Nope, states of mind are primarily chemical.
One could say states of mind are primarily electrical because of the firing of neurons or primarily atomic because
of the structure of the brain. Even though neither of these really describe them as they are generally understood
So simply because a description of something is true does not mean it best describes the phenomenon in question
One could say that Trixie is primarily a collection of atoms which she is
However it would say nothing at all about who she really is as a person
Nope you couldnt say I am my atoms, I do not have the same atoms as I did when I was a child, yet my consciousness is still trapped here.
Jakob,
I can see how each in turn can derive from the other.
We fall in love, we are filled with such happiness and joy. Love leaves us and we fall into suffering because what gave us joy has been taken from us.
We have lost a child and mourn that child. We suffer until the moment comes when we have given birth to another child. Joy is then derived from great suffering.
I cannot really see how someone can have one without the other.
How can we experience or know something without knowing its opposite?
But isn’t it possible that they might be? The equality would be within the measure of joy or suffering which was felt.
The greater the joy the greater the suffering when life has denied us something and vica versa.
It is like they say - only one who has fallen to the lowest degree is capable of rising to the highest degree.
Define what YOU mean by existence here. Many things are symmetrical in life, nature, etc.
Wouldn’t you say that there is symmetry in a sense in your work about Value Ontology?
If that theory was true, one could never know either until after they experienced the other, thus never.
Both require a desire, but neither requires that other.
Lol that’s a fallacy lol. You need to upgrade your philosophy to Ultimate Philosophy level.
If someone can only see the color green, you don’t say you need to see the color purple to understand green. green is green.
You are thinking about it the wrong way. See I am the greatest philosopher on the whole planet, Yet women don’t appreciate me just because I don’t have a fancy yacht. And they reproduce the dum dum genes like dating some YOLO guido who’s daddy inherited a yacht for him, and leave geniuses like me and tesla to die childless. Just because my father happened to make some bad decisions and lose out on his high paying engineer job with Boeing, so now I’m being punished for his bad choices. Then you make up some bullshit about claiming Im genetic defective somehow, because I want to be a woman, even though women exemplify the highest form of genetic perfection, then ignore that im a genius and that my genes are actually genetic superior to everyone else.
like people would rather date this dude instead of me, even though i have been told i am the reincarnation of neitzche. Neitzche had zero kids, but guidos get like 10 kids. Like they can’t even realize they are simply obeying their most basic primal instincts and they seem to helpless to even act like strong human beings who have no power to overcome their basic instincts, like their body automatically says “Date the rich guy with the 90 iq, rich=attractive” like they have no power to question or override their basic instincts and just obey like a basic animal. Then you wonder why modern philosophy sucks and the gene pool sucks.
For example, Magnus anderson is a genius or semi genius, and yet women are standoffish to him and he has no kids. This is because of reverse natural selection. Satyr is genius or semi genius, has only 1 child and wife divorces him. Again reverse natural selection at work here. Its like on ILP, no woman sends me a pm saying Hey you are a genius, lets date. I litterally get nothing for my efforts.
But this guy, joe shmoe, does why I guess because he works out his abs and has more money than me?
So again, Im running a charity here, giving out wisdoms and I get nothing for it.
So lets talk about the main topic at hand.
What is an opposite? Something 180 degrees in the opposite direction? Are there even a such thing as an opposite?
Seems like this is the result of flawed thinking patterns.
Is sadness really the opposite of joy? Is it able to be quantatively defined as an opposite, or it just feels good to say the word opposite, like an emotional relief? Second is it really accurate to say you need sadness to experience joy? Hypothetically, if someone was put in joy with no sadness, is sadness actually required to experience that joy? Is the color purple required to experience the color green?
Nope but people are gonna repeat the same Facebook memes they learned on the interwebs over and over, like spreading on the webs like a broken record.
Yes, this is what I’m also looking at. I interpreted the second part of your first post as if you might be implying that the universe is biased towards positive things because negative negative particles are smaller; or that universe might favor positive. If that is the case, then I will have to disagree. If not, then what is the relationship between spacing and sizing of these small isolated particles and mental states? Were you trying to make a connection?
In regards to instinctive goals of all living things, one of which might be an aversion to pain, I would argue that even self maintenance requires exposure to uncertainty/anxiety and/or suffering. It just doesn’t make sense to say that universe favors joy or positive, or whatever, if the process of life itself is negative. If everything was about joy and pain avoidance, then there wouldn’t be any life at all. Why would it even be, in the first place?
It wouldn’t have to.
Because of fundamental structure of life itself, to say that life pursues joy is really to say, to quote someone, that life pursues the death instinct, or self annihilation.
Life IS joy.
In this capacity it pursues more of itself (self-valuing).
Suffering is only life directing itself towards joy - to itself.
If you’ll notice, life tends to avoid suffering. Unless that suffering is seen as leading to greater joys.
It is a form of very low and weak joy to think life is suffering. It is just a lowly weak lifeform trying to pretend it doesn’t have any reason to look up to other forms, which hurts the small being.
What is joy? Power, essentially.
Pain is the absence of power.
Thus, wounds invigorate.
But people, this really should be 101.
101 maybe, but not 1001.
You’re really thinking about this incorrectly dude.
But im depressed and lazy so it may be a while before I elaborate why.
Genius does not have to be rewarded with sex and the only reason you think it does is because you desperately want some
your self but Magnus and Satyr are presumably fine with not having any so it is not true for all men as you seem to assume
No they are not malfunctioning asexuals like you.
Second of all sex is not just a reward is a requirement for continuation of the gene pool. But you could care less about the fate of the world because you selfishly want to die and forget about this planet forever. So yeah keep saying that people at Mcdonalds with 70 iq should have babies and it doesnt matter if me or you has babies or not.
I am going to die whether I want to or not and the planet is eventually going to die too. Meawhile the global population is
going to increase without any help from me whatsoever. And I never said any thing about McDonalds or IQ levels or babies
Good I hope the planet does die, its a shitty world anyway
You are unhappy but you can change your negative mental attitude if you really want to
or you can simply carry on being miserable for the rest of your life so the choice is yours
If im gonna die and forget my life anyway forever what does it matter? see your line of thinking doesn’t add up.
It does not matter in the grand scheme of things [ nothing does ] but it does matter in the here and now so focus on that instead
So then look to living a good life while you are alive and then having a good death free from all pain and suffering for ever more
i born male but i wish i was female. good life is denied to me.
Weakness and need, but because life goes on, it has to be continuously maintained and reinforced.
You are disregarding qualitative differences of “how”. There maybe 1001 ways to get from point A to B, but it doesn’t mean they are all equal.
I’m taking that to you, the end justifies the means, but what of the “how”? Is that not relevant to you? What if “how-process” eventually determines the qualitative difference in an entity, which in turn, may even influence what goals that entity will have. And these qualitative differences come into play when using the same descriptive words. Otherwise, words like “coward”, “brave” or “self-love” become meaningless when applied to actual processes or behaviors.
Sometimes, the quickest path is also the shortsighted path. You may get something quicker now, but you (or your descendants) will definitely pay for it later. And so, what of the original goal? And more so, what can we say of such goal originator?
Joy is simply how we feel when we attain a goal.
Or as James says, when we get closer to it or make progress towards it (which is basically the same considering that moving towards a goal means attaining a sub-goal of that goal.)
It’s another word for success.
What joy doesn’t tell you is what kind of goal is attained.
It could be any kind of goal.
And what joy doesn’t tell you is what kind of effect such an attainment has on other goals.
In other words, it does not tell you whether it moves you towards or away from attaining other goals.
Doing drugs helps you get rid of pain (which is good, because pain makes you weak) but it makes it difficult for you to remain functional and most of all alive (which is a bad thing.)
People who do drugs have no other choice.
It makes no sense to say that they are moving AWAY from being alive since they have no other choice.
All the talk about how they are moving away from being alive is hypothetical. Mere "what if"s.
Sure, if they resolved their pain in a way that doesn’t have the consequences that doing drugs have they would have faced . . . better consequence.
They would have moved you closer to remaining alive than doing drugs would.
But that’s not something they can do, so it makes no sense to say that they are pursuing self-annihilation or whatever other than as a metaphor.
It’s like saying that a cow is pursuing death when she’s being slaughtered.
SHE SHOULD HAVE PREVENTED OTHERS FROM SLAUGHTERING HER, WHY DID SHE CHOOSE NOT TO?