Satisfaction in the knowledge of good and evil?

Is there true satisfaction in the knowledge of good and evil? Considering that what feels real good is satisfaction. But satisfaction of what?

If one is hungry for, then the satisfaction thereof feels good. But is it really good, or is it good in accordance to one’s own nature? Then how is it that one’s own nature, as in all individuals be good?

dpmartin wrote:

Is there true satisfaction in the knowledge of good and evil? Considering that what feels real good is satisfaction. But satisfaction of what?

If one is hungry for, then the satisfaction thereof feels good. But is it really good, or is it good in accordance to one’s own nature? Then how is it that one’s own nature, as in all individuals be good?

Once again, I think you are butchering definitions. Good itself has a broad scope yet here you are trying to narrow it down and use it to describe something as being good or possibly evil when it shouldn't even be used in that context.

If you are starving, then by all means acquiring food is good. But not "good" in the term of "evil" or "goodness". We could substitute the word good here to something else and you would begin to see that if you tried to interchange them into other sentences, you can clearly see that the word good has two separate meanings.

"If you are starving, then acquiring food is satisfying."

Would you still use the word "satisfying" with the concept of good or evil? No.

The satisfaction comes in the reduction or removal of probably starvation pains. But is the nature of a person, starvation? No it is just a byproduct of lacking sustenance.

Sorry dude:
Your assumption is food. The word food is not found here nor any such implication but what you think. Which is a narrowed view of your own. Not necessarily a view of what people hunger for.