The evolutionary definition of good and bad

God, the FSM, and everything else.
User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19743
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby scrmbldggs » Tue Jul 18, 2017 8:00 pm

...or packets
.

Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Nikki Nyx » Wed Jul 19, 2017 2:11 am

EWWWWWWWW!!!!!
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Sat Jul 22, 2017 6:57 am

I am now going to give you the link that perfectly explains my definition of good and bad. If you don't wish to read the entire debate, then just read what is in bold at the very beginning:

http://fav.me/dbgkmdl

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jul 22, 2017 7:28 pm

Light=good = positive toned state of mind=good emotions
Darkness=bad=negative toned state of mind=bad emotions
Light Good and Dark Bad for someone with Xeroderma Pigmentosum.

Emotions are everything to being human.
Emotions are not "everything." Without rational thought in the absence of emotions, we would lack the scientific advancements that characterize modern life, and that have both improved our quality of life and increase our lifespans.

Our emotions dictate the type of perceptual value we have as human beings and the type of perceptual value we have in our lives.
Disagree. Healthy self-esteem is not dependent upon emotions, but upon critical self-analysis, which allows for a rational examination of one's own strengths and weaknesses and provides a path for self-improvement. Emotional self-analysis leads to self-deception; rather than a realistic view of the self, you get a falsely enhanced or degraded sense of the self.

In order to be in the greatest enlightened state, then you would have to be in the greatest feel good state of your life where you experience the most profound and intense good feelings. Therefore, any other way of achieving enlightenment would have to be false.
No. Enlightenment implies knowledge and understanding, and positive emotions do not naturally lead to the acquisition of new knowledge or the understanding of existing knowledge.

This means that a person can only perceive his/her life as having good value, worth, joy, and beauty to him/her through being in a joyful/beautiful mood. The more profound and intense of a feel good experience you have, the more perceptual quality of good value/worth you will have in your life. The less you have, then the less of a human being you become and the less perceptual quality of good value/worth you will have in your life.
Two things here:
1. Without negative emotions, you have no frame of reference from which to judge positive emotions. Therefore, striving for constant positive emotions is senseless; they would become meaningless in time.
2. Without negative emotions, you would not grow emotionally. That is to say, if you anesthetized yourself to emotional pain, you would remain helpless against even the mildest of emotional trauma, never attaining mature emotional well-being and a healthy self-esteem.

People who don't have these good moods/feelings due to anhedonia, an emotionally traumatic event, or depression cannot perceive any real good value/worth in their lives and they would only be deluding themselves to think otherwise. That, or their perceptual quality of good value/worth is very slim.
Emotions are not events that happen to you; they are decisions you make through emotion regulation. I've suffered from depression for 40 years, and from unrelenting chronic pain for 18 years, yet I would rate my quality of life as high, because I have learned to be aware of and regulate my emotions.

"Happiness" is not something that happens to you; it is a state of mind you choose to experience. Additionally, emotions are not extreme; there is a quite large grey area between "happy" and "sad" called "contentment." It doesn't include the boundless joy of happiness, but it is an enjoyable state of mind nonetheless. Emotions are not a purity test; one shouldn't strive always for the apex, then consider all states of mind except that goal to be the nadir.

The humanistic definition of love would be the real love while the machine's/sociopath's definition would not be real love.
Humans who claim to love another or be in love with another tend to commit a predictable array of negative, self-centered behaviors in the name of that love: jealousy, bitterness, vengeance, possessiveness, oppression, etc. There is only one definition of love that avoids that type of self-delusion, and this is it:
"Love is the subjective state of mind where the happiness of another is essential to your own."
If that is not the way you feel, it's not love. (And if that is not the way your partner feels, it's not love either.)

Now, there could actually be two types of emotions or positive toned states of mind. If you were to be in your normal state of well being which is the brain's normal healthy state or if you were to feel joyful and excited over a new video game or movie, then this is a good emotion and a positive toned state. So, this is the first type. The 2nd type would be choosing to make the best of your life anyway and pushing forward in life despite the absence of those aforementioned feel good states.

One could say that a positive emotion or positive toned state is somehow there driving this depressed/anhedonic individual. I'm not sure there is. It could be a matter of the person simply making choices. But the question is, if this truly is a positive toned state or an emotional state, does this experience meet the humanistic standard? Or is it nothing more than the will to carry on in life and make the best of things like a deluded biological machine who thinks his/her life is good and worthwhile to him/her, but, in reality, is not actually perceiving any real good value/worth in his/her life? From my own personal experience, I think that the 1st type of good moods/feelings are all there is to life. I think they are the only experiences that meet the humanistic standard of being in a state of mind where your life has a real perceived quality of good value/worth to you.
What you're saying is that true happiness can only be initiated by external events, over most of which you lack control. That's a depressingly deterministic viewpoint with which I strongly disagree. YOU and ONLY YOU are in charge of in your own happiness by deciding what it is that makes you happy, and doing it. And this is coming from a person who has depression AND chronic pain. Who are you to tell me I'm just "pushing through life" and "making the best of things" and "deluded?" Who are you to tell me my own perceptions about my life are wrong?

I'm sitting here right now with a pain level that would cause most people to scream, recovering from bronchitis, and with additional pain because I just had a tooth pulled yesterday...and I'm STILL quite content with my life. I have a cup of fantastic Sumatran dark roast sitting next to me. I just discovered a new website full of Minecraft mods. I'm in the middle of a humorous fantasy book. I got a great night's sleep. I'm anticipating the veggie soup I'm making for dinner. Life is good. You know why? Because I'm not dwelling on my depression and my pain. I refuse to define myself by my disabilities. In fact, if you asked me to describe myself using ten words, "disabled" wouldn't even make the list. It would be an afterthought.

I strongly suggest you get up off your millennial ass, cut the existential angst act, and go do something with your life. Define yourself by what you DO, by what you ARE...not by what events chance to happen to you. If I defined myself by all the hell I'd been through in my 52 years, I'd crawl into a hole and die. Guess what? Life isn't fair. Life is a bitch, and it's tough. YOU have to be tough too. Stop waiting for the Happiness Fairy to magically improve your life. That's YOUR job. Go do it.

Edited to correct a spelling error before Gord catches it. :mrgreen:
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Thu Jul 27, 2017 5:19 am

Nikki Nyx wrote:
Light=good = positive toned state of mind=good emotions
Darkness=bad=negative toned state of mind=bad emotions
Light Good and Dark Bad for someone with Xeroderma Pigmentosum.

Emotions are everything to being human.
Emotions are not "everything." Without rational thought in the absence of emotions, we would lack the scientific advancements that characterize modern life, and that have both improved our quality of life and increase our lifespans.

Our emotions dictate the type of perceptual value we have as human beings and the type of perceptual value we have in our lives.
Disagree. Healthy self-esteem is not dependent upon emotions, but upon critical self-analysis, which allows for a rational examination of one's own strengths and weaknesses and provides a path for self-improvement. Emotional self-analysis leads to self-deception; rather than a realistic view of the self, you get a falsely enhanced or degraded sense of the self.

In order to be in the greatest enlightened state, then you would have to be in the greatest feel good state of your life where you experience the most profound and intense good feelings. Therefore, any other way of achieving enlightenment would have to be false.
No. Enlightenment implies knowledge and understanding, and positive emotions do not naturally lead to the acquisition of new knowledge or the understanding of existing knowledge.

This means that a person can only perceive his/her life as having good value, worth, joy, and beauty to him/her through being in a joyful/beautiful mood. The more profound and intense of a feel good experience you have, the more perceptual quality of good value/worth you will have in your life. The less you have, then the less of a human being you become and the less perceptual quality of good value/worth you will have in your life.
Two things here:
1. Without negative emotions, you have no frame of reference from which to judge positive emotions. Therefore, striving for constant positive emotions is senseless; they would become meaningless in time.
2. Without negative emotions, you would not grow emotionally. That is to say, if you anesthetized yourself to emotional pain, you would remain helpless against even the mildest of emotional trauma, never attaining mature emotional well-being and a healthy self-esteem.

People who don't have these good moods/feelings due to anhedonia, an emotionally traumatic event, or depression cannot perceive any real good value/worth in their lives and they would only be deluding themselves to think otherwise. That, or their perceptual quality of good value/worth is very slim.
Emotions are not events that happen to you; they are decisions you make through emotion regulation. I've suffered from depression for 40 years, and from unrelenting chronic pain for 18 years, yet I would rate my quality of life as high, because I have learned to be aware of and regulate my emotions.

"Happiness" is not something that happens to you; it is a state of mind you choose to experience. Additionally, emotions are not extreme; there is a quite large grey area between "happy" and "sad" called "contentment." It doesn't include the boundless joy of happiness, but it is an enjoyable state of mind nonetheless. Emotions are not a purity test; one shouldn't strive always for the apex, then consider all states of mind except that goal to be the nadir.

The humanistic definition of love would be the real love while the machine's/sociopath's definition would not be real love.
Humans who claim to love another or be in love with another tend to commit a predictable array of negative, self-centered behaviors in the name of that love: jealousy, bitterness, vengeance, possessiveness, oppression, etc. There is only one definition of love that avoids that type of self-delusion, and this is it:
"Love is the subjective state of mind where the happiness of another is essential to your own."
If that is not the way you feel, it's not love. (And if that is not the way your partner feels, it's not love either.)

Now, there could actually be two types of emotions or positive toned states of mind. If you were to be in your normal state of well being which is the brain's normal healthy state or if you were to feel joyful and excited over a new video game or movie, then this is a good emotion and a positive toned state. So, this is the first type. The 2nd type would be choosing to make the best of your life anyway and pushing forward in life despite the absence of those aforementioned feel good states.

One could say that a positive emotion or positive toned state is somehow there driving this depressed/anhedonic individual. I'm not sure there is. It could be a matter of the person simply making choices. But the question is, if this truly is a positive toned state or an emotional state, does this experience meet the humanistic standard? Or is it nothing more than the will to carry on in life and make the best of things like a deluded biological machine who thinks his/her life is good and worthwhile to him/her, but, in reality, is not actually perceiving any real good value/worth in his/her life? From my own personal experience, I think that the 1st type of good moods/feelings are all there is to life. I think they are the only experiences that meet the humanistic standard of being in a state of mind where your life has a real perceived quality of good value/worth to you.
What you're saying is that true happiness can only be initiated by external events, over most of which you lack control. That's a depressingly deterministic viewpoint with which I strongly disagree. YOU and ONLY YOU are in charge of in your own happiness by deciding what it is that makes you happy, and doing it. And this is coming from a person who has depression AND chronic pain. Who are you to tell me I'm just "pushing through life" and "making the best of things" and "deluded?" Who are you to tell me my own perceptions about my life are wrong?

I'm sitting here right now with a pain level that would cause most people to scream, recovering from bronchitis, and with additional pain because I just had a tooth pulled yesterday...and I'm STILL quite content with my life. I have a cup of fantastic Sumatran dark roast sitting next to me. I just discovered a new website full of Minecraft mods. I'm in the middle of a humorous fantasy book. I got a great night's sleep. I'm anticipating the veggie soup I'm making for dinner. Life is good. You know why? Because I'm not dwelling on my depression and my pain. I refuse to define myself by my disabilities. In fact, if you asked me to describe myself using ten words, "disabled" wouldn't even make the list. It would be an afterthought.

I strongly suggest you get up off your millennial ass, cut the existential angst act, and go do something with your life. Define yourself by what you DO, by what you ARE...not by what events chance to happen to you. If I defined myself by all the hell I'd been through in my 52 years, I'd crawl into a hole and die. Guess what? Life isn't fair. Life is a bitch, and it's tough. YOU have to be tough too. Stop waiting for the Happiness Fairy to magically improve your life. That's YOUR job. Go do it.

Edited to correct a spelling error before Gord catches it. :mrgreen:


In regards to your final statement which was an attempt to offer me some words of advice and encouragement, I have never, in my whole entire life, experienced the form of happiness and value that you have described. I have done many things in my life even during repeated moments of depression/misery due to ocd thoughts and traumatic events. I have still not obtained the real quality of perceptual happiness and good value/worth in my life that you are describing. This has led me to the conclusion that it is all a lie and that your version of happiness and good value/worth is nothing more than a deluded lie no different than the rest of the deluded lies society teaches us.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26750
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Omniverse / Matt MSV / troll thread

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Jul 27, 2017 5:33 am

Omniverse AKA Matt MSV7 AKA Matt MSV wrote:In regards to your final statement which was an attempt to offer me some words of advice and encouragement, I have never, in my whole entire life, experienced the form of happiness and value that you have described.
You are lying again. You are loading up new compositions, which you said you could not do as you were too depressed.

Omniverse AKA Matt MSV7 AKA Matt MSV wrote:I have done many things in my life.
How about go see your psychiatrist and tell him the truth about you stalking children, getting depressed when they realise you are middle aged, so you revert to trolling skeptic and science forums.

How long have you been a pervert for? It's about five years now. right?
:lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-FClkKSRN4

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26750
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Omniverse / Matt MSV / troll thread

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Jul 27, 2017 6:03 am

For lovers of total idiots.....

Here is Matt MSV7 AKA Omniverse's video where he pretended to be a tree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KrT8TNVj0s

In essence some people have been keeping copies of Matt MSV's videos before he deletes them. If you see this person.....avoid him. :D

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29411
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Gord » Thu Jul 27, 2017 6:41 am

Nikki Nyx wrote:Edited to correct a spelling error before Gord catches it. :mrgreen:

Don't worry, I'm not reading this thread. Errorise your grammatical away!
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Nikki Nyx » Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:57 pm

Omniverse wrote:In regards to your final statement which was an attempt to offer me some words of advice and encouragement, I have never, in my whole entire life, experienced the form of happiness and value that you have described. I have done many things in my life even during repeated moments of depression/misery due to ocd thoughts and traumatic events. I have still not obtained the real quality of perceptual happiness and good value/worth in my life that you are describing. This has led me to the conclusion that it is all a lie and that your version of happiness and good value/worth is nothing more than a deluded lie no different than the rest of the deluded lies society teaches us.

But society did NOT teach me happiness. If I relied on society's definition of happiness, I'd be miserable like you.

Our culture teaches us that happiness is shallow and fleeting, dependent upon:
• physical attractiveness
• bank account
• material possessions
• job title
• physical accomplishments
• other people's perceptions of us
...and all of that is absolutely 100% dead wrong.

The most stunning supermodels in the world obsess over the flaws they perceive in themselves.
The wealthiest people in the world are greedy, neurotic {!#%@} focused on piling up more wealth.
Tune in to YouTube to watch people grievously injure themselves in misguided attempts to break records.
Are any of these people "happy?" No. They're constantly chasing some undefinable, unattainable goal.

Meanwhile, they're oblivious to what's happening right in front of their faces. Their obsessions blind them to the fact that they don't even know their own children. They've forgotten the simple contentment of sitting in the sun with a canine companion. Or the nostalgic enjoyment of a homemade hot chocolate while watching winter's first snowfall. Like you, they can't even define "happiness," because they don't pay attention to their own emotions, which are facile and shallow and described in monosyllables...sad, mad, glad.

Emotions occur in degrees, not extremes. "Angry" is not homogenous; it includes shades of involvement from annoyed to enraged. And "happy" is the same way. No one is orgasmically happy all the time, and society would be dysfunctional if everyone was. Happiness ranges from content to overjoyed, with hundreds of states of being in between the two.

So if you're chasing "overjoyed" all the time, you will be chronically disappointed. Learn to define happiness, learn that society doesn't choose what makes you happy, and learn to recognize all the states of being encompassed in happiness.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Nikki Nyx » Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:58 pm

Gord wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:Edited to correct a spelling error before Gord catches it. :mrgreen:

Don't worry, I'm not reading this thread. Errorise your grammatical away!

Oh, no. I detest making grammatical errors. I'm the person that texts using standard English. :mrgreen:
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Thu Jul 27, 2017 5:28 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:
Omniverse wrote:In regards to your final statement which was an attempt to offer me some words of advice and encouragement, I have never, in my whole entire life, experienced the form of happiness and value that you have described. I have done many things in my life even during repeated moments of depression/misery due to ocd thoughts and traumatic events. I have still not obtained the real quality of perceptual happiness and good value/worth in my life that you are describing. This has led me to the conclusion that it is all a lie and that your version of happiness and good value/worth is nothing more than a deluded lie no different than the rest of the deluded lies society teaches us.

But society did NOT teach me happiness. If I relied on society's definition of happiness, I'd be miserable like you.

Our culture teaches us that happiness is shallow and fleeting, dependent upon:
• physical attractiveness
• bank account
• material possessions
• job title
• physical accomplishments
• other people's perceptions of us
...and all of that is absolutely 100% dead wrong.

The most stunning supermodels in the world obsess over the flaws they perceive in themselves.
The wealthiest people in the world are greedy, neurotic {!#%@} focused on piling up more wealth.
Tune in to YouTube to watch people grievously injure themselves in misguided attempts to break records.
Are any of these people "happy?" No. They're constantly chasing some undefinable, unattainable goal.

Meanwhile, they're oblivious to what's happening right in front of their faces. Their obsessions blind them to the fact that they don't even know their own children. They've forgotten the simple contentment of sitting in the sun with a canine companion. Or the nostalgic enjoyment of a homemade hot chocolate while watching winter's first snowfall. Like you, they can't even define "happiness," because they don't pay attention to their own emotions, which are facile and shallow and described in monosyllables...sad, mad, glad.

Emotions occur in degrees, not extremes. "Angry" is not homogenous; it includes shades of involvement from annoyed to enraged. And "happy" is the same way. No one is orgasmically happy all the time, and society would be dysfunctional if everyone was. Happiness ranges from content to overjoyed, with hundreds of states of being in between the two.

So if you're chasing "overjoyed" all the time, you will be chronically disappointed. Learn to define happiness, learn that society doesn't choose what makes you happy, and learn to recognize all the states of being encompassed in happiness.


Actually, I think there might be a way to discover evidence for my theory. This topic isn't the right topic to talk about my whole theory. Instead, refer to this topic since this is the absolute best one:

viewtopic.php?f=30&t=28445&p=593188#p593188

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29411
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Gord » Thu Jul 27, 2017 9:15 pm

Image
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE


Return to “Belief, Nonbelief, and Philosophy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest