[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by SteveDallas

Hmm.

You may be right. But from a logician's standpoint, how does one distinguish between the two statements

if A is true, then you should do B

and

if A is true, then B is true

My statement is an example of the former; yours is an example of the latter.

Pretty easy to bypass. Just read your sentence as "If A is true, B is true" where A = doing X feels good and B = you should do X.

You do, however, touch on what is called the problem of normativity. There is a quantum leap from having a reason to think a proposition is true, to adopting a course of action. Of course, one could adopt a principle like "If I believe that I should do X, then I should do X", but this is itself a belief and so is subject to the same quantum gap from belief to action, and so it faces the same problem over again. There is nothing in logic (that I know of) that can overcome this need for a kick-up-the-bum, get-your-arse-into-gear, get-up-and-do-it impetus. Probably because philosophers aren't very good at turning good ideas into action.

Shit, what kind of nerds get into a thread about personal trainers and discuss logic?