HAPPINESS THREAD 1.0
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3W96JhB1EFs/TdHXDivYX0I/AAAAAAAAAqU/aP34nruxuZU/s1600/money_smiley_face.gif.png)
Your definition of happiness? What makes you truly happy? What should a person need to be truly satisfied with their life? How much does material wealth influence a person's happiness? Love???
These are all questions I pose to you in a topic full of sunshine! Discuss!
Happiness = endorphins released from brain. Caused by physical exertion, sexual activity, and gradually through healthy living.
To be "truly happy", all you need is a capsule of MDMA. You'll be happier than you could possibly ever imagine being.
Quote from: Torch on February 20, 2012, 10:58:41 AM
Happiness = endorphins released from brain. Caused by physical exertion, sexual activity, and gradually through healthy living.
To be "truly happy", all you need is a capsule of MDMA. You'll be happier than you could possibly ever imagine being.
You forgot cuddling teddy bears. Cuddling a teddy bear releases the same amount of endorphins has having sex. At least that's what Uncle John's Bathroom Reader tells me. And we all know his word is law.
In order of questions asked:
1. Happiness, like Torch said, is literally nothing more than the chemical consequence of having certain endorphins released from your brain, with some physical reactions to go with it.
2. Nothing that humanity seems to be up to accomplishing as a whole. Certainly it's done everything it can to do the exact opposite.
3. It depends on the person themselves and what they're willing to be satisfied with. I do know that the form of materialism embraced by most modern societies right now can be very detrimental to the well-being of the person and has no effect overall on happiness when compared to those who are less fortunate.
This being said, I would give up my position in life in a heartbeat to someone who was struggling, as right now, I can't make anything of it and all I seem to be proficient at is bearing pain.
4. As aforementioned, it does not overall.
5. Love is the same thing as happiness, except with different endorphins and with a different set of physical accompaniments, and the fact that it is much more fickle than even one of the most fickle emotions itself(happiness). I would be willing to bet over 50% of people(being generous) don't have a good grasp on this emotion and think they're in love when they're really not.
I personally feel it's the single stupidest emotion humanity is equipped with.
EDIT: 1.0 is heavily implying you're going to make another one of these in the future. Or did you just post this as a seeming contrast to the recent topics that are being discussed?
EDIT #2: I also feel having money being included in the picture of 'happiness' in the OP was, to put it lightly, not a wise decision.
Quote from: Mystery on February 20, 2012, 01:06:27 PM
1. Happiness, like Torch said, is literally nothing more than the chemical consequence of having certain endorphins released from your brain, with some physical reactions to go with it.
We can branch that out into two directions (or more). We know many people share the same things that makes them happy. Like winning a millions dollars. But we know there are some things where people are more picky about that can make them not happy and some people happy. In other words what are the requirements to get those chemical reactions. Saying happiness is just a chemical reaction is not wrong, but just a part of the picture.
Also we can look at it from the after effect. As in why does that chemical reaction effect us the way it does. There are many levels to everything.
Quote from: Torch on February 20, 2012, 10:58:41 AM
Happiness = endorphins released from brain. Caused by physical exertion, sexual activity, and gradually through healthy living.
To be "truly happy", all you need is a capsule of MDMA. You'll be happier than you could possibly ever imagine being.
For a short period of time. Of course, after a certain amount of usage, you will phyiscally no longer be able to feel happiness at all.
Quote from: Mystery on February 20, 2012, 01:06:27 PM
5. Love is the same thing as happiness, except with different endorphins and with a different set of physical accompaniments, and the fact that it is much more fickle than even one of the most fickle emotions itself(happiness). I would be willing to bet over 50% of people(being generous) don't have a good grasp on this emotion and think they're in love when they're really not.
Actually, I would argue that Love and Happiness are not necessarily one in the same. You don't have to be happy to be in love. In fact, there are plenty of times when being in love can make you quite unhappy. I believe you may be referring to infatuation. That definitely corresponds with similar endorphins and physical reactions as happiness.
Not to sound too condescending here, but I think that until you reach a certain maturity level when it comes to relationships, it's hard to see past that. It's hard to understand that you can be with someone and love them even though everything is not sunshine and butterflies. You go on with life as is, you do nice things for eachother, you care about eachother, you fight with eachother, and occasionally there's sunshine and butterflies.
To answer the original question. I think happiness is a combination of things. Being satisfied with your life, what you're doing. Being surrounded by people you love and who love you back. Having enough money, but not too much. Being challenged and excited about things.
I think of things that make you happy can rang from vary minimal to a lot. I also think happy is a survival tool but not a prefect one, and that every one does something to achieve more happy for themselves. But the reasons why an effect on a person/a person effect to the world might make them happy is complex and different from person to person.
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 02:06:28 PM
Actually, I would argue that Love and Happiness are not necessarily one in the same. You don't have to be happy to be in love. In fact, there are plenty of times when being in love can make you quite unhappy. I believe you may be referring to infatuation. That definitely corresponds with similar endorphins and physical reactions as happiness.
I was trying to point out that all things like love, happiness and sadness are just emotions at their core. I wasn't trying to say that love and happiness were similar emotions.
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 02:06:28 PM
Not to sound too condescending here, but I think that until you reach a certain maturity level when it comes to relationships, it's hard to see past that. It's hard to understand that you can be with someone and love them even though everything is not sunshine and butterflies. You go on with life as is, you do nice things for eachother, you care about eachother, you fight with eachother, and occasionally there's sunshine and butterflies.
That's implying I actually care about having relationships. I think they're laughable.
I know relationships aren't all 'sunshine and butterflies'. Nothing is. But tell me, what's the primary reason most relationships are formed? Common sense and mutual benefit? It's the feeling of love.
Which, again, is so ridiculously fickle it results in an enormous number of relationships being doomed to failure from the start.
Quote from: ARTgames on February 20, 2012, 02:03:33 PM
We can branch that out into two directions (or more). We know many people share the same things that makes them happy. Like winning a millions dollars. But we know there are some things where people are more picky about that can make them not happy and some people happy. In other words what are the requirements to get those chemical reactions. Saying happiness is just a chemical reaction is not wrong, but just a part of the picture.
Also we can look at it from the after effect. As in why does that chemical reaction effect us the way it does. There are many levels to everything.
They're affected by your environmental sensations which are encoded into your brain chemically, and by your already existing neural connections. All of which are physical and chemical.
Why does the chemical reaction affect you the way it does? Why does touching acid burn your hand?
They just happen to have those properties, which can produce an infinite number of related effects on the infinite theoretical number of human brain configurations.
Quote from: Mystery on February 20, 2012, 03:31:31 PM
They're affected by your environmental sensations which are encoded into your brain chemically, and by your already existing neural connections. All of which are physical and chemical.
Why does the chemical reaction affect you the way it does? Why does touching acid burn your hand?
They just happen to have those properties, which can produce an infinite number of related effects on the infinite theoretical number of human brain configurations.
This is fine to say but it depends on how much you want to know and at what detail depending on how you interpret my question. If you some one who stands by physics this is fine. But very veg amount of information.
Not saying your wrong, just saying there is a lot that can be discussed if some one cares to.
P.S. That smiley face is creeping me out now.
Quote from: ARTgames on February 20, 2012, 03:50:21 PM
This is fine to say but it depends on how much you want to know and at what detail depending on how you interpret my question. If you some one who stands by physics this is fine. But very veg amount of information.
Not saying your wrong, just saying there is a lot that can be discussed if some one cares to.
P.S. That smiley face is creeping me out now.
Not getting what you're trying to say here. Could you please elaborate some more?
Are you talking about the smiley face in the OP or the smiley face in Pwnage's avatar? If it's the one in the OP, well, you get creeped out extremely easily. If it's Pwnage's avatar, that's somewhat understandable, seeing as it's the hidden figure from Wario Land 3[SPOILERS]
which turns into the final boss, Rudy the Clown, after you collect all 5 Music Boxes. He's also the ONLY THING IN THE ENTIRE GAME which can give you a Game Over, and it's instant.[SPOILERS] It was disconcerting to look at as a kid.
Both faces man. both! As for what i was saying I'm just saying theirs a lot to say about the subject for this topic.
Quote from: ARTgames on February 20, 2012, 04:07:55 PM
Both faces man. both! As for what i was saying I'm just saying theirs a lot to say about the subject for this topic.
Oh, is that it? I agree, there is a lot to say about it. :P
Stick Online is really just a bunch of code being executed by your computer. All your characters are just a bunch of bytes stored on the server machine. Everything about it is really just a ton of little illusions of logic that have been fleshed out via code to create what we all know as the game. But many of you guys seem to enjoy it and recognize it as more than that none the less.
Just because one of the underlying causes of happiness is chemicals doesn't mean that's all it is (it's the effect/result of them that that is important). And just because it is caused by brain chemicals doesn't make the perceived effects of it any less real, special, or meaningful to the person experiencing it.
words like happiness, life, thought, emotions, all break down when you start thinking of them in terms of physics or chemistry. society is centered around deluding ourselves into thinking we are more than atoms.
that being said i think happiness is the song Pollywog In A Bog by the Bare Naked Ladies.
Quote from: Yankyal on February 20, 2012, 07:51:21 PM
physics or chemistry
Physics is looked at as the bases of the sciences. And some may say mathematics is under that or is the language of Physics.
Quotewords like happiness, life, thought, emotions, all break down when you start thinking of them in terms of physics or chemistry. society is centered around deluding ourselves into thinking we are more than atoms.
I know what your saying. But take that for whatever it means and at some level we don't really know whats going on.
Speaking to anyone:
Regardless it just depends on what goals you have.
Quote from: Meiun on February 20, 2012, 06:52:42 PM
Stick Online is really just a bunch of code being executed by your computer. All your characters are just a bunch of bytes stored on the server machine. Everything about it is really just a ton of little illusions of logic that have been fleshed out via code to create what we all know as the game. But many of you guys seem to enjoy it and recognize it as more than that none the less.
Just because one of the underlying causes of happiness is chemicals doesn't mean that's all it is (it's the effect/result of them that that is important). And just because it is caused by brain chemicals doesn't make the perceived effects of it any less real, special, or meaningful to the person experiencing it.
Was about to post something like this, thank you sir.
I know many of you are trying to act very intelligent to show off, but we know that when you're happy you don't think "Oh, endorphins are being released and are making me feel this way."
Is that what emotions are?
Maybe.
But like Meiun said its still real and meaningful to whoever is experiencing it.
@ Mystery.
You may think relationships are laughable now, but just wait. Someday you'll see, I promise. ;)
Quote from: Yankyal on February 20, 2012, 07:51:21 PM
words like happiness, life, thought, emotions, all break down when you start thinking of them in terms of physics or chemistry. society is centered around deluding ourselves into thinking we are more than atoms.
that being said i think happiness is the song Pollywog In A Bog by the Bare Naked Ladies.
Stick Online V3 is nothing more than just a bunch of C# code. Literally just a bunch of text that I typed into my computer. So does that make you all deluded for placing any value in it, or for being excited about it?
"The whole is greater than the sum of its parts" as was said by Aristotle. Pretty sure he was smarter than most of us too ;D
We all may just be a bunch of atoms, but it's what those atoms come together to create that's important. The ultimate purpose and or effect of the chemical reaction and what not.
I also agree with what Meiun posted. Was going to post something along the same lines, but I already had a discussion with Mystery in the Religion topic and it didn't really go anywhere. Anyways, again, not to be condescending, but Mystery, after realizing a common thread in both topics, I am starting to think you're sort of coming across as a sullen adolescent. I get that you're probably not, but just thought I'd throw that out there. Maybe take it into consideration? Just seems occasionally you could look at things from a less pessimistic viewpoint. Either way, it's sort of depressing to have a discussion where everything turns negative. Which is why I didn't really want to respond.
Quote from: Titan on February 20, 2012, 08:21:05 PM
Quote from: Meiun on February 20, 2012, 06:52:42 PM
Stick Online is really just a bunch of code being executed by your computer. All your characters are just a bunch of bytes stored on the server machine. Everything about it is really just a ton of little illusions of logic that have been fleshed out via code to create what we all know as the game. But many of you guys seem to enjoy it and recognize it as more than that none the less.
Just because one of the underlying causes of happiness is chemicals doesn't mean that's all it is (it's the effect/result of them that that is important). And just because it is caused by brain chemicals doesn't make the perceived effects of it any less real, special, or meaningful to the person experiencing it.
Was about to post something like this, thank you sir.
I know many of you are trying to act very intelligent to show off, but we know that when you're happy you don't think "Oh, endorphins are being released and are making me feel this way."
Is that what emotions are?
Maybe.
But like Meiun said its still real and meaningful to whoever is experiencing it.
I wasn't trying to 'act intelligent to show off' whatsoever. Don't attack people for no reason.
I was simply saying what an emotion was. That's all that makes up an emotion, despite that it's real and meaningful to whoever is experiencing it.
I do acknowledge that attributions to things makes them more special.
Quote from: Titan on February 20, 2012, 08:21:05 PM
@ Mystery.
You may think relationships are laughable now, but just wait. Someday you'll see, I promise. ;)
If you're trying to say I'm not mature enough to have a relationship, that's ridiculous. I've been capable of it for longer than most people my age.
Relationships are pointless for those without an interest in getting married or having children, or for those who think 'love' as most people experience it is fickle and shallow.
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM
Anyways, again, not to be condescending, but Mystery, after realizing a common thread in both topics, I am starting to think you're sort of coming across as a sullen adolescent.
At the moment, I AM a sullen adolescent. It's not like me not being sullen would change anything either, as I force myself to look at the pessimistic perspectives the most.
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM
Just seems occasionally you could look at things from a less pessimistic viewpoint.
I used to when I was much younger. It proved to be a futile endeavor.
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM
Either way, it's sort of depressing to have a discussion where everything turns negative. Which is why I didn't really want to respond.
I can stop posting if people want me to. No need for a single person to turn away several.
While I'm not sure the exact science behind it, I find that people are happiest when they are working towards a goal and seeing progress. That's part of why video games are so addictive, they give achievable goals and allow you to work towards accomplishing them. It's also why I encourage working out, it's an incredibly difficult task to get in good shape and the feeling of satisfaction at progressing towards it is one of the best.
Not only does having ridiculous amounts of money not bring happiness, it can hinder it. It can kill your ambition to better yourself as a person or work towards a goal. This is partially why so many celebrities get caught up in drug abuse.
I think Meiun's post is also another fine way to look at things and i was going to post something along the same lines. But its just another side of the whole picture. I do think myself a sum of its parts, or maybe even greater than the sum of its parts is something important here.
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM
Just seems occasionally you could look at things from a less pessimistic viewpoint. Either way, it's sort of depressing to have a discussion where everything turns negative.
I agree that his post comes off that way and the part is something that i disagree with Mystery on. But i also just kinda looked past that at what he was saying and i thought it was fine but did not add that much and there more than that that could be discussed. Thought i do think he meant what you described.
But even if he may see it negatively that's just his opinion. I know it sounds like i'm downplaying his opinion but i don't mean to, just a normal connotation of that wording. (kinda assuming that was happening to Mystery's posts)
So ill just ask him, Mystery did your past post come with a negative meaning to them?
Edit: lol, you all made my post obsolete in the time it took me to write it. im a slow writer. XD
Quote from: Mystery on February 20, 2012, 09:57:35 PM
Quote from: Titan on February 20, 2012, 08:21:05 PM
Quote from: Meiun on February 20, 2012, 06:52:42 PM
Stick Online is really just a bunch of code being executed by your computer. All your characters are just a bunch of bytes stored on the server machine. Everything about it is really just a ton of little illusions of logic that have been fleshed out via code to create what we all know as the game. But many of you guys seem to enjoy it and recognize it as more than that none the less.
Just because one of the underlying causes of happiness is chemicals doesn't mean that's all it is (it's the effect/result of them that that is important). And just because it is caused by brain chemicals doesn't make the perceived effects of it any less real, special, or meaningful to the person experiencing it.
Was about to post something like this, thank you sir.
I know many of you are trying to act very intelligent to show off, but we know that when you're happy you don't think "Oh, endorphins are being released and are making me feel this way."
Is that what emotions are?
Maybe.
But like Meiun said its still real and meaningful to whoever is experiencing it.
I wasn't trying to 'act intelligent to show off' whatsoever. Don't attack people for no reason.
Quote from: Titan on February 20, 2012, 08:21:05 PM
@ Mystery.
You may think relationships are laughable now, but just wait. Someday you'll see, I promise. ;)
If you're trying to say I'm not mature enough to have a relationship, that's ridiculous. I've been capable of it for longer than most people my age.
Relationships are pointless for those without an interest in getting married or having children, or for those who think 'love' as most people experience it is fickle and shallow.
So first off, wasn't trying to attack you or anyone else, sorry if you thought I was.
Second, whats the point of most everything we do in life?
To have fun.
Sure relationships aren't key to having fun, but there can definitley be great memories and good times had in relationships, even if you know that you won't end up with that person.
Quote from: Mystery on February 20, 2012, 09:57:35 PM
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM
Anyways, again, not to be condescending, but Mystery, after realizing a common thread in both topics, I am starting to think you're sort of coming across as a sullen adolescent.
At the moment, I AM a sullen adolescent. It's not like me not being sullen would change anything either, as I force myself to look at the pessimistic perspectives the most.
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM
Just seems occasionally you could look at things from a less pessimistic viewpoint.
I used to when I was much younger. It proved to be a futile endeavor.
I felt the same way at one time. But I just feel looking at it any way is just one way to see it. I also came to learn that there is no right way. So in other words I don't care if you see things that way good or bad. I don't mean that to downplay those viewpoints. I personally think there something to learn. I also personally like to not take one of those sides but to look at it as it is. And only adding a view if i think necessary to my goal.
Quote from: ARTgames on February 20, 2012, 10:06:07 PM
So ill just ask him, Mystery did your past post come with a negative meaning to them?
Yes, they did. It doesn't change anything.
Quote from: Titan on February 20, 2012, 10:15:19 PM
So first off, wasn't trying to attack you or anyone else, sorry if you thought I was.
Second, whats the point of most everything we do in life?
To have fun.
Sure relationships aren't key to having fun, but there can definitley be great memories and good times had in relationships, even if you know that you won't end up with that person.
Alright, sorry for getting defensive.
I personally can't see any fun whatsoever in relationships.
Quote from: ARTgames on February 20, 2012, 10:15:39 PM
I felt the same way at one time. But I just feel looking at it any way is just one way to see it. I also came to learn that there is no right way. So in other words I don't care if you see things that way good or bad. I don't mean that to downplay those viewpoints. I personally think there something to learn. I also personally like to not take one of those sides but to look at it as it is. And only adding a view if i think necessary to my goal.
One of the reasons I prefer looking at things pessimistically first is because it helps you to get to the root of problems, and solving problems subjectively is better than mulling on the good,
People have their own ways of keeping themselves entertained/happy. Some people read, others drink and/or do drugs, some strive for certain goals in life, or in many cases virtual reality. Whatever makes you happy can define you as a person. Whereas on the other hand what makes you mad or sad does as well.
To every situation whether it's relationships or money, there are many bad things that can come of both. Having a balance of something, not too much or too little can really be the ultimate goal to achieving true happiness. Though, all of this is opinion some people have millions and want more and more. Whereas someone could have millions and/or be rich and famous and want to just be a normal person in society.
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM
I also agree with what Meiun posted. Was going to post something along the same lines, but I already had a discussion with Mystery in the Religion topic and it didn't really go anywhere. Anyways, again, not to be condescending, but Mystery, after realizing a common thread in both topics, I am starting to think you're sort of coming across as a sullen adolescent. I get that you're probably not, but just thought I'd throw that out there. Maybe take it into consideration? Just seems occasionally you could look at things from a less pessimistic viewpoint. Either way, it's sort of depressing to have a discussion where everything turns negative. Which is why I didn't really want to respond.
Unfortunately, I find that the most pessimistic view point is often times the most accurate. I do agree with what Meiun is saying, but I don't think Mystery is wrong with any of his statements either. More often than not, optimism clouds logic. Anyway, I brought up the topic of qualia (http://"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia") in the religion thread, but it seems no one was too interested in discussing it further. It's basically the study of qualitative experience, and whether or not our experiences can be fully explained through physical matter alone, or if there is a metaphysical aspect to consciousness that we have yet to discover. There is actually a decent amount of evidence supporting claims that consciousness can not be described through physical matter alone. For example, how can the study of the brains perception of color ever fully describe ones perception of the color red? One argument goes as follows.
1. According to physicalism all that exists in our world (including consciousness) is physical.
2. Thus, if physicalism is true, a logically-possible world in which all physical facts are the same as those of the actual world must contain everything that exists in our actual world. In particular conscious experience must exist in such a possible world.
3. In fact we can conceive of a world physically indistinguishable from our world but in which there is no consciousness (a zombie world) and we can not see why it is not logically possible.
4. Therefore, physicalism is false. (The conclusion follows from 2. and 3. by modus tollens.)
It's an interesting discussion that relates heavily to happiness and whether or not the sum of it's parts have any meaning beyond physicalism.
Quote from: Mystery on February 20, 2012, 09:57:35 PMQuote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM
Anyways, again, not to be condescending, but Mystery, after realizing a common thread in both topics, I am starting to think you're sort of coming across as a sullen adolescent.
At the moment, I AM a sullen adolescent. It's not like me not being sullen would change anything either, as I force myself to look at the pessimistic perspectives the most.
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM
Just seems occasionally you could look at things from a less pessimistic viewpoint.
I used to when I was much younger. It proved to be a futile endeavor.
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM
Either way, it's sort of depressing to have a discussion where everything turns negative. Which is why I didn't really want to respond.
I can stop posting if people want me to. No need for a single person to turn away several.
Similarly to our discussion in the Religion topic, I'll just say "fair enough". Although, I don't want to turn you away if you are interested in sharing your thoughts and discussing them with people. That's really not what I was after. I was really just stating my personal opinion, and I definitely don't assume to speak for anyone else here. So don't leave on my part. It's really not a big deal anyways.
Quote from: Jake on February 21, 2012, 01:17:02 AM
Quote from: Lingus on February 20, 2012, 09:04:33 PM
I also agree with what Meiun posted. Was going to post something along the same lines, but I already had a discussion with Mystery in the Religion topic and it didn't really go anywhere. Anyways, again, not to be condescending, but Mystery, after realizing a common thread in both topics, I am starting to think you're sort of coming across as a sullen adolescent. I get that you're probably not, but just thought I'd throw that out there. Maybe take it into consideration? Just seems occasionally you could look at things from a less pessimistic viewpoint. Either way, it's sort of depressing to have a discussion where everything turns negative. Which is why I didn't really want to respond.
Unfortunately, I find that the most pessimistic view point is often times the most accurate. I do agree with what Meiun is saying, but I don't think Mystery is wrong with any of his statements either. More often than not, optimism clouds logic.
Not sure if I can speak to the topic of physicalism, but on a more general level I would dispute your claim that optimism clouds logic. Well, not necessarily dispute... but at the same time, pessimism can also cloud logic. On one hand you are expecting the best and therefor might be dismissing any negative results. On the other, you are expecting the worst and will dismiss positive results. Only rational thought can be used to have a clear grasp of the logic of any situation. But, still, there is something to be said about having an optimistic attitude. Yes, it may cloud your logic, but your attitude alone might result in a better outcome. Or by opening yourself to positive opportunities you might actually be able to take advantage of them. So with that in mind, what is the point of being anything other than optimistic?
Quote from: Meiun on February 20, 2012, 08:50:33 PM
Quote from: Yankyal on February 20, 2012, 07:51:21 PM
words like happiness, life, thought, emotions, all break down when you start thinking of them in terms of physics or chemistry. society is centered around deluding ourselves into thinking we are more than atoms.
that being said i think happiness is the song Pollywog In A Bog by the Bare Naked Ladies.
Stick Online V3 is nothing more than just a bunch of C# code. Literally just a bunch of text that I typed into my computer. So does that make you all deluded for placing any value in it, or for being excited about it?
"The whole is greater than the sum of its parts" as was said by Aristotle. Pretty sure he was smarter than most of us too ;D
We all may just be a bunch of atoms, but it's what those atoms come together to create that's important. The ultimate purpose and or effect of the chemical reaction and what not.
i totally agree. anyone trying to define happiness like this is wasting their time. i was trying to say that it's pointless to think about things like happiness in a physical way since
a)you will feel like shit
b)it gets you no where
c)words like happiness weren't meant to be examined this deeply anyways. they're just labels we place on those "chemical reactions" to help us make sense of it all.
Quote from: ARTgames on February 20, 2012, 08:08:56 PM
Physics is looked at as the bases of the sciences. And some may say mathematics is under that or is the language of Physics.
i like to think of philosophy/logic as the basis of math, which is the basis of physics which is the basis of chemistry and so on. although i still think a philosophy major is a waste of money and time :p
Quote from: Yankyal on February 21, 2012, 12:30:45 PMc)words like happiness weren't meant to be examined this deeply anyways. they're just labels we place on those "chemical reactions" to help us make sense of it all.
I don't think anyone is trying to break down the
word "happiness". What people are doing is trying to break down the emotion of happiness into it's basic physical form. The arguement is that it's really more than that.
Quote from: Yankyal on February 21, 2012, 12:30:45 PM
Quote from: ARTgames on February 20, 2012, 08:08:56 PM
Physics is looked at as the bases of the sciences. And some may say mathematics is under that or is the language of Physics.
i like to think of philosophy/logic as the basis of math, which is the basis of physics which is the basis of chemistry and so on. although i still think a philosophy major is a waste of money and time :p
I don't think logic is the basis of math. If anything, at it's core, logic can be broken down by mathematical logic notation. In other words, math is the basis of logic. And I believe logic is, in some sense, the basis of philosophy.
Quote from: Lingus on February 21, 2012, 11:49:51 AM
Not sure if I can speak to the topic of physicalism, but on a more general level I would dispute your claim that optimism clouds logic. Well, not necessarily dispute... but at the same time, pessimism can also cloud logic. On one hand you are expecting the best and therefor might be dismissing any negative results. On the other, you are expecting the worst and will dismiss positive results. Only rational thought can be used to have a clear grasp of the logic of any situation. But, still, there is something to be said about having an optimistic attitude. Yes, it may cloud your logic, but your attitude alone might result in a better outcome. Or by opening yourself to positive opportunities you might actually be able to take advantage of them. So with that in mind, what is the point of being anything other than optimistic?
I tend to agree with Lingus. To use an expression so optimistic as to make Mystery avert his eyes (no hard feelings, just giving you a hard time), "The man who thinks he can and the man who thinks he can't are both right."
Quote from: Jake on February 21, 2012, 01:17:02 AM
Unfortunately, I find that the most pessimistic view point is often times the most accurate.
I disagree. I think any judgement is skewing the information being pessimistic or optimistic. But when it comes to evaluating information for your needs i think a pessimistic can be helpful. It could help you see things that you may other wise nice like to know but need to know and help you accept things that you may not other wise. But i also think that an optimistic view can also help some times. I personally think you should not do either extreme all of the time and have a mixed view on things.
Quote from: Jake on February 21, 2012, 01:17:02 AM
I do agree with what Meiun is saying, but I don't think Mystery is wrong with any of his statements either. More often than not, optimism clouds logic. Anyway, I brought up the topic of qualia (http://"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia") in the religion thread, but it seems no one was too interested in discussing it further. It's basically the study of qualitative experience, and whether or not our experiences can be fully explained through physical matter alone, or if there is a metaphysical aspect to consciousness that we have yet to discover. There is actually a decent amount of evidence supporting claims that consciousness can not be described through physical matter alone. For example, how can the study of the brains perception of color ever fully describe ones perception of the color red? One argument goes as follows.
1. According to physicalism all that exists in our world (including consciousness) is physical.
2. Thus, if physicalism is true, a logically-possible world in which all physical facts are the same as those of the actual world must contain everything that exists in our actual world. In particular conscious experience must exist in such a possible world.
3. In fact we can conceive of a world physically indistinguishable from our world but in which there is no consciousness (a zombie world) and we can not see why it is not logically possible.
4. Therefore, physicalism is false. (The conclusion follows from 2. and 3. by modus tollens.)
It's an interesting discussion that relates heavily to happiness and whether or not the sum of it's parts have any meaning beyond physicalism.
I think that is something that is great to bring up. I have been thinking of this and i have made up about it. So this really is just me bsing. But I like to think of consciousness as biological matter that processes data best for survival but not limited to that. I can see it in my head that consciousness makes sense even being made up of matter. But I have nothing to back me up.
Quote from: Lingus on February 21, 2012, 11:49:51 AM
Not sure if I can speak to the topic of physicalism, but on a more general level I would dispute your claim that optimism clouds logic. Well, not necessarily dispute... but at the same time, pessimism can also cloud logic. On one hand you are expecting the best and therefor might be dismissing any negative results. On the other, you are expecting the worst and will dismiss positive results. Only rational thought can be used to have a clear grasp of the logic of any situation. But, still, there is something to be said about having an optimistic attitude. Yes, it may cloud your logic, but your attitude alone might result in a better outcome. Or by opening yourself to positive opportunities you might actually be able to take advantage of them. So with that in mind, what is the point of being anything other than optimistic?
I don't deny that pessimism and optimism can both cause us to skew reality, but from what I have seen and studied, the release of endorphins in the brain are the greatest barrier to rational thinking. I think you are, to an extent, confusing pessimism with realism. In society, people often times label realists as pessimists because it seems like a dreary observation of reality. To the realist, they're not trying to be pessimistic, they're trying their best to view reality without letting their mood or emotions get in the way of logical assessment. While Mystery might be somewhat of a pessimist, I think his thought processes are based on logic and logic alone. If you show a realist a valid viewpoint, whether it's optimistic or pessimistic, they will look at the evidence for and against it while attempting to be unbiased in their conclusion. The problem is, being a realist generally leads to being a pessimist, because you realize how shitty life can be. While being too pessimistic or too optimistic can cloud judgment, I think that people who ere on the side of pessimism generally live a life grounded more in reality.
Let me point out though that I don't think being pessimistic is a good way to live, even if it does come with a more rational perception of reality. An optimistic attitude leads to greater success and a happier life, which I would gladly take over being right all the time (not that I am right all the time).
Quote from: ARTgames on February 21, 2012, 04:22:01 PM
I think that is something that is great to bring up. I have been thinking of this and i have made up about it. So this really is just me bsing. But I like to think of consciousness as biological matter that processes data best for survival but not limited to that. I can see it in my head that consciousness makes sense even being made up of matter. But I have nothing to back me up.
So you are basically a physicalist? Or someone that believes that physical matter can completely explain and define conscious thought. If so, how do you feel about the idea of a philosophical zombie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie)? According to physicalism, physical facts determine all other facts. All facts that apply to us would also apply to a philosophical zombie, which is someone who acts like a human, talks like a human, but has no self-awareness. Since physical facts cannot determine the difference between and p-zombie and a conscious human being, it holds that either there is a meta-physical aspect to consciousness, or that the premise of a p-zombie is fundamentally not possible, or even that everyone but you is a p-zombie and actually has no self-awareness. For example, you know you exist, but how do you know I exist? I could potentially be a complex organism that is so advanced that I appear to be self-aware, but am actually no more than a p-zombie, going through the motions like a computer program.
I can not get your link to work at all. I tried copying and editing it and for some reason that's not working for some odd reason. As for the rest of what your saying i'm not too sure. I guess it comes down to what is consciousness. There could be something that can do everything we can but not have the same thing we consider consciousness but i don't know the technical aspects of how that would work. As of now i would say im a physicality. But it could change.
The thing is Jake, when you get into physics and theory like this, you're basically describing a way to perceive the world. The purpose of these theories though is to allow you to come to other conclusions. So, the question is: how does perceiving the world as being full of zombies allow you to come to other conclusions?
By the way, I think you should be using "skeptical" instead of pessimistic. I was intending to use the word pessimistic because I was getting a very negative vibe from most of the posts. I get the difference between skeptical or realist versus pessimistic. Being skeptical allows you to question things that you see or hear. There's nothing wrong with that if you are using it in a rational way. Being a realist is also fine. Taking the information for what it is. But being pessimistic is looking more at negative aspects of any situation. It would be dismissing information simply because it has a positive outcome or outlook. This hinders a rational thought process as much as an optimistic viewpoint would.
What are some things that you (the reader) like that most people don't like? Kinda off topic from the main dissolution but i'm curious. :D
I'll just answer the questions stated in the OP first...
Your definition of happiness?
-I don't really have a set definition, and I'm not going to go into the whole "chemicals being released in your brain" thing. I'd say it has multiple definitions... Basically things that make you smile, or fills you with the sense of deep joy and emotion. Or something like that ;P
What makes you truly happy?
-Not sure if this is a general question or directed at each person... but I'm going to answer it as the latter. What makes ME truly happy is seeing those around me happy. To be able to laugh with friends and family with no drama. My dog especially makes me happy with her crazy personality. Seeing artwork that takes my mind off into another world, seeing breathtaking views out in nature, and listening to amazing music. Also the sense of accomplishing things.
What should a person need to be truly satisfied with their life?
-I'd say whatever suits them best. No one is ever alike... Some people could want kids to be satisfied and some people would rather have a husband and 5 dogs.... Some people want to stay single and travel the world. The only thing I can think of that would make a large range of people satisfied is making progress/accomplishing things.
How much does material wealth influence a person's happiness?
-I think it does influence it... If you have little/no money, you're going to be stressed out all the time trying to pay off bills... They say money won't buy you happiness, but I think having enough money to afford the essentials but also being able to afford extra stuff every once and a while would make most people happy.
Love???
-Apparently this is controversial in this topic... lol. I'd say Mystery's views on relationships sound like from a high-schooler's standpoint, in which case I find that laughable and yet can agree with somewhat... I think people are way too pressured to date a lot in high school and I have had many people tell me they were in love with their significant other after a few weeks. That's the case in which I agree with Mystery, high school kids usually take dating way too seriously and don't know the difference between infatuation and love. That being said, I will point out me and my boyfriend started dating in high school in the beginning of 11th grade. I definitely did not tell him I loved him until like 3 months later, lol. Although I'm sure we were cheesy and agree we had no idea what it meant to be in a relationship... we've so far beaten the statistic that "high school sweet hearts rarely ever stay together", as we've been together for over 5 years now.
Which brings me to why I think Mystery's view is also laughable. My boyfriend and I have grown closer with each other, we tell each other pretty much everything, we're not afraid to be ourselves around each other, I love him and he is also my best friend... that I can make out with ;o We've been through hard times together; him losing his dog, house, grandma, and dad all in the same year, among many other things. And we've still stuck by eachother's side through it and helped each other. Granted 5 years isn't long and we are still quite young, I'd say we're doing very well.
And I suppose I'll try to answer Art's question too:
What are some things that you (the reader) like that most people don't like?
-Probably not the kind of answer you're looking for, but seeing as I have many girly-girl friends, most of them didn't like much of anything that I like... lol. Different tastes in music, different tastes in clothes, different tastes in how we spend our spare time, etc...
I like rock, while most my friends like country/oldies/pop/r&b... I like more edgy clothes, while most my friends shop at American Eagle or Old Navy... I like playing MMORPG's in my spare time, making art, listening to music... most my friends like going to the mall or partying.
I guess that's one thing I like that most people (most people I know anyways) don't like that I like, is having time alone to myself. I like to do solitary things that you don't need other people for. I would rather listen to other people than have to do a lot of talking (unless of course I had something really worth talking about, not just small talk)
Quote from: ARTgames on February 21, 2012, 06:58:03 PM
What are some things that you (the reader) like that most people don't like? Kinda off topic from the main dissolution but i'm curious. :D
Since I moved away from most of my old high school friends, I've found ways to keep myself happy without being with a crowd of people. Playing games online, posting on these forums (well more reading peoples' posts) talking and laughing more with my family, reading, etc. I found these things in life are more simple and bring a lot more happiness than partying every weekend and getting wasted and not being able to remember it the next day.
People worry too much about what others think of them (including myself) and I find it best to just be around those who enjoy your company and you don't have to force yourself to come up with something to talk about. It will come more naturally and if you can laugh, joke AND be serious with someone, then you know that it is a true friend.
I know I'm getting more into the whole relationship thing over anything else, but we are all people and another person can bring you a lot of happiness..
I declare that this is happiness.
http://cheezcomixed.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/koma-comic-strip-an-explosion-of-technology.jpg
I keep throwing money at the screen but nothing is happening.
Quote from: Lingus on February 21, 2012, 06:33:26 PM
The thing is Jake, when you get into physics and theory like this, you're basically describing a way to perceive the world. The purpose of these theories though is to allow you to come to other conclusions. So, the question is: how does perceiving the world as being full of zombies allow you to come to other conclusions?
If we can perceive a world that is full of p-zombies but still has the exact same laws as our own world, then one can potentially conclude that there is more to the universe than physicality, thus proving physicalism wrong. For example, we all have qualitative experiences, but if there was a being that did not have these same experiences, aka a philosophical zombie, there would be no scientific way to deduct that they are any different than a normal self-aware being. If we can not distinguish the difference between two beings based on physical science, we must look to meta-physical alternatives.
There are many counter-arguments, and arguments countering the counter-arguments, so it's important that everyone read about philosophical zombies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie) and qualia. Also, I fixed the original link.
Quote from: Lingus on February 21, 2012, 06:33:26 PM
By the way, I think you should be using "skeptical" instead of pessimistic. I was intending to use the word pessimistic because I was getting a very negative vibe from most of the posts. I get the difference between skeptical or realist versus pessimistic. Being skeptical allows you to question things that you see or hear. There's nothing wrong with that if you are using it in a rational way. Being a realist is also fine. Taking the information for what it is. But being pessimistic is looking more at negative aspects of any situation. It would be dismissing information simply because it has a positive outcome or outlook. This hinders a rational thought process as much as an optimistic viewpoint would.
Agreed.
Quote from: Lingus on February 21, 2012, 12:56:57 PM
Quote from: Yankyal on February 21, 2012, 12:30:45 PMc)words like happiness weren't meant to be examined this deeply anyways. they're just labels we place on those "chemical reactions" to help us make sense of it all.
I don't think anyone is trying to break down the word "happiness". What people are doing is trying to break down the emotion of happiness into it's basic physical form. The arguement is that it's really more than that.
Quote from: Yankyal on February 21, 2012, 12:30:45 PM
Quote from: ARTgames on February 20, 2012, 08:08:56 PM
Physics is looked at as the bases of the sciences. And some may say mathematics is under that or is the language of Physics.
i like to think of philosophy/logic as the basis of math, which is the basis of physics which is the basis of chemistry and so on. although i still think a philosophy major is a waste of money and time :p
I don't think logic is the basis of math. If anything, at it's core, logic can be broken down by mathematical logic notation. In other words, math is the basis of logic. And I believe logic is, in some sense, the basis of philosophy.
1)the only argument that you can make that happiness is more than a label for a chemical reaction is a religious one, and we all know how those fare in logical debates.
2)math is the science of quantity. all mathematical proofs require logic, without logic mathematics crumbles.
1 + 1 = 2 only in a logical situation.
Quote from: Yankyal on February 22, 2012, 05:07:45 PM1)the only argument that you can make that happiness is more than a label for a chemical reaction is a religious one, and we all know how those fare in logical debates.
Philosophical, meta-physical, spiritual... There are plenty of non-religious explanations for emotions. Also, are we having a logical debate right now? I thought we were discussing happiness. Sounds like a philosophical discussion to me.
Quote from: Yankyal on February 22, 2012, 05:07:45 PM
2)math is the science of quantity. all mathematical proofs require logic, without logic mathematics crumbles.
1 + 1 = 2 only in a logical situation.
I would concede that both math and logic require the use of the other at varying degrees.
Quote from: Yankyal on February 22, 2012, 05:07:45 PM
1)the only argument that you can make that happiness is more than a label for a chemical reaction is a religious one, and we all know how those fare in logical debates.
Not true. That's why I brought up the topic of qualitative experiences, because there are arguments out there that the subjective experience we call happiness cannot exist in a physical universe alone. If all laws are based on physical science alone, then I cannot prove that anyone on this planet, besides myself, has self-awareness. Physical science can never fully describe a phenomena as simple as hearing a sound, or seeing the color red. At most, we can say "these atoms are interacting in very complex patterns". Any deeper understanding of qualitative experience must come from a meta-physical level.
Quote from: Jake on February 22, 2012, 09:53:00 PM
Quote from: Yankyal on February 22, 2012, 05:07:45 PM
1)the only argument that you can make that happiness is more than a label for a chemical reaction is a religious one, and we all know how those fare in logical debates.
Not true. That's why I brought up the topic of qualitative experiences, because there are arguments out there that the subjective experience we call happiness cannot exist in a physical universe alone. If all laws are based on physical science alone, then I cannot prove that anyone on this planet, besides myself, has self-awareness. Physical science can never fully describe a phenomena as simple as hearing a sound, or seeing the color red. At most, we can say "these atoms are interacting in very complex patterns". Any deeper understanding of qualitative experience must come from a meta-physical level.
you are 100% right that you cannot prove that anyone else on this planet has awareness besides yourself. ever heard of the quote "i think therefore i am?".
and i agree with you in saying that for practical reasons you have to think of happiness and other emotions as nonphysical things, that's what i meant with my first post. what emotions truly refer to are chemical reactions, like torch said, but it's absolutely pointless to think of them that way.