy do I ever.
The whole philosophy and Morality of Buddhism, i.e. The Four Noble Truths is leveraged on ‘pain’ or sufferings [dukkha]. The focus is on psychological pains and sufferings.
The Four Noble Truths
The truth of suffering (dukkha)
The truth of the cause of suffering (samudaya)
The truth of the end of suffering (nirhodha)
The truth of the path that manages suffering (magga)
To facilitate efficiency the above 4NT must be dealt within a Framework and Systems of Morality and Ethics.
Why the Moral weight on pain?
The moral weight on pain is one of the heaviest because if we do not put a stopcock [e.g. The Four Noble Truths] to modulate it, on theory it will lead to the eventual extinction of the human species.
Thus the absolute moral maxim ‘It is absolutely immoral to inflict pain on oneself and others’ is an absolute necessity as an overriding guide. (A) [ought]
However in reality and practice [Ethics], humans will continue to inflict pains on others [humans] and oneself for various reasons of human nature. These various reasons may be for the good or bad of the other or oneself.(B) [is]
From the above the difference between the ‘overriding moral maxim’ [A] and the practical reality [B] create a variance, i.e. the Moral Gap.
The onus is on humanity to narrow the Moral Gap as much as possible. This is what The Four Noble Truths strive to achieve.
Translation:
1 The fact that suffering is spread far and wide
[list]- Wild wanting for what is not available to be had, lusting
- Misdirected potential creating impedance
- Random Impetus, Chaos
2 The mechanism that brings about suffering - Presuming action before consideration, impetuousness
- Impedance Mismatching
- Unconscious impetus
3 The mechanism that could prevent suffering - Humbleness to Reality, to what is and can be.
- Impedance Matching
- Orderly, Anentropic Harmony
4 The means to establish the prevention, the treatment. - increase of consciousness, consideration, and certainty.
- Reboot: Clear the path and feedback-regulate
- Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the PHT unto Anentropic Harmony[/list:u]
Causing pain is generally a part of 1 and 2 above and thus contrary to 3 and 4. Morality is based upon the attempt to establish anentropic harmony, thus causing pain is immoral unless necessary toward that goal.
One thing I do not see here is: Pain is needed for evolution. Species cannot evolve without it.
Pain belongs to life, yes, but it is also true that life, especially in the case of human beings, tries to reduce or overcome pain, for example by taking drugs, by inventing, implementing, applying medicine.
For decisions to be made and evolution to function, there must be a perception of hope and/or threat. Pain or suffering is that perception of threat from which priorities are established and life is segregated from inanimate material. Perception of hope is from the instincts toward food, light, and opportunities that lend to life. Both perceptions are required, else life can no longer distinguish how to avoid death and thus dies out from the chaos.
Carleas doesn’t address my post. No surprise there.
Intentional unpleasantness is all throughout society and many times litigated into practice by so called moral followers themselves who of course are nothing but hypocrites.
Moral philosophy=philosophical hypocrisy.
Too funny.
Respect the goal of Anentropic Harmony and it’s Maximum Joy over Time in order to resolve those questions in a rational manner. The train question gets resolved, as do the drug, cyborg, and extinction questions.
There are no morality questions that have not been solved … but merely billions of people who can’t listen.
Human morality and rationality solves things?
Having reading issues?
Oh, what kind of issues would those be?
The kind that apparently made it difficult for you to tell the difference between someone saying that morality issues have been resolved and you reading it as morality resolves issues … perhaps dyslexic? 
I’m sorry, what exactly has been resolved again? Please help us poor laymen out there.
This claim suggests we’re talking about two different things. This sounds closer to what I mean when I say “damage”. “Pain”, by contrast, is a quale, which is subjective by definition. (I think this also goes to Ecmandu and MM’s discussion of ‘psychological pain’: ‘pain’ covers a range of negative qualia; a phantom limb and a real limb can both be painful).
This is a clever point, and I regret that my response is somewhat hand-wavey: society as a whole is made more entropic by e.g. imprisonment. The local affects of chaining a person to the ground may be to reduce entropy, but globally you will see the deterioration of a the larger complex system of society. It is therefore immoral.
Which is perhaps a way of conceding that the relationship is not direct, but indirect and nonetheless real.
Prismatic, isn’t the point of the Four Noble Truths to show that suffering is an illusion and we should not cling to it? Been a while since I’ve read much about Buddhism.
My point here is basically to disagree with this. I’m arguing that pain is morally neutral. It is seen as immoral because it is associated with damage (evolved as a way to promote survival), but it is only a proxy for damage. Your point here is similar Mill’s, Singer’s and … Ryder’s points.
I don’t understand your post </me addressing your post>
And so no real evolution. The mind may change but, the body is hindered.
For the mind, but , our bodies have stagnated due to lack of pain.
The body and all objects are always making decisions (in a metaphorical sense). The bodies would simply atrophy … deciding on the lack of need.
This "need-deciding-system“ can also be called "program“.