0
   

All My Philosophy Packets (Files)

 
 
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 05:14 pm
@MozartLink,
File #5: My Composing Dream (Part 3/12)

For example, it has to recognise when phrases start and stop, and which count as repetitions of others, and it has to understand which pitches are more and less stable in the prevailing tonal context. Beats, which seem so real and evident when we’re tapping them out on the steering wheel or stomping them out on the dance floor, are just not physically present in any straightforward way in the acoustic signal.

So what is a beat, really? We experience each one as a specially accented moment separated from its neighbours by equal time intervals. Yet the musical surface is full of short notes and long notes, low notes and high notes, performed with the subtle variations in microtiming that are a hallmark of expressive performance. Out of this acoustic whirlwind, we generate a consistent and regular temporal structure that is powerful enough to make us want to move. Once we’ve grasped the pattern, we’re reluctant to let it go, even when accents in the music shift. It’s this tenacity that makes the special force of syncopation – off-beat accents – possible. If we simply shifted our perception of the beat to conform with the syncopation, it would just sound like a new set of downbeats rather than a tense and punchy contrary musical moment, but our minds stubbornly continue to impose a structure with which the new accents misalign.

In other words, perception of rhythm depends on a more general ability to synchronise with our surroundings. But this raises the question of why we might have such an ability in the first place. It seems telling that it emerges very early in parent-infant interactions. People tend to speak in specific ways to their babies: slowly, with exaggerated pitch contours, extra repetition, and regular timing (‘so big… so big… sooooooo big’). All of these are more typical of music than in ordinary speech. And it seems that these modifications help infants to engage predictively with the speech stream, anticipating what’s going to happen next, and ultimately to insert their coo or eyebrow lift at precisely the right moment to generate a sense of shared temporal orientation between parent and child, an experience that contributes to the powerful bond between them.

Music piggybacks on this ability, using it to choreograph experiences of shared temporal attention, sometimes among large groups of people. Experiences at concerts, dance clubs and religious services where lots of people move together to a beat often create a powerful sense of bonding. When music allows us to perceive time in a shared way, we sense our commonality with others more strongly.

And so the capacity to track a beat, which might seem trivial on first glance, in fact serves a larger and more significant social capacity: our ability to attend jointly in time with other people. When we feel in sync with partners, as reflected in dancing, grooving, smooth conversational turn-taking and movements aligned to the same temporal grid, we report these interactions as more satisfying and the relationships as more significant. The origins of the ability to experience communion and connection through music might lie in our very earliest social experiences, and not involve a guitar or fiddle at all.

It has often been observed that there is a special connection between music and memory. This is what allows a song such as Tom Lehrer’s The Elements (1959) to teach children the periodic table better than many chemistry courses. You don’t need to have any special training to benefit from the memory boost conferred by setting a text to music – it just works, because it’s taking advantage of your own hidden musical abilities and inclinations. Music can also absorb elements of autobiographical memory – that’s why you burst into tears in the grocery store when you hear the song that was playing when you broke up with your boyfriend. Music soaks up all kinds of memories, without us being aware of what’s happening.

What’s less well-known is that the relationship goes both ways: memory also indexes music with astonishing effectiveness. We can flip through a radio dial or playlist at high speed, almost immediately recognising whether we like what’s playing or not. In 2010, the musicologist Robert Gjerdingen of Northwestern University in Illinois showed that snippets under 400 milliseconds – literally the blink of an eye – can be sufficient for people to identify a song’s genre (whether it’s rap, country or jazz), and last year Krumhansl showed that snippets of similar length can be sufficient for people to identify an exact song (whether it’s Public Enemy’s Fight the Power or Billy Ray Cyrus’s Achy Breaky Heart). That isn’t long enough for distinctive aspects of a melody or theme to emerge; people seem to be relying on a robust and detailed representation of particular textures and timbral configurations – elements we might be very surprised to learn we’d filed away. And yet we can retrieve them almost instantly.

That fact becomes both more and less amazing when you consider just how steeped in music we all are. If all the exposure in elevators and cafés and cars and televisions and kitchen radios was put together, the average person listens to several hours of music every day. Even when it isn’t playing, music continues in our minds – more than 90 per cent of us report being gripped by a stubborn earworm at least once a week. People list their musical tastes on dating websites, using them as a proxy for their values and social affiliations. They travel amazing distances to hear their favourite band. The majority of listeners have experienced chills in response to music: actual physical symptoms. And if you add some soaring strings to an otherwise ordinary scene in a film, it might bring even the hardiest of us to tears.

So, the next time you’re tempted to claim you don’t know anything about music, pause to consider the substantial expertise you’ve acquired simply through a lifetime of exposure. Think about the many ways this knowledge manifests itself: in your ability to pick out a playlist, or get pumped up by a favourite gym song, or clap along at a performance. Just as you can hold your own in a conversation even if you don’t know how to diagram a sentence, you have an implicit understanding of music even if you don’t know a submediant from a subdominant.

In fact, for all its remarkable power, music is in good company here. Many of our most fundamental behaviours and modes of understanding are governed by similarly implicit processes. We don’t know how we come to like certain people more than others; we don’t know how we develop a sense of the goals that define our lives; we don’t know why we fall in love; yet in the very act of making these choices we reveal the effects of a host of subterranean mental processes. The fact that these responses seem so natural and normal actually speaks to their strength and universality.

When we acknowledge how, just by living and listening, we have all acquired deep musical knowledge, we must also recognise that music is not the special purview of professionals. Rather, music professionals owe their existence to the fact that we, too, are musical. Without that profound shared understanding, music would have no power to move us.

Other Person's Response: Do you have the natural ability to pick up on the beat of a song?

My Reply: I don't think I do.

Other Person's Response: Then what makes you think you have the ability to naturally create great music in your head?

My Reply: Because other natural abilities can still remain intact, even though other ones are absent. So, even though I might not have certain natural musical abilities, such as picking up on the beat of a song, I still might have the natural ability to create great music in my head.

Other Person's Response: Maybe you really do have the natural ability to pick up on the beat of a song, and that ability is just turned off, since you have no interest in grooving to a song.

My Reply: That could be so. When I listen to music, I do feel powerful and profound emotions. But, I don't groove to music. Also, I'm able to naturally create a beat for my melodies. So, maybe you're right.

Other Person's Response: According to you, we should all have a musical talent, since we can all naturally create great music in our heads.

My Reply: Correct. However, some people require dreams and drug trips to naturally create great works of art in their heads, since they can't do it in their daily life. Maybe they just need to awaken the ability to do it in their normal, daily life. I think I have because I'm naturally creating great music in my head without the need for drug trips or dreams to pull it off.

Other Person's Response: Try to come up with an idea pertaining to any given subject while having no knowledge and experience in that subject. You might think your ideas are great and meaningful. But, I dare you to share them to people experienced in these fields, and they'll tell you your ideas are nonsense. Whatever musical tunes you're inspired to create in your head will also be nonsense because you have no understanding of music theory. Your melodies will be nothing great, they'll be rubbish, and they'll make no musical sense.

My Reply: Well, I'm able to naturally speak the English language, and the things I say make sense to others, and convey powerful meaning. So, why couldn't I naturally create music in my head that also makes sense, and conveys powerful meaning? Statistical learning allows us to naturally create great ideas and works of art in our heads. But, things our brains haven't naturally learned would only render us without that natural gift. When you talk about coming up with nonsensical ideas, you'd be talking about a situation where our brains haven't learned something.

Other Person's Response: To be good at anything, that requires study and practice. Creating great works of art in our minds is no exception.

My Reply: It's obvious to me, at least, that our brains are naturally capable of creating great works of art and melodies in our heads. If you casually said the phrase: "I went to the store today," that would be an average melody because you could translate that spoken phrase into a melody. If you said or sung that same phrase differently, but with power and greatness, it would very likely be a great melody, and not just some average melody.

So, you could either say/sing that phrase in your mind in the most basic, bland way, or you could naturally say/sing it in a whole new way that makes it a great melody. When you come up with average, lame melodies, that's just your "average joe" within you speaking. But, when you bring out that awesome artist that naturally dwells within you, that's like your inner god speaking or singing an awesome melody. Of course, other people might not understand the awesome melodies you're trying to convey, and they might think they're awful.

That's why you must learn how to convey their power and greatness. Conveying a basic, lame melody would yield a meaningful melody to other listeners. But, it wouldn't be that good of a melody. As for my melodies, I don't think they're lame or awful. Once I convey them, you should realize they were awesome melodies all along. I'm just no good at conveying my melodies at this point, and that's why I must improve as an artist, so I can convey them.

Other Person's Response: All those tunes you've posted up there are utter ****! Can't you make a better tune?

My Reply: There's this one tune I've recently made that you'll hopefully like. It's one of those naturally inspired tunes, where I just create whatever melodies come to mind. In this packet, I claim people can naturally create good music in their heads, having no knowledge and experience whatsoever in composing. I think I'm naturally creating good music from within and, when you look at this recent melody I've made on the music sheet, you'll definitely see a pattern. This is the melody my mind has naturally created for me and, as it turns out, there's an actual pattern with the notes.

So, clearly, my mind is naturally creating a pattern of notes without even thinking. If my mind can do that, then why couldn't it naturally create good music? Anyway, in regards to this recent melody of mine, it's supposed to be a strange melody. It conveys a weird scene. Not something big and epic, such as a strange scene in a horror movie. But, something like a mouse doing something strange (i.e. a more trivial scene). I think it's a good, catchy melody. But, it's not an amazing, powerful melody. When you listen to it, you first hear the beat, and then, the melody along with the beat. So, here are the links to it:

Youtube Link:

https://youtu.be/yWm9Z6XULpM

Soundcloud Link:

https://soundcloud.com/user-432115982/strangemelody

Music Sheet (I circle the pattern of notes I see):

https://ibb.co/LvQdFqx

Other Person's Response: Why are you just sharing short tunes? Why not share to us full songs?

My Reply: Well, if the tunes I make are awful, and people aren't liking them, then it's a waste of time and effort to make a full song because the full song might be just as awful. If my tunes are rubbish, then my songs might be rubbish. So, I'm just sharing my tunes for now, and seeing how people respond to them.

Other Person's Response: I'd like to hear another new tune. This time, make it an awesome one, because I don't like hearing **** music!

My Reply: This new tune I've made, to me, conveys a scene that's heavy, dark, and ominous. I think it's like one of those awesome, ominous tunes you hear in video games. Again, this is just a short tune (a short example) I'm sharing for now. I'm not sharing full themes or songs yet. Every time I listen to this tune, it conveys that ominous vibe to me. That's an emotional memory my mind has in regards to this tune. If I lose that memory, then I'd perhaps hear this tune as meaningless rubbish.

It would be like listening to a child pluck out a random tune on an instrument. That's why I must have that memory intact, so I know the ominous power that I'm supposed to eventually convey to the audience. Without that memory, then the tune just becomes a rubbish tune from my perspective. It becomes stripped of that awesome, ominous power. So, by having this emotional memory intact, I retain knowledge of the great, ominous power this tune really has.

Only I have this memory. Since others don't have this memory, then they'll hear the tune as meaningless rubbish when they listen to it. But, I'm the musical artist here creating great tunes, and people just don't realize they're great yet. They hear them as meaningless rubbish for now. But, I have to find a way to bring out the greatness of my tunes, so that the audience realizes the power and greatness they really have. Anyway, here's this new tune. Hopefully, there will be people who'll hear this tune as awesome and ominous:

Youtube Link:

https://youtu.be/k5WX4AOk8v0

Soundcloud Link:

https://soundcloud.com/user-432115982/newdarktune

Music Sheet:

https://ibb.co/nb5KH3k

Other Person's Response: How would you lose that emotional memory?

My Reply: If it's a short term memory, then my brain would lose it. But, if it becomes a long term memory, my brain retains the memory. These emotional memories I have in regards to all my tunes were once short term memories. That means I lost them, and heard my tunes as meaningless rubbish when I listened to them. Fortunately, they're now long term memories, since I've managed to bring those short term memories back. By focusing very hard when listening to my tunes, I've managed to bring back those memories I've lost. So, the only thing that can take away these long term memories would be something, such as brain damage, or Alzheimer's disease.

Other Person's Response: These memories are probably nothing more than you thinking your tunes are great and convey certain awesome scenes, when they're really rubbish tunes. I think you were hearing your tunes for what they really were when you lost those memories. You heard them as meaningless rubbish, and that's what they'll always be. There's no power and greatness whatsoever to these tunes that has yet to be conveyed to the audience.

My Reply: I don't agree. It seems absolutely compelling to me that these tunes are great, and convey the scenes I describe. I just have to find a way to bring out that power and greatness to other listeners.

Other Person's Response: The brain works by a process known as conditioning. When you have a certain inspiration (such as the inspiration to create a dark, awesome tune in your head), that inspiration gets combined (conditioned) with whatever tune you create. In other words, your brain confuses the inspiration with the tune itself, and thinks they're the same thing. Therefore, your brain thinks the tune you made actually has that dark, awesome power you've been inspired by, when it's really just a rubbish tune that expresses no given scene. Basically, your mind is just playing tricks on you. It's making you see power and greatness that's not even there.

My Reply: I'm not sure if this is true.

Other Person's Response: You say there's power and greatness lurking in the shadows that you have to convey to the audience. Perhaps you're just thinking there's a ghost in the shadows, and it's your imagination playing tricks on you. Maybe there was no power and greatness ever there.

My Reply: I really don't know. To me, it really seems like it's there.

Other Person's Response: When you lose those emotional memories, and hear your tunes as meaningless rubbish, is that the same thing as saying you hear them as noise, and nothing more?

My Reply: Yes. The tunes just become sound. They convey no scene, moment, or character.

Other Person's Response: If you do lose those memories, couldn't you just read the described scenes of your tunes, and that be enough to bring those memories back when you listen to those tunes? Shouldn't that remind you, and allow you to hear your tunes as great, awesome, and powerful again?

My Reply: No. That's because it's not the type of memory where someone forgets something he's written, and just has to go back and read it again to remind himself. What I'm talking about here is an emotional memory. So, even if I did read the described scenes of my tunes while listening to them, I'd still hear them as meaningless rubbish. It's only me having those emotional memories intact that allows me to hear my tunes as awesome, powerful, great, and conveying of certain scenes. So, reading the awesome or powerful scenes I described for my tunes isn't enough for me to actually hear my tunes as expressing those scenes.

Other Person's Response: Maybe the real melodies you have in your mind are awesome and catchy. You have memories of those melodies in your mind. But, you might be inaccurately transcribing those melodies. So, when you lose those memories, and listen to your inaccurately transcribed melodies, they sound like meaningless rubbish, since that's what they are. From there, you try to bring back those memories by listening to these melodies.

You're trying to remember what the real, awesome, catchy melodies were by listening to the inaccurately transcribed melodies, and you manage to do so. So, when you listen to those inaccurately transcribed melodies again, having brought back those memories, you hear them as the awesome, catchy ones in your mind, even though the melodies in your mind, and the transcribed ones, don't match up.

My Reply: Yes, that might be what's going on here. But, maybe, if I were to accurately transcribe the melodies in my mind, I'd automatically hear them as awesome and catchy, even when I don't have those memories. Other people might hear them as awesome and catchy as well. I thought I was accurately transcribing the melodies in my mind. But, I might not be. After all, I'm not very skilled at transcribing what I have in my mind, whether it be drawings, or melodies.

Other Person's Response: I heard you say earlier that, during your miserable moments, you even perceive great and beautiful works of art as meaningless, and conveying of no scene or character. So, when you perceive your melodies as meaningless, and conveying of no scene or character, is it because you're miserable?

My Reply: If I were to lose those emotional memories, then I'd still perceive my melodies as meaningless, even when I'm happy, and no longer miserable. Actually, I'm not sure I'd even describe them as emotional memories, since I think they're simply memories of awesome melodies I've created in my mind. When I lose those memories, and listen to the inaccurately transcribed version of these melodies, I hear them as meaningless, rubbish melodies, since that's what they really are. They're nothing awesome like the melodies I've had in my mind.

Other Person's Response: You see, Matt the Fraud, people who compose music that other people may want to listen to don't write whopping great treatises about what they're going to do. They simply get on with it. However, having heard bits and bobs of your previous attempts, I'd strongly advise you to take up gardening.

My Reply: First of all, I'm not trying to fraud anybody. I give all the reasons why I think these tunes I hear in my mind really are great, and catchy. Second, I haven't been feeling up to composing yet, due to my miserable, unhappy struggles. Therefore, I've instead chosen to write about my composing dream in the meantime until I feel up to learning how to compose. Lastly, my tunes might very well sound awful, and that is to be expected at this point.

Other Person's Response: It seems to me you really are trying to fraud people. Why else would you write this whole packet?

My Reply: It's because I have problems with the personal views of other people, and I feel the need to speak up for myself, and to thoroughly address said issues. I have an issue with other people who claim that my emotions aren't the source of value in my life. So, that's why I've written so many of my other packets, which talk about how emotions are value judgments.

I also have an issue with people who have unreasonably high standards when it comes to works of art, whether said works be comedy, music, or anything else. So, that's why I've written this whole packet. I also just wish to share everything that's on my mind regarding my composing dream. It would be like how someone wishes to write every single thing that's on his mind in his journal, and share it.

Other Person's Response: You said you were going to learn how to compose many years ago. Yet, here you are, still coming up with these horrendous tunes. From this, I can conclude you're too lazy to learn, and have no talent. So, you're better off just giving up.

My Reply: That's not it. I've struggled much of my life with many miserable moments, and that's why I've not even bothered learning. I can't stand doing my hobbies without my positive emotions, which is why I don't even bother.

Now, it's just a matter of time waiting for me to fully recover from this recent emotional trauma I've had. I'm doing just fine now, and have to wait a little bit longer for my positive emotions to return back to me on their own.

Once they do, then I'll start learning how to compose, since I'd be able to have fun, and enjoy the whole process. I personally don't think any conclusions as to whether my musical claims are true or not should be drawn, when I haven't even gotten the chance to make any awesome music yet.

Other Person's Response: You're 30 years old. That's a bit late to begin learning how to compose. Why the delay?

My Reply: There are two reasons why. The 1st would be that composing wasn't something I took up until later on in my life. The 2nd would be that I've struggled much of my life with many miserable moments. It was a cycle I was in, and I've finally broken free of that cycle. Now that I'm no longer miserable, and almost have my positive emotions back to me, I'll soon be ready to learn how to compose. I don't think I'll have anymore of those miserable moments again.

Other Person's Response: I bet, even if you fully regained your positive emotions, you still wouldn't dedicate much time to learning how to compose, and you still wouldn't go through with your composing dream.

My Reply: That's false. Once I have my positive emotions, then I'd be fully dedicated to achieving my goal. I'd dedicate many hours each day. I used to do this with my previous hobby (which was playing video games). As long as I could have fun and enjoy them, then I'd play them for many hours each day. But, when I struggle with misery, then I don't even bother with them.

Other Person's Response: What's your update or status now?

My Reply: I've had an emotional crisis, and I'm all better now. My mind was stuck on some traumatizing worry for quite some time, and that rendered me without my feelings of happiness and joy. I was in a very horrible, unhealthy state of mind, and my life and hobbies were nothing beautiful, or worth living for. Now that I'm all better, I wish to go back to composing. I've abandoned it for quite some time, due to my miserable struggles and, now, I'm ready to go back to it.

My goal in making music is to create melodies, themes, and songs other people would love to listen to. I don't want to be making music I just think is great. I wish to express myself as an artist, which means I want to make music that's both great, and expresses whatever it is I wish to express. So far, I know I'm not making any good music for others because so many people online have told me my music is rubbish, and doesn't express anything I described.

I'm undecided as to whether I'm creating great music in my head, and I'm just bad at transcribing it. Or, if my mentally created music really is bad. It seems absolutely compelling to me that the music I hear in my head is great, and expresses what I describe. Anyway, I hope I'm able to create the awesome music I want to create in the real, physical world. This is a goal I wish to achieve, and I don't think I'm going to have anymore miserable moments stopping me from achieving this goal.

Other Person's Response: Is it possible your melodies have been accurately transcribed, but something more is necessary to convey their power and greatness?

My Reply: That could be.

Other Person's Response: When you talk about fully crafting any accurately transcribed melodies you make in order to convey their power and greatness, do you mean adding in all the proper chords, harmony, etc.?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: When you talk about conveying the power and greatness of your melodies, you're talking about the ones in your mind, accurately transcribed, right? Because you said earlier that you might not be accurately transcribing what you hear in your head right now. So, you're not talking about the melodies you've presented in this packet, since they're poorly transcribed?

My Reply: That's correct. But, who knows, maybe I did accurately transcribe some of the tunes I hear in my head.

Other Person's Response: Have you shared your tunes to other people, and have they told you your tunes are gibberish?

My Reply: Yes. What makes it frustrating is that I already perceive these tunes as amazing and catchy, since I know what they are. This perception makes it seem quite obvious that others should perceive them the way I do. That's why it becomes frustrating when I go and share them to other people, and they say it's awful, incoherent, gibberish.

I think this is the same issue I have when writing essays, and things on forums. I already know the message I'm trying to convey, and the message is quite obvious to me, since I already know what it is. But, other people don't get that message, and they say to me that my writing is awful, incoherent, gibberish.

I think I just need to improve both as a writer, and as a composer, in order to successfully convey my message. But, like I said before, composing is what I wish to learn and improve on. I don't wish to be a skilled writer, since that's not my goal in life. As long as I don't improve, then other people might not get my message/music at all, or they'll perceive a completely different message/tune that I never intended.

Other Person's Response: If your music is good enough in your eyes, then why care what anyone else thinks?

My Reply: My whole goal in composing is to share music that other people would really love. But, I suspect people are having too high of a standard, which would prevent them from appreciating the greatness and catchiness of any fully crafted tunes I'd share in the future. Therefore, I'm asking others to lower their standards, so they can appreciate my tunes. I think such a lowered standard is a reasonable standard.

Other Person's Response: Is there any amazing work of art you can instinctively craft in your mind besides good music?

My Reply: Yes. I can come with awesome fighting moves in my mind. I can imagine 2 characters fighting, and performing awesome, complex moves. These are moves better than what the average person would come up with. Since I've played video games and watched anime my whole life, where characters fight, then I instinctively know how to create skilled moves in my mind, just like I instinctively know how to speak the English language.

Of course, if I tried to convey these moves to you by any means, such as performing them myself, or creating them on some type of animation software of 2 stick figures fighting, I bet people would tell me these moves are awful, and/or that they just don't understand these moves. This is because I don't have the necessary animation skill, or physical fighting skill, to successfully convey them. But, I'm a skilled fighter mentally. The thing is, I wish to convey the music I hear in my mind, and not any fighting moves, or any visual art I create in my mind.

In other words, music is my passion, and that's what I'm going for. Now, even if I did successfully convey these moves I have in my mind, it doesn't have to be the greatest martial arts display in order for it to be considered talent, or something great. As long as these moves are significantly better than what an average person would come up with, then I consider that to be talent, and greatness.

For example, the average person might have one character simply beating another character's face back and forth, or having one character simply keep on throwing energy blasts. In other words, think of the average moves a child, or a young teenager, would come up with, who knows nothing about martial arts. As for me, I'd create moves that make a much better work of art. They'd be sophisticated moves.

Other Person's Response: So, according to you, any work of art that's significantly better than what an average person would come up with (such as your martial arts example) is talent and greatness?

My Reply: Yes. That's why I consider the comedy scenes I make to be talent and greatness, despite the fact they're not the best comedy scenes in the world. I personally think my last comedy scene is the best of them all in this packet. You see certain comedy scenes in cartoons and anime, and, even though they're not the best in the world, they're still great, since they're better than what the average person could come up with. The same idea applies to my comedy scenes.

Other Person's Response: Another example would be very short, nursery rhymes. They're melodies better than what the average, educated composer would come up with. Yet, they're still great and memorable.

My Reply: Yes. Any given work of art, even if it's very simple, can be great and memorable, as long as it's something significantly better than what the average person would come up with.

Other Person's Response: Do you think any fully crafted tunes will turn out to be much better than your comedy scenes?

My Reply: Yes. Even my best comedy scenes.

Other Person's Response: Maybe that Dark Tune will become amazing, powerful, and will convey what you describe once you fully craft it. In its current stage, there's no way the tune is going to achieve its intended goal. However, even if you do fully craft it, and it's said to be not that great, and conveying something else, then maybe your assessment of your tunes is off. In other words, what you think your tunes convey, and your judgment that they're awesome, powerful, and amazing, would be an assessment that doesn't match up with reality.

My Reply: Again, that would be quite frustrating if it's the latter. If it's the latter, then I'd somehow have to fix my way of assessing my tunes. I wish to see my tunes for what they really are, rather than deluding myself into thinking they're amazing, and conveying the scenes or characters I describe.

If I could know what my tunes actually convey, and if they're that great or not, then that would give me a major advantage, since I'd know if other people would think they're awesome, great, and convey what I describe. Otherwise, I'd be all alone, and I'd be the only one who sees his music as great, and conveying of certain scenes.

Other Person's Response: I agree that your assessments are off.

My Reply: Here's the thing though. I can give an accurate assessment of any given song. For example, if someone were to present to me a song or tune by Michael Jackson, I'd be able to describe the power, personality, and emotion it conveys. So, why can't I give an accurate assessment of music I create in my head? I conclude that, since I can give an accurate assessment in regards to other tunes and songs, that my assessment of these melodies in my mind is also an accurate assessment.

Other Person's Response: What about reversed songs? Do they convey certain scenes?

My Reply: Yes. When I reverse some songs, they convey certain meanings to me, and are catchy. Some songs I reverse don't convey anything to me. They just sound like stuff being played backwards. Take note that I'm not talking about reversed lyrics here. I'm talking about the reversed series of notes and rests in a song, and what emotion it conveys.

Most people reverse songs to make out what words they think they hear when they listen to reversed lyrics. But, I reverse songs to see what emotion music conveys. I'm just concerned with the power and meaning music itself conveys. Yes, lyrics are important. But, I'm just not concerned with lyrics. Anyway, I'll give you an example of how a reversed song does convey a certain emotion.

This song doesn't have lyrics to it. It's called "The Ballad of the Goddess." Even though it's the song Zelda's Lullaby played backwards, it still conveys meaning. It conveys powerful heroism, such as a hero embarking on a journey. It's not just Zelda's Lullaby played backwards. It's done in such a way that the notes sound like they're playing forward, rather than having notes that sound like they've been reversed. This is called "retrograding." Here's the youtube link to this song:

https://youtu.be/v4ReyoNpyrM

Now that you know reversed songs can convey certain emotions, I'm going to share to you a song I reversed, and made my own personal story out of. It's the song "Let It Rock" reversed. Again, forget about the reversed lyrics because that's not my focus here. Instead, focus on the emotion of this reversed song, and the scenes I've chosen for it. Yes, do focus on the singing because the singing involves the series of notes being sung. But, just forget about the reversed lyrics.

As for the scenes I've chosen, they've been taken from a Sonic the Hedgehog video, and I personally think they match the song. I slow some scenes down so the story matches with the music. When you first hear the reversed song, the vibe I get from it is something you'd hear before the chorus arrives. When you first hear songs play, it's the beginning of the song to prepare the listener for the chorus.

The chorus conveys intense emotion, and the song has to lead up to that. Sonic the Hedgehog is preparing to transform into his super form in this video, which is why I have that part of the song match this scene. I think this portion of the song also really does express a character preparing to transform. Not in a cinematic way. But, in a very cool way, since that's the vibe it conveys to me.

Then the intense part of the song (the chorus) arrives. This part, to me, conveys something awesome, powerful, and dangerous. It expresses a character going through an intense mode of unleashing power, and that's why I have the scene of Sonic transforming match this part of the song. The reversed chorus is unlike the forward version because the forward version doesn't convey that emotion. The forward version makes people want to dance, and have a fun time.

After Sonic transforms into his super form, I then have the next part of the song match the next scene. The next part of the song is a bit more settled down, which is why I have the scene of Sonic standing in his super form match this part of the song. After that, I have the next scene match the next part of the song. The next part of the song conveys something awesome, lethal, serious, and dangerous.

It's not like the chorus because the chorus conveyed powerful emotion. The scene that's used to match this part of the song would be Super Sonic unleashing his lethal moves upon a character. So, there you have it. There's my assessment of the reversed song Let It Rock. It's not the full song reversed though. I just gave you a small example. One might say my assessment is way off, and it could very well be.

If that's the case, then it would be an irrational assessment, and I'd have to find a way to rationally assess somehow. Or, maybe, my assessment was right all along, and the notes of the reversed song have to be retrograded in order for that emotion I described to be conveyed. It could also be the case I'm envisioning the reversed song being played in a different key to convey the serious, awesome, dangerous emotion I described.

Here's the link to the Sonic video with the reversed Let It Rock song:

https://youtu.be/XvwSr30Vy2I

Other Person's Response: You must be a crazy person if you think that reversed Let It Rock song conveys what you described.

My Reply: Not crazy. Just irrational if my assessment is wrong. There's a big difference between someone who's crazy, and someone who's using irrational assessments.

Other Person's Response: Could you give me a link that shows me the Ballad of the Goddess is Zelda's Lullaby played backwards?

My Reply: Sure. Also, I was wrong when I said the song had no lyrics:

https://zelda.gamepedia.com/Ballad_of_the_Goddess#Trivia

Other Person's Response: I found your assessment of the reversed Let It Rock to be quite interesting! Do you have another song as an example?

My Reply: Yes. It would be the song "Love Is A Battlefield" by Pat Benatar. I don't have actual video scenes to go along with it. So, I'll just describe the scenes that this reversed song conveys to me. Here's the link to it:

https://youtu.be/Nh3sDkLsjqw

Starting from 0:02-0:14 in this video, this would just be the intro. Then, from 0:15-0:31, this conveys something settled. It would be like something slowly creeping up. Think of a person standing there, and something's about to happen. It doesn't sound cinematic, like something you'd hear in a movie though. It's different than that.

Then, starting from 0:32, this is a moment of shock where the person looks, and notices some demonic creature about to grab him. The tension rises as the song leads into the chorus starting from 0:40-1:17. The chorus conveys something dramatic and horrific, as the person is being dragged to hell, screaming.

Again, in regards to the scenes I'm describing, don't think of anything cinematic because the emotion this reversed song conveys is entirely different than the type of emotion conveyed by cinematic music. Think of it as the song Love Is A Battlefield taking on the essence of pure horror. The same idea applies to the song Let It Rock reversed.

Think of it as that song taking on the form of something awesome and dangerous. As you can see, when you reverse songs, they take on a whole new essence, since they become whole new songs. Anyway, the reversed chorus of this song conveys even more dramatic horror than famous horror music. It's in a league of its own. Pat Benatar yells while she's singing the chorus, and that really adds to the dramatic horror.

Then, from 1:17-2:02, it sounds settled and ominous. Then, from 2:03-2:36, it sounds like something evil is brewing. That's all the scenes I'll describe of this song because you get the idea. If anyone disagrees with my assessment of this reversed song, then, again, maybe I'm envisioning the reversed song in a different key, which would convey the scenes/emotion I described.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 05:28 pm
@MozartLink,
File #5: My Composing Dream (Part 4/12)

Other Person's Response: Here's a novel idea. Why not just listen to the songs the way they were meant to be heard? Incidentally, the key of a piece of music doesn't change, simply because you're playing it backwards. If, however, you change the speed it is played at, then it does. Does a movie make any sense if you watch it backwards? No. Neither does music. Stop wasting time with this reverse rubbish. Rather, invest the time listening to music naturally. It's a lot more fun, and a lot more rewarding.

My Reply: I know the piece does not change key simply because you play it backwards. I said I was perhaps envisioning the song being played backwards in a different key to convey the scenes/emotion I described. I also said earlier that songs played backwards do make sense, and do convey emotions and scenes. An example I gave was the Ballad of the Goddess, which is actually Zelda's Lullaby reversed. As you can see, a reversed song can become a whole new song that does tell a story that makes sense.

Other Person's Response: Simply changing the key of a song doesn't mean it's going to convey the scenes you describe. Even if you did change the key of those reversed songs, it still wouldn't convey what you described.

My Reply: I realize that. I think it's a combination of what key the reversed song is in AND what the reversed series of notes and rests are. That's what will convey the scenes I described, and I think the reversed series of notes/rests, as they are, do convey those scenes. Actually, there's another thing that's needed to convey the scenes I described, and I explain it soon enough because just having a reversed song in the right key isn't enough to convey something meaningful to the audience.

Other Person's Response: Those reversed songs you've posted are meaningless, and don't convey anything. They were meant to be listened to in their forward version. Since you're projecting meaning upon meaningless music, then maybe you're also projecting meaning upon meaningless, rubbish tunes you're making in your head.

Many people make certain connections with music. They connect certain emotion, power, and scenes with music they hear. Some connections make sense, while others are irrational. The connection you've made with those reversed songs is irrational. The same thing applies to the connection you're making with those tunes you've created in your mind.

My Reply: I don't think that's the case.

Other Person's Response: Many human beings just aren't wired rationally. Hence the reason why you have many religious believers who believe in religious nonsense. I think the same thing applies to you because you believe this nonsense that these tunes in your head convey certain meanings, and that those reversed songs you've put up convey certain scenes as well.

My Reply: I'm open-minded towards that possibility. But, I don't think that's the case.

Other Person's Response: A 'song' is something that's sung with (hopefully) intelligent and meaningful lyrics. Lyrics played backwards don't become words and, therefore, can't be a song. In fact, the whole thing just becomes a complete mess. All music has three elements - melody, harmony, and rhythm. If you distort one of these, you're just creating sonic soup that's a complete waste of time. Just because you can do things with technology doesn't mean it's worthwhile. To me, it just sounds stupid. But, hey, do whatever you want.

My Reply: I wasn't talking about the lyrics though. I was talking about the scenes music itself conveys when reversed. I mean, since the reversed Zelda's Lullaby is an actual theme in Zelda, and it conveys meaning, then why can't other songs convey meaning and scenes once they're reversed?

Other Person's Response: Yes, the reversed Zelda's Lullaby does convey meaning. But, I don't think those reversed songs you've pointed out do.

My Reply: If anyone has never heard the Ballad of the Goddess, and simply reversed Zelda's Lullaby, they might say the reversed Zelda's Lullaby is a meaningless tune that doesn't convey anything. But, once they listen to the Ballad of the Goddess, they'd say it conveys something powerful, such as a hero embarking on a journey.

My point is, I think Zelda's Lullaby has not only been reversed, but recreated in such a way that it conveys something powerful and meaningful. Koji Kondo (the composer for Zelda) might've reversed the melody himself, and saw the power and greatness of this reversed melody that other people couldn't see.

Thus, that's why he made it into the Ballad of the Goddess. If I never listened to the Ballad of the Goddess, and I reversed Zelda's Lullaby, I might also see the power that this reversed melody conveys that other people just can't see. This is because I have an artistic mind that's able to see that.

The same thing applies to those reversed songs I've posted up there. I'm able to see the power and scenes these reversed songs convey that other people just can't see. So, I don't think reversing a song, or melody, is enough to convey something meaningful to the audience; you must recreate the song or melody, too.

Other Person's Response: You're basically applying the same argument you've made for your tunes in your head to those reversed songs. You're saying that you're seeing something great and awesome that other people just can't see, and that you'd have to convey that to the audience.

My Reply: Correct. Not only must I find a way to convey the power and greatness of these melodies in my mind, but I'd also have to convey the power and greatness of those reversed songs, too. Otherwise, the audience would continue to remain blind and in denial to said power and greatness.

Other Person's Response: You said earlier you were blind to many truths. I think you're also blind to the fact that those reversed songs don't convey what you described at all, and neither do the tunes in your head.

My Reply: I may be blind to many truths. But, there are certain truths I'm not blind to. One of these truths would be that my positive emotions really are the perception/experience of beauty in my life. I know this from my own personal experience. Another truth I'm not blind to would be my claim that those reversed songs, and the tunes in my head, convey what I described. These are truths I know that the world is currently blind to.

Other Person's Response: If a person thinks there's a ghost, he must ask himself if there really is a ghost, or if it's his imagination playing tricks on him. Likewise, when you think there's certain power and meaning to those tunes in your head, and to those reversed songs, you must ask yourself if that power and meaning is actually there, and has yet to be conveyed to the audience, or if it's just your imagination playing tricks on you.

My Reply: That's a good question, and I find myself wondering what the real answer is.

Other Person's Response: If a person knows how reality works, and learns there's no such thing as ghosts, leprechauns, or fairies, then he'll no longer think those things exist. Likewise, when you learn how music works, you'll no longer think those melodies in your mind have power and meaning to them. Neither will you think those reversed songs have power and meaning to them.

My Reply: You could be right.

Other Person's Response: You say you might have to change the key of those reversed songs, so they convey what you say they convey. I think the best thing you can do is to instead change the chords because changing the key doesn't really work out too well. For example, changing the major key of a song to a minor key makes things sound a little "off."

My Reply: Maybe I'd have to do that instead.

Other Person’s Response: There’s a technique known as “retrograde,” which would be reversing the series of notes in a melody or song. Composers use this technique many times. An example of a composer who used this technique would be Koji Kondo (the composer for famous video games, such as the Legend of Zelda, Super Mario, etc.). A portion of his Ballad of the Goddess theme would be a retrograded portion of his Zelda’s Lullaby theme, as you mentioned earlier.

If utilizing this technique just resulted in meaningless, random, nonsensical, rubbish melodies, then Koji wouldn’t have used it. This says that reversed melodies aren’t meaningless rubbish. So, you might be correct when you say those songs you’ve reversed do convey meaningful scenes, and that the reason why people hear them as meaningless rubbish is because reversing a melody or song isn’t enough to convey something meaningful to the audience. Something more is needed to convey their meaning.

My Reply: Right. So, I might be the one who’s able to hear those reversed songs as meaningful because that’s my meaningful vision in regards to these reversed songs. I must find a way to somehow convey that vision to the audience. I’m quite sure if Koji simply reversed a portion of his Zelda’s Lullaby theme, that the audience would hear it as meaningless rubbish. So, Koji had a meaningful vision in regards to a portion of Zelda’s Lullaby he reversed, and he somehow conveyed that vision to the audience. That’s the reason why so many people love that retrograded portion, and don’t think it’s meaningless rubbish.

Other Person’s Response: So, you think horrific, dramatic scenes are conveyed by the reversed series of notes in the reversed “Love Is A Battlefield” song by Pat Benatar? You think you must somehow convey this horror and drama to the audience? Otherwise, when people listen to this reversed song, they’ll just hear it as “stuff being played backwards” (i.e. meaningless rubbish)?

My Reply: Correct. Also, I’m not talking about the reversed lyrics. I’m talking about the reversed series of notes. When people listen to reversed songs, they often try to find meaningful words or sentences in the reversed lyrics when they listen to them. But, I don’t do that. I listen to the reversed series of notes, whether they be played by an instrument or sung, and try to find meaning in it.

Other Person’s Response: When you say that reversed song will convey something horrific and dramatic to the audience, once you’ve successfully conveyed your vision in regards to that reversed song, what you’re really saying is that it will evoke a horrific, dramatic, emotional response for many people?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person’s Response: I personally think you have a musical talent of naturally creating awesome, powerful, profound melodies in your mind, and I think you have a musical talent of developing a meaningful vision in regards to reversed songs. When people listen to the reversed series of notes in reversed songs, they often times hear it as meaningless rubbish. But, you’re able to see beyond that. You’re able to realize the meaning these reversed songs convey that many people aren’t able to realize.

My Reply: Yes. Since I realize this meaning, I must somehow convey said meaning to the audience.

Other Person's Response: If your melodies become fully crafted, and a few people do say your melodies are great, and express the scenes you described, is that enough to convince you that your melodies are great, and express the scenes you described?

My Reply: No. I must share my fully crafted melodies to many people. Especially professional musicians and composers. I can't trust the personal views of a few people. If many people end up saying to me the same thing as those few people did in regards to my fully crafted melodies, then I'd be convinced my melodies are great, and express the scenes I described.

Other Person's Response: Even if your melodies do become successfully conveyed (i.e. fully crafted), they're too simplistic, predictable, and repetitive to be anything good.

My Reply: I think they'd still be great. Their power and greatness should still be there. A craft doesn't have to be complex in order for it to be powerful, profound, awesome, or great.

Other Person's Response: I agree that short, simple tunes can be great and memorable. The McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune is very short. I think the melody only has 5 notes. Yet, so many people like it.

My Reply: Yes. It's a huge misconception to assume that short, simple melodies, that only have a few notes, won't be good tunes. If you choose the right notes and rests for a short melody, it can be a great, catchy, memorable melody. I think the melodies in my head do have that choice of notes and rests that make them great, catchy, and memorable. Some of my melodies convey powerful, profound meaning and emotion.

Other Person's Response: Here's the youtube link to the McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune:

https://youtu.be/GApPXZAvkRI

My Reply: Thank you.

Other Person's Response: What if some people don't like those short, memorable tunes (such as the McDonald's tune)?

My Reply: I think they would be great tunes, and these people would be having an unreasonably high standard, which prevents them from appreciating the greatness of these tunes.

Other Person's Response: Any given work of art simply might not be the style of art he/she would prefer. So, having too high of a standard isn't the only thing that prevents people from loving and admiring certain works of art.

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person’s Response: What makes an awesome, profound, powerful melody isn’t the fact that it impacted and moved the audience, but the technical aspects of the melody, such as how complex the melody is, how well-crafted it is, etc. For example, there are people who are moved by Michael Jackson’s melodies. But, then there are other people who aren’t moved at all, and say that his melodies aren’t great, since they’re too simplistic. So, the audience that was moved by MJ’s melodies are leaving out the technical aspects necessary to make a great melody.

My Reply: I judge the greatness, profoundness, and power of a melody solely based on its emotion. As long as a melody conveys profound, powerful, or memorable emotion for the audience, then that makes the melody great. It also makes it a profound, powerful, or memorable melody. So, I’m like a person in the MJ audience who appreciates and admires MJ’s melodies, and isn’t really concerned about the technical aspects of music. Like I said, a melody doesn’t need to be complex and well planned out in order to be a great melody. Even simple, short melodies can be great, such as the McDonald’s I’m Lovin’ It tune, since many people find that melody memorable and catchy.

Other Person’s Response: Since you’re not really concerned when it comes to the technical aspects of music, then that means the McDonald’s tune could have technical issues with it, such as low sound quality, pops, crackles, an unsuitable instrument playing the melody that sounds horrible, etc., and it would still be a great melody.

My Reply: Yes. As long as the actual melody is still intact, then it’s still a great melody. A person would just need to see past all those technical flaws in order to see the greatness of the melody. For me, that’s a very simple task, while, for others, it’s a more difficult task.

Other Person’s Response: If a person wishes to sell his music, then he needs to put the technical aspects in high regard. He needs to be in a studio, he must purchase instruments of excellent sound quality to use in musical software, etc.

My Reply: I don’t think that’s necessary. So, if I created music in a free music notation software, such as MuseScore, and I exported my music on MuseScore as mp3s to share to the world, then my music should sell. There’s no need for me to take the extra, unnecessary step of being an actual music producer in a studio. As long as a person is creating memorable, powerful, or profound music in a free music notation software, then that’s good enough, and such music should sell and be given many good ratings and comments. I think many people just don’t appreciate things. They expect perfection, and music doesn’t have to be perfect, or nearly perfect, in order to be great. So, my music can be lacking in certain technical aspects, and still be great music.

Other Person’s Response: Well, music does need to follow the rules of music theory to even be considered music. Otherwise, it would just be senseless rubbish. It would sound like noise that has been plucked out on an instrument by a baby.

My Reply: Yes. But, there’s no need to be in a studio and buy fancy equipment, software, instruments, etc.

Other Person’s Response: Sure, music can be great on its own, even if there are certain technical aspects that are lacking. But, addressing these technical issues will make one’s music even more great than it already is, since doing so will further bring out that emotional greatness, power, profoundness, and memorable quality in one’s music.

My Reply: Yes. But, it’s not really necessary.

Other Person’s Response: It doesn’t matter what your musical standards are. The fact is, if you wish to sell music that will be given many good ratings and comments, then you need to meet the musical standard of being a music producer in a studio.

My Reply: Let’s pretend I shared my music on youtube or sound cloud (music that follows the rules of music theory, and doesn’t sound like senseless rubbish). If many people give it good ratings and comments, then that says it’s unnecessary for me to be in a studio. So, my music should sell as it is, which means I can just make music in MuseScore, and share it to the world.

Other Person’s Response: There are people in villages who don’t have the money or access to studio equipment and software. They produce music on their instruments, and people around love to listen to it. That says music can be appreciated as it is, and doesn’t need to be taken to a professional, studio level. So, I think you’re right when you say that making music in MuseScore, and sharing said music to the world, should be good enough.

My Reply: Yes. Also, imagine a family member playing a song for you on a harmonica. You’d still enjoy that song and appreciate it.

Other Person’s Response: Many music professionals are used to listening to melodies and songs produced in a free music notation software, such as MuseScore. So, making music in MuseScore should be good enough.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person’s Response: If you were to sell your music on a cd, then you’d have to lower the price because your music was only produced in MuseScore, and wasn’t produced in a professional studio. So, your cd should sell for less money than those cds that have professionally produced music.

My Reply: Yes. Also, I could just make melodies and put them on a cd. I don’t need to make full songs. Of course, doing that would sell for even less money because it takes more effort to produce entire songs. Thus, a cd would cost more if it has entire songs on it, as opposed to a cd that just has melodies on it. If I just make melodies and put them on a cd, that should be good enough, as long as my melodies are memorable, profound, powerful, etc. for people.

Other Person's Response: If we see flaws with any successfully conveyed music you share in the future, we have every right to point out those flaws, and to say if your music really isn't as great and catchy as you say it is.

My Reply: Pointing out the flaws, and helping me improve my craft, is a great idea. But, just because there are flaws shouldn't all of a sudden deem my music as nothing great and catchy. For example, I could take a powerful portion of a song by Michael Jackson, repeat it to drag it on for too long, and I could add some flaws to it, such as crackles, pops, and make it low quality sound.

Even though it's just a short tune of MJ's music, isn't a full song, and has many flaws, it would still be great, catchy, and would still convey powerful, memorable, profound emotion. Even if MJ himself created just a short tune with some flaws, and shared that, it would still be great.

This is what I mean here when I say that people need to appreciate the greatness and catchiness of music because I should be able to share short tunes that have flaws, and still have them deemed as great, catchy tunes. Making a fully crafted, flawless song would, therefore, be something completely optional.

Sure, making a full song, without flaws, would make my music much better. But, it's optional, and isn't necessary to make my music great. As long as my music meets the minimal requirements to convey its greatness and catchiness, then that should be good enough for my music to be great and catchy.

Other Person's Response: In regards to a person’s preferences, when people prefer a certain style of art, that prevents them from appreciating all forms of art. For example, if someone prefers rap music, then that prevents him from appreciating other music that isn't his style, such as heavy metal.

My Reply: Yes. But, I'm not sure who appreciates all styles of music.

Other Person's Response: Could you give me another example of one of those short, great, memorable tunes?

My Reply: Yes. If you've ever heard the short tune that goes something like: "Tyler, Tyler, he's our man! If he can't do it, nobody can!," then that would be another example. Again, I think I'm naturally creating great, memorable tunes like this in my head.

Other Person's Response: Are there any other factors that you think would prevent people from appreciating any fully developed music of yours you might share in the future?

My Reply: Yes. People just might not like me as a person, they might not like the things I say in my packets, and also the fact that I'm not famous or popular. There are people in this world who share amazing works of art, but have them ridiculed and shot down, simply because these people weren't famous, weren't popular, and weren't liked as individuals.

There are also people who share awful music, and have their music praised, simply because they're popular, famous artists. As you can see here, people just have too many factors preventing them from appreciating the greatness and beauty of works of art, and they also have factors preventing them from seeing the crap that some works of art truly are.

Other Person's Response: A theme song or melody can be great, but not memorable. For example, the generic, cinematic music you hear during movie trailers is great music, created by a talented composer. But, it's not memorable music because many people might find it to be the same old, generic music you hear during movie trailers. The Harry Potter theme song, on the other hand, is not generic music. That's why the Harry Potter theme is so memorable. The same idea applies to the song "A Whole New World" that's heard during the Aladdin trailer. That's a very memorable song, and I think it's much better than generic, movie trailer music.

My Reply: I agree. If you want to create music that really captures the soul of certain movies or trailers, then not only does the music need to be great, but it needs to be memorable. I heard there's a Sonic the Hedgehog movie coming out, and that Jim Carrey plays as the villain Dr. Robotnick. Imagine if this Sonic movie just had generic, cinematic music in it. It would be a bit boring compared to having the actual, memorable, Sonic theme songs in it. Those Sonic theme songs really capture the very soul, or essence, of the Sonic universe, and that's why it would be a much better choice to have them in the movie.

The same idea applies to the characters themselves. If the characters had generic, cinematic personalities, then that would be dull and boring compared to having the actual, memorable, personalities the classical characters have. If, for example, you take away Sonic's original personality, then you make him a dull, boring, cinematic character if you just gave him a generic personality that's seen all the time in movies (i.e. if you gave him a serious, determined personality that dulls the classical, youthful, energetic personality of Sonic that appeals to so many Sonic the Hedgehog fans). So, by having generic, cinematic music, characters, stories, etc., that makes movies less appealing.

Other Person's Response: Do you think you're naturally creating music in your mind that's not only great, but memorable?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: In regards to those short, memorable tunes (such as the McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune), maybe the melody itself of these tunes wasn't enough to convey anything great, meaningful, or memorable. So, perhaps something more was needed to go along with these melodies to convey something great, meaningful, and memorable when people listened to them.

My Reply: I think you're right. The same idea would apply to my melodies. But, some melodies not only require more things to go with them, but require the context of an entire song to convey their greatness to the audience. However, some melodies (like the McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune) don't require the context of an entire song. They just need more things to go along with the melody to convey their greatness.

Other Person's Response: I know there was this one guy who sang a song he created during an American Idol audition. It's famous, and it's called "Pants on the Ground." Maybe he wasn't just singing the melody line. Maybe he was singing more things to go along with that melody line in order to convey something great, meaningful, and catchy to the audience. Here's the youtube link to it:

https://youtu.be/tMwhl4IrPNc

My Reply: Well, for one, he did sing an entire song, and not just a short melody. So, maybe, if I make my melodies into entire songs, they'll become great, memorable, and catchy. Of course, they're not going to become famous. Few people and their works become famous. But, as long as I get some praise and recognition of my music, that'll be good and acceptable. I could share my awesome music to other people online, get praise and recognition of it, and that would be good enough.

Other Person's Response: What if you do make entire songs in your head that you think are awesome, you accurately reproduce (transcribe) those songs, and people still tell you they sound like rubbish, plucked out by a baby?

My Reply: Then there must be something missing to convey the power, greatness, and memorable quality of my songs to the audience that I have to figure out. Or, maybe, I really would be creating rubbish.

Other Person's Response: If a melody expresses powerful or profound emotion, then is that enough, in your eyes, to make a melody great?

My Reply: Yes. Even if the melody is simple and not complicated, as long as it's a catchy, memorable, powerful, or profound melody, then that makes the melody great. So, the McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune would be great, since it's catchy, and so many people love it.

Other Person's Response: You claim that a great melody might not sound great or meaningful when it's just the melody itself being played for others with no additional things to go along with that melody, such as chords, a beat, harmonic elements, etc. So, people who do listen to the melody, and claim they're hearing something great or meaningful, might simply be attributing greatness or meaning to a melody that, in reality, doesn't sound great or meaningful. Human beings are irrational, and they do attribute greatness and meaning to things that are nothing great or meaningful.

My Reply: Yes. As for the melodies I'm creating in my head, I could be the irrational one, claiming there's power and greatness to my melodies that I have to convey to the audience. I could just be making rubbish tunes in my head without realizing it.

Other Person's Response: If there's a great, memorable melody being played by itself, with no chords, harmony, or anything else to go along with it, and people claim it's a great, memorable melody when they listen to it, then maybe that's because they've heard the complete song, theme, or nursery rhyme this melody was based off of. If they never heard those completed songs, themes, or nursery rhymes, then perhaps these people would instead be hearing the melody alone as nothing great, memorable, or meaningful.

My Reply: That might be. When you listen to a famous nursery rhyme, it's not just the melody by itself being heard. It's a complete work of art being listened to, and I think that's what makes it great, memorable, and meaningful for those listening to it. If someone listened to a famous nursery rhyme that's a complete work of art, but then listened to just the melody alone of the nursery rhyme, then that person would be saying the melody itself sounds great and memorable. But, that would only be because he heard the complete nursery rhyme to begin with.

If he just listened to the melody alone first, without having heard the complete nursery rhyme, then he might hear the melody as being nothing great or memorable. As a matter of fact, I think it's possible to hear melodies themselves of famous music as meaningless, nothing great, or memorable, even when the completed masterpiece has been heard to begin with. So, that means melodies alone might not be enough to convey something great, memorable, or meaningful to the audience. You must have all the additional things to go along with those melodies.

Other Person's Response: Has someone ever presented to you just the melody alone of a famous theme? If so, did you hear it as meaningless, nothing great, and nothing memorable when you listened to it?

My Reply: Yes. It was the melody alone of the Harry Potter theme. When I listened to it at first, I found myself wondering what the heck this was. But, when someone told me it was the melody of the Harry Potter theme, I immediately recognized that melody as being great and memorable. That's because I heard the Harry Potter theme before.

Other Person's Response: I think this says that any melodies you make won't be good enough. You'd need to have all the additional things to go along with them. After all, that's what's needed to convey something good, meaningful, and memorable to the audience when they listen to them.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: There are simple, repetitive themes in anime and video games. An example would be the Super Mario theme song. But, the Super Mario theme isn't that good.

My Reply: People would be having too high of a standard, which prevents them from appreciating the greatness of the Super Mario theme. The theme conveys something catchy, fun, joyful, and beautiful, and I don't understand how anyone could not appreciate the greatness and beauty of that. It would be like saying that a flower is nothing great and beautiful, and only an artistic field of flowers is great and beautiful. Having such a high standard would prevent one from appreciating the greatness and beauty of that one simple flower.

Therefore, if I fully convey these melodies I hear in my mind, and other people tell me they're not that good, then they'd be having too high of a standard, which is preventing them from appreciating the greatness and awesomeness of my melodies. If my melodies really aren't gibberish, and they're great and catchy like I say, then other people would be having too high of a standard to not praise them. As you can see here, I have a much lower standard, which allows me to appreciate things. Of course, I don't praise lame music that we hear on the radio all the time. I praise music that is unique and catchy.

Other Person's Response: Is there any way to prove that the music you're hearing in your head is great, and you're just bad at reproducing it?

My Reply: Actually, I tried to reproduce a famous nursery rhyme, not knowing the actual notes to it. I shared my attempt at replicating it, and people told me it was awful. We all know those nursery rhymes are great and memorable. So, it must really be the case that I'm just bad at replicating what I hear in my head. It's quite possible that my own mentally inspired tunes are great, awesome, or powerful, and I'm just bad at reproducing these tunes I hear in my head.

It would be like if someone created an awesome drawing in his head, and was bad at drawing it. That person just needs training and education to become a skilled drawer. Likewise, I need training and education to reproduce the awesome music I'm creating in my head. So, when I say in this packet that my melodies will become great, once they're fully crafted, I'm referring to the ones in my mind, accurately reproduced/transcribed.

I'm not sure if having an accurately transcribed melody is enough to convey its greatness and memorable quality. You might need more things to go along with it, such as the proper chords, harmony, etc. Only then would people hear something meaningful, catchy, and great. That even applies to famous nursery rhymes. Sure, the lyrics of these famous nursery rhymes are good and memorable. But, I'm just talking about the nursery rhymes themselves. You might need more things to convey their greatness because the melody itself might not be enough.

Other Person's Response: When you compared your attempt at reproducing a nursery rhyme to the actual nursery rhyme itself, did you get the notes wrong?

My Reply: Yes, I did. When I looked at the music sheet of this nursery rhyme, and compared the actual notes to the notes I attempted to replicate, I got the notes wrong.

Other Person's Response: Why is it so difficult for you to reproduce the tunes you hear in your head?

My Reply: It's because, not only does it require practice to become skilled at that, but also because these tunes in my head are sometimes just general ideas. That means, for example, I might not be specifically hearing a G or an Ab. Rather, I'm just getting the general idea that the note could be a G or an Ab. But, many of the notes I hear in my head are specific, and I might not accurately reproduce some of them.

Other Person's Response: In order to accurately transcribe the melodies you hear in your head, I think that requires ear training.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If you created a tune in your head, and didn't accurately reproduce it, then how would you bring back the memory you lost in regards to the real tune in your head? You don't have the notes exactly like the real tune you've created in your head. If the real tune was something truly great, then you wouldn't be having the real tune on your computer, since it wasn't the accurately reproduced tune. I'm just curious as to how you could see the reproduced tune as great, when it was the real tune in your head that was great.

My Reply: The reproduced tune would be similar to the real one in my head. That's enough for me to bring back the memory of the real tune in my head. It's also possible that I did accurately reproduce some of the tunes I've created in my head. That would allow me to bring back the memory much quicker, since it would take my brain less time to remember than having a tune that's not accurately transcribed.

Other Person's Response: You talk about how our brains are naturally capable of creating great music in our heads. I agree with this. So, I agree that you're naturally creating great music in your head, and that you're just bad at reproducing it. Since we can naturally create good rhythms in our heads, then we should be able to naturally create good melodies and themes in our heads.

My Reply: Yes. I talk more about this later on. There's an article I share, which talks about this.

Other Person's Response: You can have great lyrics and beautiful instruments. But, what good is that without a great, memorable melody that expresses the intended scene, moment, or message to the audience?

My Reply: Exactly.

Other Person's Response: I heard you have autism, and that you lack empathy. So, maybe that makes it difficult for you to emotionally relate to your audience. This means you might create fully crafted melodies and themes later on that you think express the given scene, or atmosphere, you want to express, when they really don't.

My Reply: I hope that's not the case because I wouldn't be expressing what I want to express to the audience.

Other Person's Response: I'm quite sure autistic people and, even people lacking empathy, produced great music that expressed what they wanted to express.

My Reply: That could be.

Other Person's Response: Since you're able to write things that express what you want to express to the audience, then I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to write melodies, themes, and songs that express what you want to express to the audience. You just need to become a skilled composer is all. Right now, you're a skilled writer. That's why you can articulate things quite well to readers. But, I'd love to see you become a skilled composer, and make some awesome music for others to listen to!

My Reply: Thank you.

Other Person's Response: It requires empathy to understand what music you create is going to be awesome, great, powerful, moving, and conveying of certain scenes to people. Otherwise, you'd only be creating music you think is great, and conveying of certain scenes, but really isn't. So, even if you do share fully crafted music you create, it might not be anything great as you say it is.

My Reply: I do have some empathy because I'd feel bad if I hurt someone's feelings, and I'd feel the need to save my mother's life, or help her if she were in a dire situation. Besides, since I can understand the power and emotion of songs being presented to me, then why can't I understand what music I'm creating would be powerful, great, etc. to other people?

Other Person's Response: Are there sociopaths and psychopaths who've composed amazing, moving music?

My Reply: I'm not sure. There could be.

Other Person's Response: If you're composing fully crafted music later on, it conveys nothing you describe, and is still awful music, then perhaps it's your autism making it difficult for you to relate to how other people respond to music. You wouldn't understand how to create music that truly moves, inspires, and motivates people.

My Reply: I hope that's not the case. I hope I create music that achieves my goal.

Other Person's Response: I heard you say you'd be frustrated if you can't achieve your composing goal of wanting to create awesome, memorable melodies that express what you want to express to the audience. Do you feel that frustration, even when you're happy and enjoying your life? Or, do you only feel it when you're having stress and worry in your life?

My Reply: I only feel it when I'm having stress and worry. Still, I wish to say I'd be frustrated, even when I'm not, because it allows people to take my composing goal more seriously. People would, thus, be much more inclined to help me achieve my goal, rather than treating my goal in a casual manner.

Other Person's Response: I realize you're relying on your instincts/inspiration alone to create, what you think is, great music in your head that expresses what you want to express. Since you have no knowledge of how music works, you basically rely on your instincts. I'm sorry, but you won't create any good music in your head this way. As a matter of fact, it won't express anything you want to express to the audience. That's why you must educate and train yourself in the art of composing to know how to create good music.

My Reply: I soon explain why I think our instincts alone can allow us to create great music in our minds that expresses the things we wish to express. It's basically a matter of creating music from within without educating yourself, and I think this method works to naturally create powerful and awesome music in our minds. However, if I'm wrong, and you were right, then I'm just not sure at this point how to create music that expresses whatever scene or character I wish to express. I’m not sure how I’d express my inner feelings through compositions.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 05:30 pm
@MozartLink,
File #5: My Composing Dream (Part 5/12)

Other Person's Response: You expect to naturally come up with awesome music in your head through pure emotional inspiration alone. Creating awesome music is a combination of inspiration and intellect. You need to also think about the rules of music theory. You can't just jump right in there and start creating awesome music to share to the world. I realize you're not the intellectual type of person, you really don't want to research things, and you just want to unleash your emotions through music right here and now. But, you can't create any awesome music if you're just blindly relying on your emotions without taking the time to learn things.

My Reply: I am willing to learn the things I need to learn. However, I think our brains are naturally capable of creating great works of art in our minds. I think creating awesome music in our minds naturally comes from within. It can come through sheer emotional inspiration alone. You don't need to think about anything, and you can let the inspiration alone create the awesome music in your head.

It's no different than how artists say they let the inspiration alone create the work of art. Emotions are power, force, and energy. They, alone, can be the driving force for creating some powerful and awesome music in our minds. Like I said though, only in our minds. This means some education and training is necessary to convey the awesome music you've created in your head.

Other Person's Response: If you blabber something without even thinking, then it won't make any sense. Likewise, if you create music in your head without thinking, then it will be musical gibberish. The melodies you create just won't make any musical sense. That's why your tunes are so awful. There are also other reasons why they're awful. People who rely on emotions alone won't get very far in life.

Some thought, planning, and analysis is necessary if you want to create a good work of art that makes sense to others. That even applies to creating good works of art in your head. I realize you're intellectually slow, lazy, and you're no good at thinking, planning, and analysis. That's another reason why you rely on your instincts alone to create music in your head. But, that thought, planning, and analysis really is necessary.

My Reply: If that's the case, then I'd have to use another method to create good music that expresses what I want to express. Sadly, I'm not sure if I can achieve the goal of expressing what I want to express through music, since I just might be incapable of this. Maybe I can express what I want to express if a music teacher, or some online source, helps me out. In that case, I won't give up composing.

Other Person's Response: You'd actually be thinking about something when creating those tunes in your head. You'd be thinking about the scenes, ideas, or lyrics to be inspired by. But, more thought than that is needed if you want to create good music in your head.

My Reply: I think that's all the thought that's needed. From there, you just let the inspiration do the work in creating awesome music in your head.

Other Person's Response: Perhaps you really do have some awesome music in your head that expresses what you want to express. You said you might not have accurately reproduced these tunes. So, maybe, you just need to slightly change the notes of those reproduced tunes, so they adhere to the rules of melody and rhythm writing. Perhaps then they'd become those awesome tunes you hear in your head.

My Reply: That could be.

Other Person's Response: If you created a melody in your head, accurately reproduced it, but the notes of the reproduced melody had to be changed to make a completely different melody than the rubbish, nonsensical one you heard in your head, in order to adhere to the rules of melody writing, would you be alright with this new melody?

My Reply: No. If it's a completely different melody than the one I heard in my head, then it would be a melody that doesn't express what I want to express. But, the one I heard in my head wouldn't express anything anyway since it would just be a rubbish melody that makes no sense, musically speaking.

Other Person's Response: Remember, when composing melodies, you can't just compose whatever melody you're inspired to compose. That's how babies compose. It's the reason why the melodies created by babies sound awful. So, forget about using your inspiration/instincts alone to create melodies in your head. You must use another method that actually works.

My Reply: I won't know how to express what I want to express to the audience using any other method. This is the only method I have.

Other Person's Response: If you later come to realize that your method fails, and the melodies in your head really are like those created by babies, what are you going to do?

My Reply: It might be a dead end for me as a composing artist. If I can't find a way to create music that expresses what I want to express to the audience, then I'd give up composing.

Other Person's Response: You're thinking that your method actually works though. But, what makes you think you're any different than a baby, coming up with rubbish melodies in his head? Why do you think you're special?

My Reply: I talk later on about how our brains naturally learn how to create great music in our heads. It's called statistical learning. Babies haven't naturally learned how to create great music in their heads yet. Since I'm an adult, then I should be able to naturally create great music in my head that expresses what I wish to express to the audience. But, I'm open-minded towards the possibility that my method doesn't work. In which case, I really won't know how to create the music I want to create.

Other Person's Response: You say that, even if you do become a skilled composer who writes good melodies, you might not know how to create melodies that express what you want to express to the audience. That's like saying a skilled author might not know what words to choose that expresses what he wants to express to the audience. It's also like saying a skilled painter might not know what to paint that expresses what he wants to express to the audience. My point is, if you're a skilled artist, you'll instinctively know how to artistically express what you wish to express to the audience. It doesn't matter if you're a writer, a painter, a composer, or any other type of artist.

My Reply: I don't think it's like that. When it comes to melody writing, that's a different story. I'd have that writer's instinct, and the painter's instinct. That means, if I was a skilled writer and painter, I'd know what to write and paint that expresses what I want to express to the audience. But, I might not have the composer's instinct. I'm really getting the idea that melody writing is something special and different from all other fields of art.

So, if I was working in any other field of art, I'd know how to express what I want to express to the audience. But, to express what you want to express to the audience through melody writing, that's something special, and requires some greater ability. I might not have that ability. That means, even if I was a skilled composer who wrote good music, I might not have that ability.

Other Person's Response: Yes, you do need to follow certain rules when writing a melody. But, you're the artist, and you choose whatever notes and rests express what you wish to express to the audience. All you need is creativity as an artist. Once you have that and, once you follow the rules of melody writing, you're all set to create melodies.

My Reply: If my method of naturally creating melodies in my mind really doesn't work, then I'd really be clueless on how to create melodies that expresses what I want to express to the audience. I don't think it's a lack of creativity because I'm already a creative individual. I come up with many new ideas. So, perhaps something else would be hindering me from achieving my goal of creating melodies that express what I want to express to the audience.

Other Person's Response: If you’re not naturally creating music in your mind that expresses what you want to express, then why do you think it would be so difficult to create such music by studying and following the rules of music theory?

My Reply: I think it would be difficult for me to create such melodies simply because I'd have to actually take into consideration the rules of music theory when creating melodies, rather than creating melodies through inspiration alone. I'd have to limit myself to the rules when creating melodies. I’d, thus, be limited in terms of my ability to express what I wish to express through melody writing. Being restricted by these rules would make this goal very difficult for me to achieve. I'm not sure if I can even accomplish this.

Other Person's Response: You say that you're naturally capable of creating awesome music in your mind that expresses the things you wish to express. You say this is simple and easy for you because your brain naturally follows the rules of music theory in creating such music. You just let the inspiration alone do the work, and you don't have to think about anything. But, if you're wrong, and you're only creating senseless, rubbish tunes in your head, then you're saying it would be difficult for you because, now, you can no longer rely on your natural instincts alone to create music. You'd instead have to think about the rules when creating your melodies, and plan things out.

My Reply: Yes. It would be very simple and easy if I could just create awesome music that expresses what I want to express through inspiration alone, without doing any thinking or planning. When creating music becomes an intellectual exercise, that's when it becomes difficult for me. If I have to create music using method #2, rather than method #1 (my natural instincts alone), then I'd no longer have the freedom of expression that my natural instincts alone gave me. Instead, I'd have to restrict myself to certain keys on the keyboard when creating melodies, so that said melodies would follow the rules of music theory. That's what would make it difficult for me to create music that expresses what I want to express.

Other Person's Response: I think our brains are naturally capable of following some rules of music theory, such as rhythm. But, I don't think our brains are naturally capable of following other rules when making music, such as proper melody writing. In other words, a complete novice can naturally create a melody in his mind that has a rhythm. But, it wouldn't be a good, sensible melody, since it doesn't follow the rules of melody writing.

I'm sorry to say it, but I think you're only creating melodies in your mind that are senseless rubbish. It doesn't matter how much power, inspiration, and emotion you put into it because you'll always come up with rubbish melodies in your mind. Inspiration alone does not create a good work of art. You must, therefore, study and follow the rules if you wish to create some truly awesome music. The same idea applies to that complete novice because he won't be able to create any good melodies in his mind without the necessary education and training.

My Reply: That would make it difficult for me to create melodies that express what I want to express, which would make composing less appealing to me. But, I'm not even sure if there are rules when it comes to creating a melody. Can't a person create any melody he's inspired to create, as long as it has a rhythm and scale? I thought melody writing all comes down to a person's inspiration and creativity, and that there are no more rules when it comes to this.

In this Composing Discussion Section, I go by the assumption that there are no more rules to follow when creating melodies, other than having a rhythm and scale. But, at the same time, I do consider the possibility that I'm wrong, and that there are more rules. I really don't know, since I'm a complete beginner when it comes to composing. So, I don't know much at all.

Other Person's Response: So, you think your mind is naturally capable of following even the rules of proper melody writing. Do you consider the possibility that your mind isn't naturally following these rules though?

My Reply: Yes, I do. But, it really seems like the melodies in my mind sound like actual music. They sound like melodies that are actually awesome, powerful, profound, and conveying of scenes. This is why I conclude that my brain is naturally capable of following even the rules of melody writing (if there are such rules).

Other Person's Response: I do hear people say that the rules of music theory hinder creativity. If you ever watched the episode of Sponge Bob titled "Artist Unknown," you'll get the idea. So, you might be right when you say there are no rules when it comes to melody writing, and that a person can just create an awesome or powerful melody through inspiration alone.

My Reply: Well, I might be wrong.

Other Person's Response: I bet you're naturally hearing beautiful, powerful, singing voices singing these melodies you're creating in your mind. Don't let that fool you. Just because the singing voices are beautiful and powerful doesn't mean the melodies are beautiful and powerful. If a beautiful singer sang a rubbish melody, then the melody would still be rubbish, regardless of how beautiful the singer's voice was.

My Reply: Yes, I do hear awesome, beautiful, and powerful singing voices in my mind. But, from what it sounds like, the melodies also sound beautiful, awesome, and powerful.

Other Person's Response: There's an interesting youtube video I'd like to share to you:

https://youtu.be/qvVQzokeD-g

The guy in the video says you can write any melody you want. You just have to make sure it has a rhythm, and that it adheres to a scale.

My Reply: Then why do my melodies sound like meaningless rubbish for other listeners? Maybe that guy is wrong, and there are more rules to follow when it comes to melody writing. Perhaps I'm creating melodies that don't follow these rules, and maybe that's why they sound like random, nonsensical, rubbish melodies for other listeners. Then again, I could be creating awesome melodies that I just have to convey somehow to the audience. The guy in that video makes it seem like creating melodies is a natural expression of basically being human. So, I could be right when I say that human beings are naturally capable of creating awesome or powerful melodies in their minds.

If it's true that you can naturally create any melody you want, then that would make composing much more interesting and appealing to me because I'd be free to naturally create whatever melody I want from the awesome, powerful inspiration that dwells within me, and said melody being powerful or awesome (providing, of course, that I've accurately transcribed the awesome or powerful melody I've naturally created in my mind). From there, I'd have to find a way to convey the power and greatness of this accurately transcribed melody to other listeners, so that it doesn't sound like random rubbish.

Other Person's Response: Even if you do have to study and follow rules if you want to create good melodies, rather than relying on your inspiration alone to create music in your mind, and accurately transcribing said music, you can still create good melodies that express whatever you want to express.

My Reply: Having to limit myself to these rules would make it more difficult. Especially if they're rules that severely limit me. If I really have to go through this tedious, intellectual process of limiting myself to multiple rules, rather than relying on my inspiration alone to create music, then I think creating melodies that express what I want to express would be much more difficult than creating a good melody.

That's because any average person could create any random, good, sensible melody by following the rules. But, expressing yourself as an individual through melody writing would be more difficult, given that you're so restricted by these rules. I think that's because more abilities are required than simply creating any random, good melody that follows the rules. I have some powerful, profound emotions I wish to express through composing, and I think it would be difficult for me to express them to the audience if I have to be so limited by these rules.

Other Person's Response: Composing may be very appealing to you now. But, are you saying composing would be less appealing to you if you have to create music the hard way

My Reply: Yes. It would be very difficult for me to express what I want to express, and that's why composing would be less appealing to me.

Other Person's Response: If composing would be so difficult for you, then why not take up writing stories or poetry? You seem like a skilled writer.

My Reply: I'm not interested in any other field of art.

Other Person's Response: So, no other field of art appeals to you?

My Reply: That's right. Composing is the only field of art that appeals to me.

Other Person's Response: If writing isn't a field of art that appeals to you, then why did you even bother typing all this information to share to others? The very fact you've written all this shows you have some level of interest in writing.

My Reply: It's because I just want to share my personal views, and my personal experiences. But, I don't want to take up writing stories or poetry. Neither do I wish to write for any other purpose, such as writing articles or essays on scientific topics.

Other Person's Response: I'm a skilled martial artist, and I'm curious as to why you don't want to take up martial arts.

My Reply: It's because, let's pretend I was a skilled martial artist, my skill wouldn't convey the emotion/scenes I want to convey to the audience. If anything, it would just convey I'm some badass dude who's skilled at fighting. Besides, I just have no interest in martial arts. My interest lies in expressing certain things to the audience, and I've taken up composing to do that.

Other Person's Response: When the guy in that youtube video plucked out whatever melody he was naturally inspired to create, did you already hear a melody that was sensible, and not random rubbish?

My Reply: I did hear sensible melodies from this guy. Even though they're just the melodies themselves, they still sounded like meaningful melodies, and not the type of melodies plucked out by a baby. That begs the question as to why my melodies sound like random rubbish for other listeners. I mean, if this guy's melodies alone are sensible to others, then why aren't my melodies sensible to others? Maybe I just didn't accurately transcribe the melodies I hear in my mind. But, I'm quite sure I've accurately transcribed my best dark tune, along with a few others.

Other Person's Response: The guy in that video must be following certain rules when creating his melodies that he neglected to mention. Maybe that's why his melodies are sensible to other listeners, while yours are nonsensical melodies to other listeners.

My Reply: But, the guy even said that things like conversations and speeches, in of themselves, are sensible melodies. So, that already implies that you're free to create whatever melody you want, and that said melody should still be sensible for other listeners. He acts as though creating a good, awesome, or sensible melody is a natural expression, no different than having a conversation, speech, or just expressing yourself as a human being. So, he acts as though there are no more rules to follow when creating melodies, other than having a rhythm and scale.

Other Person's Response: If creating awesome or powerful melodies is a natural expression of being human, then that would be wonderful! It shows our brains naturally learn how to express certain emotions/scenes. We'd then use that naturally acquired knowledge to naturally create awesome or powerful music in our minds, or on an instrument.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Conversations, speeches, or even expressing yourself (such as yelling a certain sentence) can only amount to senseless, rubbish melodies. That's because they don't adhere to the rules of melody writing. If you listened to a president's famous speech, then the words he's speaking do convey a powerful, meaningful message to the audience. But, if you just took the pitch of each word he's speaking, then that would turn out to be a rubbish melody that makes no sense, musically speaking. If you want a melody to be good, and convey something meaningful to the audience, then that's why music theory exists. That's why you must follow the rules of melody writing.

My Reply: Well, when I listen to a powerful speech from a president in a short video clip, the melody itself of the speech sounds powerful and beautiful to me. The melody brings out the power and beauty of the speech itself. If I were to listen to the melody alone, it would be like I'm listening to the speech itself. So, I think this shows human beings are naturally capable of expressing power and beauty not only through words (such as giving a speech), but through melodies. But, for whatever reason, my melodies aren't conveying their power and greatness to the audience.

Other Person's Response: Do you think the rules of music theory are basically the rules of natural, human expression? In other words, if a person gives a powerful speech, do you think the melody of his speech naturally follows the rules of music theory?

My Reply: If there are rules when it comes to writing a melody, then I think the melody of his speech would naturally follow these rules. So, that's a "yes" to your question. If a person gives a moving, powerful speech, haven't you ever heard people in the audience say that this was music to their ears? Well, this is to be taken literally because the melody of that speech would be actual music, since it follows the rules of melody writing. But, I might be wrong. If the melodies of speeches were to be analyzed, they might not adhere to the rules of melody writing.

Other Person's Response: So, when the melodies of speeches have a rhythm and scale, you think they'd be sensible melodies?

My Reply: Yes. Some of them can be great and memorable melodies.

Other Person's Response: If any melody we naturally create would be a sensible melody, then what would constitute a senseless melody?

My Reply: It would have to be a melody that wasn't naturally created through personal expression, such as a completely random melody. Such a melody would be one plucked out by a baby. Personal expression would be things like speeches, conversations, yelling certain sentences, etc. So, any created melody that goes outside of that would have to be a senseless melody. But, some melodies created through personal expression do sound like senseless rubbish. An example would be my melodies. I'm not exactly sure why that is. Maybe I just didn't accurately transcribe them.

Other Person's Response: There are forms of natural expression that are already great works of art. For example, helping someone, and changing someone's life, would be a beautiful work of art to witness. Given this, why can't melodies themselves be forms of natural expression that are great works of art?

My Reply: Exactly. I thought human beings are naturally capable of creating awesome, beautiful, and powerful melodies.

Other Person's Response: Your melodies really make no sense, and they just don't work out. There's no pattern to your melodies in terms of melodic intervals. It seems you just have notes randomly placed all over. Melodies need to have this type of pattern in order for them to be good melodies that make sense to others.

My Reply: I'm not sure about this. I thought a person could create awesome, memorable melodies through naturally expressing himself as an individual. I know I had a music teacher once who told me to just write whatever melody I was inspired to create. He never talked about my melodies needing to have a melodic pattern. The teacher's name was Don Estes at Griggs (a place for buying music accessories).

He was an old man. So, I'd expect him to be a wise music teacher, since he's old. If he's so wise, he would've pointed out to me that my melodies need this pattern if they really needed them. Also, I only saw Don for a short while. I struggled with many miserable moments in my life, and that's why I gave up seeing him. I gave up on my composing dream entirely. But, I might see him again someday, since I'm fully recovered now, and am no longer having those miserable struggles.

Other Person's Response: If you do create some awesome, memorable music someday, do you plan on seeing your music teacher again, so you can share your music to him?

My Reply: Yes. I think he'd be quite surprised because, when I first saw him, I was only creating rubbish melodies.

Other Person's Response: Maybe the real melodies in your head do have a melodic pattern, and you're just bad at reproducing what you hear in your head.

My Reply: It's quite possible.

Other Person's Response: If you can't naturally create good, sensible music in your mind, then you say it might be difficult for you to create melodies that express what you want to express by going through the intellectual process of following the rules of music theory. Maybe you should just take it one note at a time, and see what type of melodies you can come up with. Who knows, you might be successful, and create melodies that express what you want to express to your audience.

My Reply: I'm doubtful. I already tried this while studying some rules, and it just didn't work out. When I listened to my melodies, they didn't express what I wanted to express. So, I decided to scrap these melodies.

Other Person's Response: I take it you've discovered there are rules when it comes to melody writing. You tried to create melodies that follow these rules. But, you just couldn't create melodies that express the powerful, profound scenes you wish to express.

My Reply: Correct. I put some thought and planning into it. But, it just didn't work out.

Other Person's Response: Maybe you just need to study all the techniques you can in order to create the music you want to create.

My Reply: I'm not sure if that's the case.

Other Person's Response: Do you wish to create catchy melodies and themes? For example, the Super Mario theme song is catchy.

My Reply: Yes. I'm failing at this, too. When I follow the rules that I studied, I just can't create melodies that are catchy and memorable.

Other Person's Response: Maybe you just need more practice to create the music you want to create.

My Reply: That could be. But, I don't know. Maybe I'm just incapable of this.

Other Person's Response: Maybe it's not a matter of it being difficult for you to create melodies that express what you want to express by going through the intellectual process of following the rules. Perhaps you just don't have this ability at all. So, even if you did acquire much knowledge and experience in composing, you just might not have this ability.

My Reply: I hope that's not the case.

Other Person's Response: You said earlier you've discovered there are rules when it comes to writing a melody. I don't think your melodies follow these rules, and that's why they sound like rubbish.

My Reply: Yes. I've studied some rules of melody writing, and I've revised my Super Sonic tune so that it follows these rules. I think I'm just no good at transcribing the awesome, memorable melodies in my mind, and that's why I need to study these rules to help me do so. Anyway, I think this Super Sonic tune now follows the rules, and this revised tune is my most recent tune I'm sharing here. So, consider this very reply to be my most recent update. As for this tune, the chords go from I-V and V-I. This would be an imperfect and perfect cadence. There's also a IV chord in there as well, which goes back to the I chord.

This would be a plagal cadence. The notes of the melody are the chord tones. I think this melody is great, memorable, and catchy. If, for whatever reason, it's still a rubbish melody that doesn't follow the rules of proper melody writing, then maybe I just need to revise this melody even more so that it follows these rules. Only then will this awesome, memorable melody I'm trying to convey be successfully conveyed to the audience. If I revise all my other melodies so they follow the rules, then maybe they will also become the great, memorable melodies I've naturally created in my mind. Anyway, here are the links to this revised Super Sonic tune, along with a few other recent melodies I've made:

Youtube Link to revised Super Sonic tune:

https://youtu.be/hRyYbMIkYBE

Soundcloud Link to revised Super Sonic tune:

https://soundcloud.com/user-432115982/1listentofirstsupersonictune

Music Sheet of revised Super Sonic tune:

https://ibb.co/WF2sPd2

Now, here is a lovely melody, ominous melody, and another melody I've made titled "On A Higher Level":

Youtube link to lovely melody:

https://youtu.be/aRQD7M4cERc

Soundcloud link to lovely melody:

https://soundcloud.com/user-432115982/5lovelymelody

Music sheet of lovely melody:

https://ibb.co/yfMpPPf

Youtube link to ominous melody:

https://youtu.be/8kxgyvIUqsI

Soundcloud link to ominous melody:

https://soundcloud.com/user-432115982/6ominousmelody

Music sheet of ominous melody:

https://ibb.co/3z0g65b

Youtube link to On A Higher Level:

https://youtu.be/Suqvzm_y7z0

Soundcloud link to On A Higher Level:

https://soundcloud.com/user-432115982/onahigherlevel

Music sheet of On A Higher Level:

https://ibb.co/vZyy21G

Other Person's Response: I heard you had another melody, which you say is your new, best one. Could you share that?

My Reply: Sure. I think it's an awesome, memorable, heavy, dramatic melody. Anyway, here it is:

Youtube Link:

https://youtu.be/dcVkoXN3G6c

Soundcloud Link:

https://soundcloud.com/user-432115982/1besttunedramaticskyhighmelody

Music Sheet:

https://ibb.co/ydypwxF

Other Person's Response: I can tell that gothic, sky high melody you just shared, starts on the dominant note in F minor (the C note), and ends on the tonic note (the F note).

My Reply: Yes

Other Person's Response: What if you make your melodies follow all the rules, but they still sound like senseless rubbish for other listeners?

My Reply: Then, like I said, something more would be needed to convey their power and greatness. Or, maybe, I was creating senseless, rubbish melodies all along.

Other Person's Response: What if you make your melodies follow all the rules, people tell you they sound like sensible melodies, but that they're lame or mediocre melodies?

My Reply: Then maybe something more is needed to convey their power, greatness, and memorable quality. Or, maybe, I was just creating lame, mediocre melodies in my mind to share to the world, and I just thought they were awesome, memorable melodies, when they really weren't.

Other Person's Response: When you transcribe the melodies in your mind, is it much easier for you to accurately transcribe the note lengths, as opposed to the note pitches?

My Reply: Yes. I have a difficult time accurately transcribing the note pitches.

Other Person's Response: Even if your brain does naturally know all the rules of music theory, it's still possible for your brain to make errors when it naturally creates an awesome, powerful, memorable melody in your mind.

My Reply: Which means I'd just need to correct those errors when I accurately transcribe that melody.

Other Person's Response: When attempting to accurately transcribe the melodies in your mind, do you sing them first, and then create a melody based off of what you sung?

My Reply: Yes. Listening to the sung version, even though it's poorly sung, since I don't know how to sing, helps me remember the melody I've created in my mind. From there, I create a melody on the keyboard, and it will be a bit different than what I've sung.

Other Person's Response: I have some advice for you. When creating a melody, make a beat first, and then make a melody that fits the beat, as opposed to creating a melody first, and then making a beat to go along with it.

My Reply: Yes. I think this is how I create melodies that actually work out.

Other Person's Response: I have another word of advice for you. If you hear a complicated series of notes and rests in your mind, don't just try to transcribe them, since that would be difficult. Also utilize the techniques of music theory to help you out, since that would make matters easier.

My Reply: Sure.

Other Person's Response: Is it easier to transcribe melodies that are just notes being heard in your mind? Or, is it easier when the melodies you hear in your head have lyrics to them?

My Reply: It's easier when they have lyrics. If, for example, I heard a complicated series of notes in my mind, that would be difficult for me to transcribe. But, if all those notes had lyrics, then the melody becomes more clear to me, and easier to transcribe. When the melody is just a bunch of complicated notes without lyrics, it's like a muddled, complicated mess that my mind has a difficult time with. If I'm not making sense to anyone, just know that having lyrics makes it easier for me to transcribe the melodies in my mind.

Other Person's Response: If your brain naturally knows the rules of music theory, then you'd already have all the knowledge you need to create awesome, memorable music in the real, physical world, and not just in your mind. So, it makes me curious as to why you think you're naturally creating awesome, memorable music in your mind, but not in the real world.

My Reply: Even though I can naturally create awesome, memorable melodies in my mind, I wouldn't know the technical details of what I've created in my mind. For example, I wouldn't know that the melodies in my mind start on the tonic note, and end on the tonic or dominant note. I could also naturally create a chord progression in my mind. But, I wouldn't know that the chord progressions would be a I-V, V-I, IV-V, IV-I, etc.

The only reason I know these technical details now is because I've read about them online. So, even though the melodies I naturally create in my mind follow the rules of music theory, I wouldn't know the technical details. I need to know these technical details because I don't think I'm skilled at transcribing my mentally inspired melodies, and knowing these details would allow me to create melodies that are awesome, memorable, and accurately transcribed, as opposed to inaccurately transcribed rubbish.

Other Person's Response: Even if your brain does naturally know all the rules of music theory, that wouldn't be enough for you to create great, memorable, catchy melodies in your mind, such as the McDonald's tune, or any other memorable tune for that matter. It requires much talent and training to create such melodies, in addition to having knowledge of the rules of music theory.

My Reply: I'm not sure that's the case. Sure, it requires talent. But, would it really require training to create such melodies in my head, when I already know all the rules of music theory?

Other Person's Response: Even if you did know all the technical details, it's still possible to inaccurately transcribe the melodies you've created in your mind.

My Reply: Which means I'd also need the ability to skillfully transcribe the melodies in my mind. If I had a professional level of this skill, then I could just accurately transcribe the melodies in my mind without even knowing any of these technical details. But, if I had a moderate level of this skill, combined with knowledge of these technical details, then I could still accurately transcribe my melodies.

Other Person's Response: When you transcribe the melodies in your mind and, from there, revise these melodies, so they follow the rules of melody writing, do they become completely different melodies than the ones you've naturally created in your mind? Or, do they actually sound like the awesome, memorable melodies in your mind?

My Reply: At first, they were completely different melodies. This frustrated me because I thought I was naturally creating awesome, memorable melodies in my mind, just to find out I had to stick with completely different melodies that actually follow the rules. They were average, mediocre melodies. From this, I concluded I must not be naturally creating any awesome, sensible melodies in my mind. If I really was creating such melodies in my mind that follow the rules, then the revised, transcribed melodies would sound like the ones in my mind.

They didn't, and I grew frustrated. But, then, I tried again, and actually discovered they do sound like the ones in my mind. A great example would be my Super Sonic melody. Therefore, I must've made the wrong revisions, which made the transcribed melodies sound different than the ones in my mind. For example, if I started the transcribed, and revised, Super Sonic melody on the notes Eb and C, rather than the notes I've chosen for the recently revised melody, which would be F and C, then that would be the chord tones of a V chord in the key of F minor, rather than a I chord in F minor.

That V chord would need to go back to a I chord. To do that, I'd need to choose notes that fit that I chord. So, my next couple of notes to complete that bar would be something like F and Ab. This ends up creating a completely different melody than the one I hear in my mind because the first few notes of the melody would be Eb and C (the notes of a V chord), and F and Ab (the notes of a I chord), rather than F and C (the notes of a I chord), and the next couple of notes I've chosen for the V chord, which would be Eb and G. I think you should look at the music sheet of my Super Sonic melody to help you understand what I'm talking about here.

Other Person's Response: So, not only is it important that your melodies follow the rules, but that you make them follow the rules in such a way that they sound like the melodies in your mind. Otherwise, you'd end up with a completely different melody than the one you've created in your mind, due to the rules putting you in a position where you'd need to choose completely different notes for these melodies that fit whole new chord progressions.

My Reply: Yes. I'd be ending up with completely different melodies that are mediocre, and don't sound like the awesome, memorable ones in my mind.

Other Person's Response: I realize you think you've made some of your melodies not only follow the rules of music theory, but made them sound like the ones in your mind. When you lose the memory of the melody you had in your mind, and you listen to the transcribed melody, does it sound awesome and memorable, like the one you remembered having in your mind?

My Reply: No. It becomes a mediocre melody that conveys a completely different scene. I'm not sure why that is. Perhaps there are more rules to follow, and I need to further revise my melodies so they not only follow these rules, but sound like the awesome melodies in my mind.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 05:31 pm
@MozartLink,
File #5: My Composing Dream (Part 6/12)

Other Person's Response: But, when you manage to bring back how the real, awesome melody sounded in your mind, do you see the transcribed melody as awesome?

My Reply: Yes. It's like the melody in my mind, and the transcribed melody, are the same. That puts me at a disadvantage because I wouldn't be seeing the transcribed melody for what it really is. When I lose the memory of the melody I had in my mind, then I can see the transcribed melody for what it really is. If I had the choice, I'd choose to delete that memory in my mind, so I wouldn't be blinded, thinking that the transcribed melody is awesome and memorable like the one I had in my mind, when it's not.

Other Person's Response: In regards to the melodies of famous speeches, they don't classify as actual music. They're just rubbish. But, you can make them into good, sensible melodies that not only follow the rules of melody writing, but sound close to the actual speeches themselves. Just because you have to make these melodies follow the rules doesn't mean they have to be melodies that sound completely different than the speeches.

My Reply: Sure. That would be wonderful because I could express anything I want through melody writing, and the melodies not having to be completely different than what I wanted to express.

Other Person's Response: You later thought you weren't naturally creating awesome, memorable melodies in your mind. But, then you discovered you might be, after all. Therefore, does composing appeal greatly to you now, knowing that you can just naturally create such melodies in your mind, and that you don't have to go through some tedious, intellectual process to do so?

My Reply: Yes. But, I still need to go through an intellectual process when making sure my transcribed melodies not only follow the rules, but sound like the awesome, memorable melodies in my mind. I'm perfectly alright with this, and I actually enjoy this. But, if it was the case I wasn't naturally creating any awesome melodies in my mind to begin with, then composing would be less appealing to me because it would no longer be a matter of trying to convey some awesome melody I've naturally created in my mind.

Instead, it would be a tedious, intellectual process of trying to come up with an awesome, profound, memorable melody to begin with. That would be difficult, and I might find myself giving up composing. The fact is, composing becomes much more interesting and appealing to me when I can naturally create awesome and powerful melodies from within, and just have to find a way to convey them to the audience.

Other Person's Response: Maybe the melodies you're naturally creating in your mind are just expressions at this point, and not actual music. But, if you transform these expressions into actual melodies that work, they might turn out to be awesome and memorable melodies.

My Reply: That could be the case.

Other Person's Response: I think I understand what you were trying to say earlier. The intellectual process of creating melodies that not only follow the rules, but sound similar to the ones in your mind, or similar to ones, such as any conversations or speeches you wish to express, would be much easier than not being able to do this, and instead having to create whole new melodies from scratch.

My Reply: Yes. It would be more difficult trying to create whole new melodies from scratch, that follow the rules, and express what I wish to express, as opposed to having some sort of expression in my mind, and trying to create a melody that's very close (or even exact) to said expression in my mind, while making sure the melody follows the rules of music theory.

The former method makes it more difficult for me to create melodies that express what I wish to express, while the latter method makes it much easier, since all I have to do is match whatever form of musical expression I have in my mind, whether it be a speech, someone yelling, or someone singing. If I couldn't match whatever melody I had in my mind, then coming up with these mentally inspired melodies would be pointless to begin with, since they wouldn't work out.

Other Person's Response: By the way, if someone creates a rubbish, senseless melody for someone else to listen to, then the listener can create his own vision of that melody. He could turn that rubbish into something beautiful for others to listen to. Since everyone is different, then different people will have their own, unique vision of that rubbish melody.

My Reply: Yes. Anyone could revise the rubbish melody, so that it not only follows the rules of proper melody writing, but conveys his unique vision to the audience.

Other Person's Response: Are you saying it's easier to have a musical idea in your mind, and create a melody that not only follows the rules of music theory, but sounds like what you have in your mind, as opposed to creating a melody from scratch on the keyboard?

My Reply: Yes. Creating musical ideas in my mind gives me freedom of expression, and I'd just have to match these ideas. But, coming up with melodies that express what I want to express by just playing around on the keyboard, is a much more difficult, tedious process. When I create musical ideas in my mind, what I wish to express to my audience is already there in my mind, and all I have to do is match what's in my mind. That's what makes matters much easier.

Other Person's Response: I have some advice to give you in regards to your Super Sonic melody. I think the issue here is the number of bars. Having 9 bars, followed by a bar's rest, creates an unnatural break in the flow when the tune is played again. Normally, melodies are arranged in 8 bars, 12 bars, 16 bars etc. Try changing the timing of the second part of your tune. Apart from that, the sounds & arrangement sound fine to me.

My Reply: Thanks for your response. Now, as I said before, my goal in composing is to not only create melodies that are awesome and memorable, but express the given scenes, moments, characters, etc. I wish to express to the audience. You said this melody sounds "alright" to you, which means you're acting like it's a basic, or mediocre melody. That must mean I'm not achieving my goal because, if I was, then you'd be saying something like: "WOW, THIS MELODY IS AWESOME, AND SHOULD BE FAMOUS!!! I'LL ALWAYS REMEMBER THIS BEAUTIFUL MELODY!!!"

It would be like if I've created a new, famous, nursery rhyme of my own for you to listen to. If you were to listen to it, you'd be giving such an exclamatory response. Since you're not giving such a response to this melody, I can only gather I'm not achieving my goal. It becomes frustrating when I can't achieve this goal because I'm not expressing myself to the audience. I'm not expressing the awesome, memorable emotions/scenes I think I'm expressing to the audience. So, something's not right here. 

Other Person's Response: Your Super Sonic melody really isn't my sort of music. So, I'm trying to be objective. Reactions, such as thinking something is awesome, are completely subjective, and will be different for each and every person. For ANY piece of music, you'll get some who'll love it, some who'll hate it, some who are indifferent, and everything in between. If your goal is to please everyone, you'll never achieve it.

My Reply: My goal isn't to please everyone, because I know everyone can't be pleased. However, most people can be pleased, and think a certain melody is awesome and memorable, even if it is a short melody. For example, short, famous, nursery rhymes are things many people find awesome and memorable, even though there are a few people out there who wouldn't like them. If I share this revised, Super Sonic melody to many people, and most people think it's a basic or mediocre melody that's nothing memorable, then I'd find that frustrating.

Other Person's Response: Do you expect to be those types of composers who put hours and hours into making a craft that others would enjoy? Or, are you satisfied with making short, simple melodies, as long as said melodies convey the awesome, memorable emotions/scenes you wish to express to your audience?

My Reply: I'd be satisfied with making these short melodies. Sure, I could go all the way, and be one of those hardcore composers who really pleases the audience with fully crafted songs. But, as long as I'm achieving my goal of pleasing most people with short, awesome, memorable melodies, then I think that's good enough.

Other Person's Response: I thought you didn't care about the opinions of others. So, why do you wish to please others through your music?

My Reply: It's because I wish to create music that's truly awesome and memorable, and share it to the world, so it gets heard and praised. I don't wish to be creating music that I just think is awesome, when it's really not. Imagine if someone wanted to come up with ideas that are awesome and memorable. It would be absurd and pointless for him to just dedicate his life, coming up with ideas that he thinks are great, when they're really rubbish. As a matter of fact, it would be a wasted life. So, it would be a wasted endeavor for me to create rubbish, or mediocre music, that I just think is great, and expressing of certain scenes.

Other Person's Response: It would be interesting to find out, scientifically, what makes a person talented at composing. Some people don't have talent, which means they can't create music that's catchy, and expresses what they want to express. But, other people have talent, which means they can create great, awesome, and catchy themes (such as the Super Mario theme). If science can find this out, then maybe there will be a way to invent some sort of technology that can bestow talent to untalented people.

My Reply: That would be great. That means I could have a great, composing talent right now, and create awesome music that expresses the powerful, profound scenes I wish to express.

Other Person's Response: There's a song written by Hanson called "MMMBop." That means even kids can write awesome music that expresses what they want to express. If they can do it, then so can you! After all, you're an adult.

My Reply: Well, these must be talented kids with advanced mental capabilities, since they can do this. I'm not sure if I have what it takes.

Other Person's Response: Learning how to write good music that expresses what you want to express can't be that difficult, can it? Even kids learn how to do it.

My Reply: I've been learning some music theory on a website called www.mymusictheory.com. Some things I understand on that website, while other things I don't quite understand (such as certain aspects of melody writing). I've always been the type of person who has a difficult time figuring things out on his own, and doing certain things with nobody there to help me and hold my hand the whole way through. If I tried on my own, I'd always fail. When I was in school, I required an aid (a woman) to help me because I was incapable of making it on my own. I think that's because I'm an autistic, special needs person. I talk even more about this later on.

Other Person's Response: It shouldn't be that difficult to comprehend the rules of music theory. Maybe that website explains the rules in such a way that makes it difficult for you.

My Reply: I think that is the case. When I listened to the rules of melody writing in a youtube video, it was much easier for me to understand. But, Victoria Williams (the music theory teacher on that website I linked to earlier) goes into a bit complicated detail, which makes it difficult for me. It becomes difficult when she explains melody writing. Her explanations left me with questions that I couldn't figure out on my own.

Other Person's Response: Do you find it most helpful when you create a melody, and a professional composer points out the mistakes in your melody to help you improve your craft?

My Reply: Yes. I learn best this way. If I just read up on a bunch of complicated information regarding composing, then that would make matters much more difficult for me.

Other Person's Response: Maybe you can find a professional composer online who could help you out. Maybe you could go to a forum for composers, and find a professional there.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Did you find a professional composer who could help you?

My Reply: Yes, and he said my melodies are still lacking in some things necessary to make them good, sensible melodies for other listeners. But, I don't really understand the things this guy says. So, I'll purchase 2 books I've found online, which would be "Music Theory for Dummies," and "Music Composition for Dummies." These books should give me a full, and complete understanding, of music theory and composition.

When I learn online, I might only be learning bits of information here and there, and not learning all the rules I need to know when composing music. Not only that, but professionals might say things I don't understand, since I don't have the full background level of knowledge I need to understand these things. There's also another book I later plan on getting, which is titled "Song Writing for Dummies." This book talks more about writing songs, and how to get them recognized (noticed) online by many people.

Other Person's Response: If you get these books, then you won't need to go to college, since you'll learn everything you need to learn.

My Reply: Yes. I'm sure college teaches much more than these books. But, I don't need to be a great composer like Beethoven. I just need to learn the things necessary to make good music. I don't expect to produce complex, genius compositions. So, all the material in these books would be enough to teach me how to make good music.

Other Person's Response: Do you order things online, including those books?

My Reply: Yes. I search on Amazon, and make wise, popular purchases that have many good ratings.

Other Person's Response: You don't need to buy those music books. You can just download them for free from a website called "PDF Drive." In addition, you can also download a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy book for free to help you relieve this misery-inducing worry that's been lingering on in your life. I think you can just read the book on your own, and do the exercises. I don't think you need a therapist who specializes in Cognitive Behavioral Therapy.

My Reply: Thank you. But, that worry is all gone now, and I'm all better.

Other Person's Response: When learning, you're expected to memorize things, such as how to draw the circle of 5ths. Did you learn how to do this yet? If so, did it stick in your mind?

My Reply: It only stuck in my mind for a little while. Later on, I forgot how to draw the circle of 5ths. So, even if I do draw the circle of 5ths many times to memorize it, and even if I do extensively memorize other things, I end up forgetting them. So, they never become permanent memories. However, knowing my note names on my keyboard, and on music sheet, is something I always remember. So, this might be a permanent memory. Perhaps I've familiarized myself with the note names for so long that it has become a permanent memory.

Other Person's Response: In order for something to become a permanent memory, it sometimes takes much repetition. Even much more than what music theory teachers recommend. Especially for people with memory impairments.

My Reply: Yes. There was a well known music theory teacher on youtube who recommended drawing the circle of 5ths a certain amount of times, so it becomes a permanent memory. I followed his teachings, and remembered how to draw the circle of 5ths for a little while. But, that memory faded.

Other Person's Response: That means, during the learning process, you might forget things often, and have to go back, and study them again, even after the amount of exercises and repetition that's recommended to permanently memorize them.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: I heard your goal in composing is to share awesome, memorable compositions to the world that express the given scenes, atmospheres, etc. you wish to express to the audience. I think you shouldn't have this goal, since composing for its own sake is what matters. You should appreciate composing, and not compose only to achieve this goal. Besides, something fatal could happen to you soon, which would prevent you from achieving this goal. So, I say, just compose for its own sake.

My Reply: If I was playing a video game, and my goal was to reach a certain destination, then I'd still be intent on reaching this destination, even while knowing that enemies and traps could kill me. My point is, I'm still intent on achieving my composing goal, even while knowing there will be things in life that might prevent me from achieving this goal.

Other Person's Response: Since you've given a video game analogy for your composing goal, do you think trying to achieve your goal is like playing a video game, where you reach for the destination, even though there are enemies and traps that could kill you?

My Reply: I don't see it as a video game. I just gave a video game analogy to get my point across.

Other Person's Response: Does your music have to be famous?

My Reply: No. I just wish to share it to as many people as I can.

Other Person's Response: Let's pretend you couldn't achieve your composing goal, and you knew that, would you still compose anyway?

My Reply: No. I'd just go back to my previous hobby, which would be playing video games. But, nobody knows if I will achieve my composing dream or not. So, I still have every reason to not give up composing.

Other Person's Response: Is it important to you if you make money off your compositions?

My Reply: That's not important to me. What's important to me is that I create awesome compositions, and have such awesome, otherworldly power recognized, and praised by many people. I don't need to be recognized and praised as a person. I just want my compositions to be recognized and praised.

Other Person's Response: Why couldn't you just compose music, since it means something to you? I make artistic crafts, since it means something to me, and I don't need these crafts praised and noticed by anyone.

My Reply: It's because I wish to deliver something awesome to the audience. If I create an awesome composition, then I wouldn't want such awesome power to go unpraised and unrecognized. I also wish to express myself to the audience through composing, and I don't want to express myself alone.

Other Person's Response: Even if you could achieve your composing dream, you'd give up if you didn't have your positive emotions.

My Reply: That's correct. If I can't have fun and enjoy the whole process of learning, and achieving my goal, then it would be nothing valuable, precious, or worthwhile to me.

Other Person's Response: When you do have your positive emotions, would you feel eager and exhilarated to achieve your composing dream?

My Reply: Yes. That feeling of eagerness, motivation, and exhilaration would make my composing dream valuable, precious, and worthwhile.

Other Person's Response: I understand why you wish life was free of all illnesses. If you developed some potentially fatal illness that could kill you before you got to achieve your composing dream of sharing awesome, memorable music to the world, then that would be very unfortunate for you.

My Reply: Yes. If I had the choice, I'd choose to live a very long, happy life on this Earth. Not only so I could achieve my composing dream, but because this could be the only life I have, which means I'd want it to be the longest, happiest life for me.

Other Person's Response: I also realize you wouldn't want to have cancer, and live your life on a hospital bed because that would prevent you from achieving your composing dream.

My Reply: Yes. I could say the same thing about an athlete. All his athletic goals would be destroyed if he developed cancer, and had to live his life on a hospital bed.

Other Person's Response: I don't think life should be about achieving goals, and seeking after the things we want because life doesn't always meet our expectations.

My Reply: I think this is a **** life to live because, if there's a heaven, then we can achieve all the goals we want up there, and we can get anything we desire, whether it be happiness, riches, etc.

Other Person's Response: If you're just no good at composing, and you can never create any good music, would that disappoint or anger you?

My Reply: No. I'd just go back to playing video games. But, if I was having a miserable moment in my life, then it would cause me to feel enraged.

Other Person's Response: There are casual people who just make crafts because they like to do it, and don't need their crafts noticed by anyone. Then, there are those who are very serious, such as those who wish to deliver an awesome work of art to the audience.

My Reply: Yes. I would be that very serious individual. By the way, there are artists who are very dedicated and serious, but don't need to share their crafts to the audience. Just because you don't wish to deliver an awesome craft to the audience doesn't mean you're not a serious, dedicated artist. But, like I said, I'm the type of artist who wishes to share to the audience.

Other Person's Response: I heard the style of music you wish to compose is music that's awesome, otherworldly, and out of the ordinary. If you do compose such music someday, and many people give it bad ratings and comments, since they think it's frightening music, would that upset you?

My Reply: No. I'd actually consider it them to be good ratings and good comments, since my music was so great, that it frightened the audience. So, I'd consider it to be a compliment. But, if people are posting bad ratings and comments, since they think my music is rubbish, then that's a different story.

Other Person's Response: If a person was pursing composing, then it's likely his natural, impulsive reaction would be to compose, just to make money off his compositions, or just to get his music praised and recognized by the world. Since you live by impulses, then I bet that's why your goal as a composer is to get your music praised and recognized. If you learn to transcend your impulses, then perhaps you'd be able to appreciate the art of composing for its own sake.

My Reply: Yes. Impulsive people live for money, and can't appreciate other things, since their only goal is to be rich. They also lack appreciation in general, since their impulse is to pursue whatever they desire. But, whether you wish to pursue any given field of art, solely because you wish to achieve a goal, or to just appreciate it for its own sake, is up to you. Since I'm the impulsive personality type, then I'm composing just to achieve my goal. Even when I'm apathetic, I still have this goal in mind, but don't pursue this goal, since it would have no value or worth to me without my positive emotions.

Other Person's Response: Since you're the impulsive type, do you wish to unleash powerful and profound emotions through composing?

My Reply: Yes. They'd be awesome, otherworldly emotions. I don't wish to unleash anger or misery.

Other Person's Response: When you do make some good compositions to share to the world, don't trash the ones that don't express the scenes you wanted to express, even though they're still good. I, myself, have composed some tunes that were great, even though they didn't really express what I wanted to express. Yet, I still kept, and treasured these tunes.

My Reply: My whole goal is to create melodies and songs that express what I want to express. If I can't achieve this goal, I'm giving up composing.

Other Person's Response: If you do make awesome compositions in the future, then you can choose to express any character you want by creating a theme song for that character. You could compose a theme for that character that gives the character a whole new personality, rather than trying to compose a theme that suits the original personality of the character.

My Reply: Yes. So, if I was creating a theme song for Sonic the Hedgehog, I could create a theme that suits him. Or, I could create a whole new theme that gives him a whole new personality. Characters are just images on the screen, and you can portray them any way you want to. You could portray them any way you like through your own compositions. Or, through compositions already out there.

Other Person's Response: Do you expect to create many awesome compositions to share to the world? Or, would you be fine with just a few?

My Reply: I'd be fine with just a few, since I have a lower standard than most people. In other words, I don't have high expectations of myself as a human being, or as a composer. As a matter of fact, I think I'd be satisfied with creating just one, awesome, short, memorable melody that expresses the otherworldly scenes I wish to express. So, I think that would be good enough. For me, at least. Other people would certainly expect more compositions from me, and I'll go ahead and create more compositions to share. But, all I'm pointing out here is that I'd personally be satisfied with just one composition.

Other Person's Response: So, you're saying you're still going to create all the awesome compositions you want to. But, that you'd be satisfied with just creating one, awesome composition that expresses what you want to express?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: When composing music, you can take melodies that already exist, and modify them a bit to make them your own melodies. Many artists do this, and there's nothing wrong with it. You won't get in trouble for doing this.

My Reply: I don't do that. I create compositions that are purely my own. That means I don't derive from other composing artists at all.

Other Person's Response: I heard people do get in trouble for copyright infringement. I wonder at what point the person would get in trouble. If someone created a character that looked exactly like Sonic the Hedgehog, but the character had different ears than Sonic, would the person get in trouble if he claimed that it's his own character? My question also applies to music. If I took a famous melody, just tweaked it a little, and claimed it was my own melody, would I get in trouble for that?

My Reply: That's a good question, and I don't know the answer. At what point would it be considered illegal to create a work of art that resembles another work of art, and to claim said work as your own?

Other Person's Response: I heard you fail at many things, including taking exams. Maybe you just need more experience. Then, you'd get better.

My Reply: Yes. But, there might be certain things I'll never be good at, no matter how much practice and effort I put into it.

Other Person's Response: Even when you're very careful and thorough, you might still fail certain tasks. That's because you don't have enough practice. So, even if you studied music theory, understood all of it, and then took the exams, you might still fail some of these exams.

My Reply: Yes. When you lack practice, that leaves much room for errors. But, when you do a certain task all the time, you make less errors, or no errors at all. There was a time I was very careful to make sure I put all the food up in the refrigerator. But, I left some food sitting out. If I was putting food up all the time in the refrigerator, then I'd have more experience. Thus, I'd be putting it all away this time. I could have so much experience in putting food up that I no longer have to be careful and thorough in making sure it's all put away. I'd just automatically put it all away.

Other Person's Response: If you achieved your composing dream, are there people in your family who wouldn't care that much about your music?

My Reply: There might be. For example, my younger brother isn't the type of person to praise music he hears. He's interested in other things. But, I'm quite sure my mother would, since she's very intrigued by my composing dream, and would love to listen to my music.

Other Person's Response: When you listen to music that isn't your style (doesn't appeal to you), and said music really is powerful and awesome, do you still acknowledge that it's powerful, awesome music? Or, do you just say it's crap music because it doesn't appeal to you?

My Reply: I still acknowledge it as powerful and awesome.

Other Person's Response: Do you plan on sharing your music to others?

My Reply: Yes. When I'm able to finally create good music in the physical world, I plan on featuring it on youtube and soundcloud. I also wish to share it with my friends and family. In addition, I'd also go on music forums, and share it there, too. My whole goal here is to create good music that makes me feel positive emotions.

It's fine if my music doesn't become famous because I'm not expecting to be famous or rich. I just want to share my music to as many people as possible because that would stroke my ego, which would allow me to feel positive emotions from their praise and recognition of my music.

That would get me all pumped up and high, which would make the moment something amazing and joyful. Consider it a moment of victory and celebration for me. But, like I said before, if my music isn't good, and doesn't get praised and recognized, then that's fine. I'll improve, so I can create good music and, hopefully, find a way to get it out there in the world, so it can get the praise and recognition it deserves.

Other Person's Response: Composing only to seek praise and recognition of your music is shallow, and being a hedonist is shallow, too.

My Reply: Shallowness is all subjective. What one person sees as shallow another might see as something profound and great. I see composing for the praise and recognition of my music as not shallow because getting my awesome music out there into the world would make my music and artistic talent known.

Me composing just for the sake of composing, and nothing more, is shallow because I'd never achieve my goal of creating the awesome, profound music I want to create, and having it known to the world. I have some unique, bizarre music I plan on sharing, and people would never get to know my unique style of music I compose.

Some people might say some of my music is possessed or demonic, and shy away from it. But, I think it would be some very interesting music, nonetheless. I have yet to become a skilled composer to create such music. As for being a hedonist, again, I don't see that as shallow either because I think positive emotions are like the holy, inner light within us that we need.

Other Person's Response: Could you give me more insight into the music you plan on making? You said you plan on making bizarre music to share to the world, and that this music might sound demon-possessed. I'd like to hear more about this.

My Reply: I could also simply describe the music I plan on making as awesome and otherworldly. That's the style of music I wish to create, and that's what I wish to express to the audience. My username is Transcended Dimensions, and you can see the avatar setup I've chosen on my youtube and soundcloud account. Said username and avatar expresses the music I wish to create.

Other Person's Response: I know you're just sharing crap tunes for now, and that you're trying to express different scenes right now, such as love (your Wedding Tune), or beauty (your Beautiful Tune).

My Reply: Yes. I'm just expressing these scenes for now. Later on, I plan on creating awesome, otherworldly music.

Other Person's Response: What type of awesome, otherworldly music do you wish to create? Would it be classical music, or the type of music you hear in horror movies?

My Reply: I'll give you an example. It would be awesome, otherworldly, divine, psychic/supernatural heavy metal. It would have a very dark, heavy, powerful, bizarre, and dramatic personality. When I say dramatic, I don't mean sad, tragic, angry, or morbid. I mean something that has a lot of awesome emotion to it. I guess you could call that "epic and astonishing," rather than "dramatic." If you ever listened to the Ginyu Transformation theme from the anime Dragon Ball Z, then this would be an example of epic and astonishing. You can listen to the theme on youtube. Here's the link to it:

https://youtu.be/Es9Fk6v5n-0

Other Person's Response: Would there also be awesome, otherworldly, divine, psychic/supernatural, heavenly music?

My Reply: Yes. I'd create that music as well. It would be something bizarre, too.

Other Person's Response: The very fact you wish to compose this style of music means you're an awesome individual. You're more than those shallow types of people who just wish to compose the same old, lame music we hear on the radio. Even if you don't have the talent to ever produce such awesome music, you'd still be an awesome, profound individual for even wanting to produce this style of music.

My Reply: Thank you.

Other Person's Response: I'll admit, you do have an awesome, musical vision, and you do have some awesome, musical ideas. But, the music you're creating is ****! Maybe you're better off creating musical ideas, rather than actual music. You can share your ideas to skilled composers, and maybe they can make a song, melody, or theme for you.

My Reply: Hopefully, I will be able to create some awesome music. Even if other skilled composers did create music for me, I don't think it would turn out how I wanted it to turn out. That's because I have my own vision of what it is I wish to convey. Each person has his own, unique vision, and one person's vision won't be exactly the same as someone else's. That's why no other composer can create the exact music I want. Actually, it could happen if I get lucky. But, for the most part, that doesn't happen.

Other Person's Response: When you say you wish to create awesome, otherworldly music, I think you're setting yourself a goal you can't achieve. You're just no good at composing. So, you might as well delete those awesome Transcended Dimensions accounts because you can never claim the great, almighty status your username and avatar expresses. Deleting these accounts would also delete all the rubbish tunes on those accounts. Personally, I think it's a joke to have this username and avatar setup, just to upload rubbish tunes onto these accounts. Why not do something better with your life than wasting your time, showing off your lack of talent? Just do a different hobby.

My Reply: I'm keeping those accounts intact just in case I end up creating some awesome music later on.

Other Person's Response: If there's one thing you've created that's good, it's your username and avatar. Your youtube and soundcloud username is Transcended Dimensions, and your avatar is Super Sonic in the cosmos. I think that's a cool combination.

Sadly, the music I listened to on your account doesn't match the greatness of your username and avatar. I'd really love to see you produce some music in the future that's just as great, or even better than your username and avatar.

My Reply: That's what I plan to do. My whole username and avatar setup is supposed to express the bizarre, cool, amazing, and otherworldly music I wish to produce and share in the future. I envision producing music down the road that could outmatch my username and avatar.

Other Person's Response: Why do you wish to produce the style of music you wish to produce? What has inspired this?

My Reply: Because it all depends on your motives. If your motive is to be a composer who spreads peace and joy, then you'd be inspired to compose peaceful, joyful music. My motive is to create awesome, otherworldly music that's out of the ordinary because I wish to go beyond what people consider to be ordinary. I wish to create something new and astonishing.

When I listen to music on the radio, yes, some of it's good. But, it all conveys an ordinary vibe to me. For example, there are songs that are very famous, catchy, powerful, and bring joy to the audience. But, that's normal and very human. I wish to create music that's not human. It would be something very bizarre, and might sound possessed or demonic.

But, when I say possessed or demonic, I don't mean music that conveys demonic beasts from the lower realms, filled with hatred. I mean music that conveys a transcended being. Referring back to my avatar on my youtube and soundcloud account, Super Sonic is a transcended, god-like being.

So, imagine my music conveying a possessed, transcended being, rather than a possessed demon. This is the style of music I wish to compose for the most part. For now, the tunes I'm sharing are of a different style, and aren't any good in their current stage of development.

Other Person's Response: I'll admit. Your username, avatar, and the style of music you wish to compose is interesting. But, can you actually produce such amazing music later on is the question?

My Reply: I hope so.

Other Person's Response: Is there any other style of music you wish to create besides what you've just described?

My Reply: There might be a few themes here and there that completely differ from the music I described. People might find them catchy. For example, they could be some joyful or lovely tunes. Speaking of joyful tunes, I'd also produce bizarre, otherworldly, heavenly themes as well.

Other Person's Response: Not only do you have no musical talent, you also amount to nothing as a human being.

My Reply: How you think determines what type of person you are. I do have profoundly awesome, beautiful, powerful thoughts that make me feel powerful, positive emotions. That, right there, already says I'm an awesome, beautiful, profound, powerful person. It's such a shame I can't express these emotions through music. I need the talent to express that, and I don't have it.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, it's how you feel that determines what type of person you are because you can't be an enraged person if you don't feel rage, you can't be a joyful person if you don't feel joy, etc.

My Reply: Yes, you're right.

Other Person's Response: Going back to what you said earlier, I see what you mean when you say shallowness is all subjective. Spiritual believers would say it would be a shallow existence if this was the only life we had. That's because we'd just be biological machines, living in a universe of pure luck and chance. Once we die, that's it. But, at the same time, people who are convinced this is the only life would say that's not a shallow or meaningless existence. They'd say it's a profoundly beautiful existence, since we only have one life, and we should make the best of it.

My Reply: Yes. As for my views regarding the afterlife, I think it would be a shallow existence if this was the only life we had. According to my view, living an eternally blissful life, where we get whatever we desire, would be the most profoundly beautiful existence. That's because such a life would offer us the greatest amount of positive emotions.

The more positive emotions you have, the more beauty and goodness your life has. So, an eternally blissful life would be the far more meaningful existence. For those who don't agree positive emotions are the source of beauty and goodness, I could instead say the same thing about positive thoughts.

The more positive thoughts we have, the more positive experiences we have in life. Thus, the more beauty and goodness our lives would have. Since an eternal life of positive thoughts would offer us the greatest degree of positive experiences, then that would be the greatest life we could live. Living a short, finite life only gives us so much positive experiences we can have.

Think of it this way. If a baby was born into this world, and had only 1 week's worth of beauty and goodness in his life before he died of an illness, then that's not very much. The baby would die, and that's it. But, if the baby got to live an eternal paradise after his physical body died, then he'd have an eternal amount of beauty and goodness.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 05:32 pm
@MozartLink,
File #5: My Composing Dream (Part 7/12)

Other Person's Response: I agree. If there's a life that would hold the greatest amount of beauty and goodness, then that's the better life to live. That's the more meaningful existence.

My Reply: Yes. That's why I think there should be an eternal, blissful afterlife of our dreams. If it doesn't exist, and this is the only life we have, then scientists should really work on trying to make us immortal.

Other Person's Response: If life just went on and on, then it would be a life that holds less beauty and worth, even if said life was a paradise.

My Reply: It's still possible to have the most profoundly beautiful thoughts regarding a life that drags on and on. Therefore, even an eternal, blissful life can still be the most profoundly beautiful and worthwhile existence for you. I know it would for me. So, I disagree with your statement.

Other Person's Response: If you had some fatal condition right now, and the doctor told you that you only had a few weeks to live, would you give up composing?

My Reply: I'm afraid so. There's no way I can achieve my goal within such a short time period. Since I can only compose just for the sake of composing, then I'd give up. That's another reason why I've bought these Immortality Rings because they are said to keep your body healthy and alive by preventing diseases, and stopping aging. If these rings work, then they would allow me to fully go through with my goal.

That is, if some fatal accident doesn't happen to me because the rings won't protect me from that. Also, even if I did manage to achieve my goal, but my music got little to no praise, then I'd give up, too. This is because I wouldn't be creating any good music and, thus, I'd see it as being pointless to pursue composing any further. If I try and try to improve, but my music is never that great, then I'd officially give up composing.

Other Person's Response: So, your only goal in composing is to hog all the glory and attention, and feel good from that? That makes you a leeching bastard! I'm sorry, but that's plain selfish! If you really do have an autistic gift that has yet to be conveyed to the world, that gift can be used for something better than what you intend to use it for.

My Reply: I'll take what I want in life, and I don't care what anyone's attitude or opinion is! Like I said, only my own views and opinions matter to me. I see nothing wrong with seeking praise and recognition of my music. As I said before, I don't care about the standards of others, and only my own standards matter to me.

According to the standards of others, I wouldn't be a decent human being, and I would be composing for a wrong, selfish purpose. But, according to my standard, I'm a decent human being, and me seeking praise and recognition of my music would be nothing wrong.

Other Person's Response: Why must you share your works to others? A field of art can be appreciated just as it is. You can make music simply because you want to do it. I make artistic crafts because it means something to me. If my works get shared to the world, then that's just a bonus. It's not my main reason for making crafts. That's why it doesn't bother me if my works never get shared to the world.

My Reply: The whole point of expressing yourself through art is to express yourself to others. Imagine if there was a very cool, awesome dude, and he had some awesome attributes, such as cool clothes, a cool personality, etc. If he lived a solitary life, then he'd never get the chance to express these attributes to others. Thus, his cool attributes would never be known to the world. That's why he needs to meet people, and express himself to others.

I realize there are cool attributes about me that I could express to others, such as my casual, polite personality. But, there's something greater within me that I have yet to express to the world. I have some awesome, profound, and powerful emotions to express to others through music. It's my mission that I achieve this goal. I don't want said greatness to be confined. I want it expressed to the world. Once people realize said greatness, they should be astonished.

Other Person's Response: Do you express your cool attributes to the world? If not, then why be concerned about expressing yourself musically to the world? Why not compose for its own sake?

My Reply: I'm not concerned about expressing my attributes such, as the clothes I wear, and how I behave. This is because I'm not concerned about that. Those are personal things to me, and I don't care if the world praises, and recognizes them or not. It would be like how a person doesn't care if his preferences are shared to the world.

But, there's one thing I wish to express to the world, and that would be my music. If I create awesome music, that would definitely be worth sharing. But, things, such as the clothes I wear, and how I behave, are basic things that I don't care about sharing to others. Besides, there are emotions that I can only express through art that I can't express as an individual.

Other Person's Response: I really think you need to appreciate composing for its own sake, rather than composing to get what you want out of it.

My Reply: When people manufacture products, they don't make products just to make them. They do it to make an awesome product that's promising to the customers. Some people make awful products that don't work, and some people make products just to make them. But, that's beside the point. The point I'm trying to make here is that, if I'm going to make some music, then it has to be awesome music that delivers to the audience. It must be known, praised, and given good ratings. I'm not going to make music just to make music.

Other Person's Response: I know there are people out there who can't appreciate good products. So, even if you do make some awesome music later on, some people might not appreciate it.

My Reply: I agree. Not everyone is going to think a given melody, theme, or song is great. Likewise, there are some great products out there, and not everyone's going to think said products are great.

Other Person's Response: When creating music for the audience to listen to, don't stop at any given point in the crafting process, say your music is good enough, and that the audience just needs to lower their standards, so they can appreciate it. Make sure you create a fully crafted melody, theme, or song that delivers.

My Reply: Sure. But, as long as I create an awesome melody, theme, or song, and its power and greatness has been successfully conveyed, then the audience should appreciate that. If further improvements are needed, then the audience should kindly point them out, rather than dismissing and not appreciating the power and greatness that's already there. Just because a work of art needs some improvement doesn't mean it's not a good, beautiful, or great work of art, and that it holds very little to no profound meaning. It would simply be a great work of art that needs some improvement to make it even more great.

So, when people witness great works of art that need some improvement, they should praise these works while, at the same time, offering constructive criticism. Just offering constructive criticism without the praise isn't fair. Saying the work of art isn't good because it needs improvement just isn't fair. But, offering nothing but praise for a work of art without any constructive criticism isn't fair either. So, you should offer both praise (if the artwork is deserving of it) and constructive criticism (if the artwork needs it).

However, there are works of art that don't need any constructive criticism because they're at their peak of perfection. For these works of art, we'd just give them praise. But, there are some people who wouldn't like these works of art because it's just not their style. For example, some people wouldn't like Beethoven's music. That's alright because different people will have different styles of music, drawings, paintings, etc. they prefer. Then, there are works of art that deserve constructive criticism, but are unworthy of any praise. An example of these types of artwork would be tunes plucked out, on a keyboard, by a baby.

Other Person's Response: So, you'd actually have 2 main goals when it comes to composing:

1.) To produce some awesome music, and have it known and praised.

2.) To feel happiness and joy in pursuing #1, and achieving #1.

My Reply: Correct. #1 without #2 would be a worthless endeavor. But, even if I could feel happiness and joy in the absence of #1, I still wouldn't bother composing because I wouldn't be able to create good music, and have it known and praised by the world. That's why a combination of #1 and #2 is needed.

Other Person's Response: Honestly, achieving your goals shouldn't really matter because, once you die, that's it. Your compositions will never become legend, and they'll be forgotten.

My Reply: Well, this might not be the only life, and there might be some grand purpose or meaning to life. That being the case, achieving my goals would matter. This would mean my works wouldn't just waste away. Now, if I did learn that this was the only life, then achieving my goals would still matter to me. It wouldn't matter to me as much though. Why would it still matter to me? Because I still wish to achieve goals anyway. I bet Stephen Hawking's goals, or Beethoven's goals, would still matter to them, even if they were convinced this was the only life they had.

Other Person's Response: Why go through all the trouble of trying to compose awesome music? Why not just wait until your soul goes to the afterlife? You would then be bestowed with the ability to magically and instantly transform your inner emotions into music for other souls to listen to.

My Reply: This could be the only life though. There might be no soul or afterlife. In which case, I must live the longest life I can here on Earth, and I must compose awesome music the hard way through education and training. I have purchased Immortality Rings, and I hope they work to make me live a long, Earthly life.

Other Person's Response: What if it turns out these tunes you're hearing in your mind really are as great as you say they are?

My Reply: Since my claim that these tunes I'm hearing in my mind were great tunes was a true claim I was making all along, then other people should really keep an open mind to my other claim, which was that positive emotions are the only things that make life good and beautiful.

As I said before, I have autism, and autistic people have great insight into themselves, and their own personal experience. Many discover new ideas that humanity was blind to, and in denial of. If you don't believe I have autism, then go ask my mother, and she will tell you.

Other Person's Response: You don't have to create good, emotionally powerful music. You can just create music because you like to do it as a hobby.

My Reply: My whole goal in making music is to create music that's great, unheard of, and emotionally powerful or profound. To me, it's not about the craft itself. Even if I made the most artistically crafted song, but said song only conveyed a bland, unattractive emotion, then that craft wasn't something to be proud of. Think of the lame music you hear on the radio. From there, imagine a well-crafted version of that. It would still be lame music. So, to me, music is all about that emotionally powerful, profound greatness. Without that, then I've failed my mission as a composer.

Other Person's Response: Are you expecting to be as great as Beethoven?

My Reply: No. I just want to create music that's awesome, catchy, and emotionally powerful or profound. It would be like music for video games or anime. When you hear theme songs for characters in popular anime or video games, they're often something catchy, awesome, bad ass, and emotionally epic or dramatic. That's the style of music I'm going for. However, it's something much more bizarre than that.

Other Person's Response: Are you trying to be the better composer than anyone else?

My Reply: No. The type of praise and recognition I'm seeking isn't the type that the person with the biggest muscles, the best stunts, or the greatest intellect would receive. It's the type that a person with a unique and awesome, artistic vision, or craft, would receive.

Other Person's Response: Do you wish to go to college and go into a music business?

My Reply: No. I'm much better off learning at home and composing that way. I can learn all I need to learn online. It would just be a waste of money, when I could've become a good composer at home. Besides, I wish to pursue composing as a hobby, and not as a career.

Other Person's Response: Wouldn't you feel positive emotions from inspiring others through your music? Do you only feel positive emotions when others compliment your music?

My Reply: I don't feel inspired or driven to inspire and help others in general, or through my music. Although, I'd feel positive emotions from having inspired others, and giving them something good to listen to. So, in the process of me feeling positive emotions from making music, and having my music praised, I'd also feel positive emotions from others being inspired through my music. Right now, I can't share any good music, since I have to learn how to create good music.

Other Person's Response: Do you wish to be a performer?

My Reply: No. I have a keyboard, and all I want to do is use it to figure out these notes I'm hearing in my head. I do not plan on performing my music, or any other type of music. I figure out the notes on the keyboard, and place them on a music notation software. From there, I'd use music producing software to choose better instruments for them.

Other Person's Response: We as human beings project meaning upon things all the time. Even meaningless things become meaningful to us. It's quite possible you're projecting certain meanings upon these tunes in your head, which are actually gibberish tunes. If I were to write down a series of randomly placed notes, then I bet you'd report to me that this "melody" conveys something.

My Reply: I performed this little experiment on myself, where I placed a bunch of random notes down, and listened to them. I still perceived the "melody" as random gibberish. So, it's quite possible I really am creating tunes in my mind that are catchy and amazing.

However, if I were to somehow perceive that random melody as conveying something meaningful and catchy, then it's quite possible my brain is creating a different tune from that, which would be a tune that does convey something meaningful and catchy.

My brain might be trying to make sense of that random melody and, in order for my brain to do that, then it has to create a melody out of that random mess, which would be a meaningful, catchy melody.

Other Person's Response: You have to give me evidence that you're instinctively creating great tunes in your head. Otherwise, I'm not going to believe you.

My Reply: In the past, I've sung my tunes on the microphone, since I didn't have a keyboard at the time. But, I don't know how to sing. When people listened to them, they said they were awful. But, I knew all along the good tunes I was really trying to convey, even though people didn't get them.

There was one person who has conveyed these tunes for me. These are just 3 tunes here. The instrument choice this guy has chosen for my tunes is different than the ones I had in my head. But, the 1st two tunes are very close to what I intended to convey.

So, he got those 2 tunes right, for the most part. If anyone thinks these tunes are good and catchy, then I think that's evidence, right there, that I'm creating great, catchy tunes in my mind. These tunes of mine you hear in this video aren't my best ones.

I've created powerful, amazing tunes in my head that I have yet to convey myself. But, for now, here are these tunes of mine I'll share to you. When you watch this video, you hear my voice singing, along with instruments the guy has chosen.

Also, scroll down to the comments section below in this video, and you'll see that it really is me. A person mentions my name in the comments section. He/she says: "I'M SORRY I DOUBTED YOU MATT! PLEASE FORGIVE ME!" So, here's the video:

https://youtu.be/IuTvz0yBoFE

Other Person's Response: I'm sorry. Yes, your tunes that this guy conveyed for you are catchy. But, they're nothing good.

My Reply: If those tunes are catchy, then that's something worth praising and appreciating. It says that I'm creating catchy tunes in my head, and that should be enough, right there, to appreciate for now. Too many people complain, and they don't appreciate the beautiful, amazing, good things in life.

If a work of art has good qualities, but many bad qualities, then many people complain, and call the whole work of art awful when, in fact, there are still good qualities about that artwork worth appreciating. Sure, constructive criticism is needed in order for a person to improve. But, such criticism shouldn't dismiss the good qualities of an artwork worth appreciating.

So, yes, those tunes might be awful in certain regards. But, if they're still catchy tunes, and convey scenes, then that's a good quality worth praising and appreciating. Even the people in the comments section of the video appreciate this. Therefore, a fair assessment of my tunes would be something like:

"Man, those tunes are awful in certain areas! But, wow, they're catchy and convey scenes! I see great potential in you as a composer. But, these specific areas still need improvement."

This would really be no different than if someone was a dancer, and there were some judges. If the dancer had good form, but poor timing, then his good form was something worth praising and appreciating. From there, his timing should be criticized. But, to say that this dancer is awful, and has no talent, would be an unfair assessment, since that would be leaving out things worth appreciating.

Other Person's Response: Who are you to say things like this? You're an insult to musicians everywhere!

My Reply: The truth is often times insulting, and I'll not hold back from expressing the truth.

Other Person's Response: Those tunes in that video aren't even worth appreciating, since they're nothing catchy or good.

My Reply: I think I might have a difficult time telling the difference between the real good, catchy tunes I hear in my mind, as opposed to what's been produced in reality. So, from my perspective, the tunes in that video are the real, good, catchy ones I had in my mind all along.

But, perhaps they're really not, which is the reason why other people say they're not good or catchy when they listen to them. Or, maybe, they are good and catchy, and you're just having too high of a standard when it comes to what you deem as a good or catchy tune, theme, or song.

After all, many people liked the video, there weren't that many dislikes, and all the people in the comments section loved these tunes. So, I think this clearly shows you're having too high of a standard. I really love people like the ones in the comment section, who are able to appreciate and praise works of art that deserve appreciation and praise.

Again, I do agree with the idea that constructive criticism should be offered in addition to praise. But, I don't agree that constructive criticism should completely overshadow any praise that's deserved, and neither do I agree that praise should completely overshadow any constructive criticism. People should also keep their standards at a reasonable level and not so high that they can't appreciate things.

Other Person's Response: In regards to standards, I think it's best to have a high musical standard, and to not settle for a moderate standard. This will compel a person to be the best composer he can be.

My Reply: I think it's best to have a moderate standard while, at the same time, encouraging a composer to be the best he can be. Such a standard would leave a person saying something such as:

"Those tunes of yours really are good and catchy! I really love them, and find them unique! I see great potential in you, and I'd love to see you at your best!"

As you can see here, having a moderate standard can still encourage a person to be the best he can be, while also leaving plenty of room for appreciation and praise. It doesn't demand growth, but simply offers it up as encouraging advice. But, having a high standard, like you're suggesting, may encourage a person to be at his best. But, it leaves little to no room for praise and appreciation.

A moderate standard leaves room for praise of works of art that meet both a moderate standard, and a high standard. But, a high standard only leaves room for praise of works of art that meet a high standard. I realize a low standard would leave room for praise of works of art that meet a low standard, a moderate standard, and a high standard. But, the goal is to have a reasonable standard, and I think that standard would be the moderate standard. It's neither too high nor too low.

So, a high standard leaves too much room for criticism, and little room for praise and appreciation, while a low standard leaves too much room for praise, and little room for criticism. That's why I think the moderate standard is the right standard to have. It's the fair standard to have, which makes the low and high standards unfair. In my opinion, I think the moderate standard should be the universal standard everyone should agree upon.

Other Person's Response: That doesn't justify disregarding valid criticism, just because you don't receive praise as well.

My Reply: I agree constructive criticism should be offered, and taken into consideration, even if it's offered without the praise. All I'm saying here is that it's unfair for a person to just offer criticism, without the praise, or praise without the criticism.

Other Person's Response: That's an opinion that you're entitled to. Don't consider it factual though.

My Reply: I'll just give an example to show how it's unfair and insulting. For example, if someone on American Idol sang quite well with some flaws, then if Simon Cowell just displayed his rude attitude, and only offered criticism, then that would be plain rude and unfair. However, if he also offered the praise that was deserved, then that would be the right thing to do.

Other Person's Response: You only give praise when you can really find anything good about something. You don't just praise whatever you see to make the creator happy. You praise something to let the creator know of what's positive in a certain art piece, and let them know what to keep in, and what to improve, or leave out.

Always expect feedback. But, don't expect people to just shower it with praise, or bombard it with criticism. You can only know about people's opinions, once they've provided feedback. Before said feedback is provided, you have the right to judge your own works of art however you want. However, you can't impose your opinion on everyone else.

You just might like different things people here do, and that's ok, honestly, as long as you don't complain about our standards by saying they're "too high." They're are different. But, not necessarily high. I don't know how to talk anymore. I shouldn't keep talking to no avail.

My Reply: People can have a different style of comedy, or music, which prevents them from appreciating the greatness of certain types of comedy, or music. So, having a high standard isn't the only thing that prevents people from praising and appreciating works of art. As for standards though, I think the moderate standard should be the universally agreed upon standard because, like I said before, it's neither too high, nor too low. It's just right.

Other Person's Response: Well, unfortunately, that renders basically your whole post moot because no one is going to have the exact same standards you have that you consider "moderate standards," as that's really subjective. You might as well not have shared this packet at all if this is the basis for all your responses to people's posts.

My Reply: I thought there was a low, moderate, and high standard that was objective because I thought there was a way to objectively determine what works of art are good, magnificent, bad, or horrendous. If these objective standards don't yet exist, and it's currently subjective, then surely there must be a way to objectively determine them.

Other Person's Response: When you naturally create music in your head, having no knowledge of how music works, you won't create any good music that expresses what you want to express to the audience. But, having much knowledge in composing, you can naturally create such music. At first, you will have to put much thought into creating music when you're first learning how to do it. That's because there are rules to follow, and things to take into consideration. But, over time, you'll naturally create good music.

My Reply: I hope I can naturally create good music that expresses what I want to express then. I hope I can achieve this goal someday. People might tell me to give up composing right now, since I'm no good at it. But, I'll only give up when I'm absolutely sure that I can't achieve my goal of creating the music I want to create.

Other Person's Response: Could you explain why composing means so much to you?

My Reply: I'll explain. First of all, music is just what means so much to me. Simply put. Secondly, all other forms of art are quiet. They don't make noise. For example, if an author has written a good story, or if a painter has created an awesome painting, then the other person would just have to look at the painting, or read the story. But, music is different because you could blast the stereo or computer speakers.

I'd consider music to, thus, be a more potent form of art. It's more loud and impulsive than other forms of art. It seems to be more expressive than, say, a story or painting that quietly sits there, waiting for the audience to read it, or look at it. Music gets right in your ears. It's like a person screaming into your ears.

If it was a calm, relaxing song, then it would be like someone speaking gently to you. My point is, music speaks or screams, while all other forms of art are quiet. Sure, other forms of art do speak, or scream, in their own way (which would technically classify them as "noisy" works of art in their own, unique way). But, music is just what means so much to me.

I think it's a fact that many people prefer music over other art forms. If you ask many people, I bet they'd tell you they'd prefer to listen to some loud, awesome music, than to sit or stand there, reading an awesome story, or looking at an awesome painting. For me, music is the greater form of art, since it triggers the greater emotional response within me than other art forms.

Actually, it would be having a combination of sound, music, imagery, and story that would trigger the greater emotional response within me. For example, if I heard the loud noise of a monster, while also witnessing the image of the monster out of nowhere, that would trigger the greater fear response within me than simply hearing, or looking at the monster.

Another example would be that witnessing a female character, witnessing her actions, knowing her story/personality, hearing her theme song, and hearing her voice would trigger the greater feeling of beauty, or love, within me than simply witnessing the image of this female character. So, it's when different forms of art combine that create the greater work of art, and the greater, more profound, emotional response.

For example, the Legend of Zelda and Super Mario are great games. They combine imagery, sound, and good story telling. If it was just the story, sound, music, or imagery, then that wouldn't be as great as the video games themselves which combine all those forms of art. It just wouldn't trigger as powerful of an emotional response within the audience.

I'm not saying I wish to pursue multiple fields of art to create video games or movies, which combine multiple forms of art. I just wish to pursue one field of art, and stick with it. That would be composing. I have no interest in any other field of art anyway. Now, I realize all fields of art are equal, and no one is inferior to the other. But, for me, composing is what I want to do.

Other Person's Response: If you were to ask people if they'd prefer to listen to awesome music, or to instead look at awesome paintings, and read beautiful stories, I bet many people would prefer to listen to music. They'd prefer to just crank up their speakers, and groove to the music. That shows many people are more moved and motivated by music than any other art form. So, I understand why you want to make music, rather than painting, or writing stories.

My Reply: Yes. For me, music evokes the more profound and powerful emotion than any other art form.

Other Person's Response: Even though music triggers the more powerful and profound emotion than any other art form for you, do other works of art still trigger powerful and profound emotions for you?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If you ever do compose some awesome music that expresses what you want to express to the audience, you can combine your music with Sonic the Hedgehog videos, or any other type of video you see your music fitting to. That would certainly create a greater work of art than having the music alone.

My Reply: That's what I plan on doing. Also, take note that, even though I'd use Sonic the Hedgehog video clips, my music wouldn't suit the Sonic universe. My music would be very powerful, evil, bizarre, otherworldly, and awesome. So, I'd be expressing Sonic in my own, unique way. I'd also use Dragon Ball Z, or Dragon Ball Super video clips as well for my awesome music. That is, if I ever do create such awesome music someday.

Other Person's Response: I see you're someone who wishes to express emotion through music, and you're not someone intellectual, such as a person who'd want to play chess, or learn physics.

My Reply: Correct. Even though I'm not an intellectual genius like Einstein, or an amazing chess player, I'd consider myself to be an emotional genius. My fully crafted music wouldn't be great like Beethoven's or Bach's music. But, I'd still consider it to be the work of an emotional genius who expresses powerful and profound emotion. You don't have to be the best composer in the world to be considered a genius. For example, I consider Koji Kondo to be a genius, since he makes music that so many people love and find catchy.

Other Person's Response: You do realize there's some intellect involved when it comes to making music, and that it's not all emotional? For example, you have to take into account the rules of music theory, and things like this.

My Reply: I realize this. But, I'm not willing to pursue intellectual endeavors for their own sake, such as playing chess, doing riddles, calculus, or any other intellectual exercise.

Other Person's Response: When you say you wish to create awesome, memorable music to share to the world, are you wanting to give to the world?

My Reply: It's a matter of wanting to showcase, rather than a situation like wanting to give money to the poor, or wanting to help humanity. Basically, I just wish to show off something great and awesome. That is, if I ever do create such awesome music someday.

Other Person's Response: If you can never create the music you want to create, then why not just make AMVs (anime music videos)? You can take music that already exists, and add it to video clips.

My Reply: I don't want to do that.

Other Person's Response: When something is sung such as: "Tyler, Tyler, he's our man! If he can't do it, nobody can!," wouldn't that be the chorus part of a song?

My Reply: Yes. Many of my melodies are the chorus part of a song. The chorus would be the most emotionally intense part of the song.

Other Person's Response: I realize those naturally inspired melodies in your head do adhere to a scale, and aren't just randomly chosen notes. But, that's not enough in order for a melody to be meaningful, great, and conveying of certain scenes to listeners. So, even if you do fully craft your melodies, and give context to them, they'd still be rubbish, even though they do adhere to a scale. The fact is, your melodies are lacking in other attributes necessary to make them great and meaningful. You claim the chosen notes and rests of your short melodies make them great and memorable, just like those short tunes, such as the McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune.

You're wrong. It takes a well-trained, and well-educated composer to create great and memorable melodies like this. It can't be done through naturally creating tunes in your head through inspiration. It doesn't matter how powerful the inspiration is because no amount of inspiration can trump training and education. Can a martial artist become a fighting master just through his inspiration and passion alone? No! He needs to be trained and educated in martial arts to come up with some good moves. He can't expect to come up with some awesome moves in his mind if he doesn't know martial arts. If he does come up with moves, then they'd just be rubbish moves.

My Reply: I think I just need to revise these melodies, so they match up with the great ones in my head.

Other Person's Response: Speaking of your best dark tune, I do see a pattern in terms of the notes. For this tune, you use the notes G, C, Ab, Eb, and F. C, Eb, and G is the C chord in F minor, and the notes F and Ab would be the notes of an F chord in F minor. The C chord would be the dominant chord in F minor, while the F chord would be the tonic chord in F minor. A dominant chord going to the tonic chord, or a tonic chord going to a dominant chord, would be a perfect or imperfect cadence.

My Reply: Thanks for pointing that out! I find it quite interesting how my naturally inspired melodies end up having a pattern to them. All of my melodies might not have a pattern to them though.

Other Person's Response: Haven't you ever come up with an idea in your head that you thought was good, only to find out it makes no sense, and just doesn't work out? My point is, you might be coming up with melodies in your head that you think are awesome, memorable, and expressing of certain scenes. But, perhaps later on you'll find out that was never true. You might find out that they really were rubbish melodies.

My Reply: Yes, that did happen to me. I did come up with certain ideas for video games that I thought were good, only to find out they don't work out. I shared my ideas to video game fans on forums, and they told me why my ideas are no good. But, I'm not sure if the same thing applies to the melodies I'm creating in my head. This might be a different situation.

Other Person's Response: I bet your ideas for video games were good, and people were just bashing them.

My Reply: If I was someone working for Nintendo or Sega, the Nintendo or Sega team would also tell me my ideas are bad, make no sense, and don't work out. I don't think a single person there would tell me my ideas are good. If I listen to people who are experienced professionals, rather than blindly accepting the opinions of people, such as you and my mother, I'll get the real truth.

Other Person's Response: You say the Nintendo or Sega team would be telling the truth if they told you your ideas are no good. I thought you couldn't decide what's true though.

My Reply: I don't think it would be a situation where the Nintendo or Sega team would debate whether my ideas would be good or not. They'd all tell me they're no good. Besides, these are the creators of famous video games, such as Sonic the Hedgehog, and Super Mario. So, they know what's best for these games.

Other Person's Response: There are fans who think the Nintendo or Sega team are doing things all wrong. For example, Sega fans would say the recent Sonic games suck. The fans preferred Sonic back in the old days. That means there are fans who disagree with the ideas put forth by Nintendo or Sega. Likewise, there are ideas put forth by fans that Nintendo or Sega disagrees with. Even if these are experienced, hardcore fans, there will still be a disagreement between their ideas, and the ideas put forth by Sega or Nintendo. They'd find themselves in a debate, where the ideas would be debated. So, even your ideas would be put to debate.

My Reply: In which case, I really wouldn't know then if my ideas are good or not, given that they'd be debated.

Other Person's Response: If you realize that your mentally inspired melodies really were rubbish all along, would you still hear them as great, and conveying of those scenes you described? Or, would you now hear them as the meaningless rubbish that they really are?

My Reply: It's quite possible I'd still hear them as great and conveying of those scenes. Let me give you an example to illustrate my point. If Jake was nice and harmless, and Jon thought he was cruel and harmful, then if Jon later learned that Jake really was nice and harmless, then Jon might still feel that he's cruel and harmful anyway. Jon might still get that same vibe from Jake. My point is, certain thoughts or feelings can still linger on, even though we realize the truth. Another example would be phobias. People know the truth that there's no reason to fear. But, they still fear anyway.

Other Person's Response: Let's pretend you successfully conveyed your melodies to other listeners, and there were experienced musicians debating whether your melodies are meaningless rubbish, or if they're awesome, then you're saying you'd have to remain undecided on this?

My Reply: Yes. I wouldn't know if my melodies are meaningless rubbish or not. That even applies to my melodies as they are now, in their beginning stage of development. If people debate whether my melodies will be great, or if they'd be rubbish once they become successfully conveyed, I'd have to remain undecided on this as well.

Other Person's Response: If your melodies really were great, and did follow all the rules of composing, then people would be hearing them as great. If a melody truly is great, then it should sound great on its own. Thus, there'd be no need for anything more than the melody itself for others to listen to. But, having more would further bring out the melody's power and greatness. The reason why your melodies convey no power and greatness whatsoever to others is because that's what they really are. They're just rubbish melodies.

My Reply: Even if you do create a melody that's great, and follows all the rules of composing, the melody alone might still sound like a tune, plucked out by a baby. So, I really do think more things are needed to bring out the power and greatness I see in my melodies, such as the proper chords, harmony, etc. Also, a person could create a melody that follows all the rules of composing, successfully convey that melody to the audience by adding in all the proper chords, harmony, etc., and the melody having the context of an entire song, but it still sounding like a meaningless melody, plucked out by a baby.

That's because something more is required to make a melody great or meaningful, other than having a melody that's successfully conveyed, skillfully follows all the rules of composing, and has the context of an entire song that's also successfully conveyed, and skillfully follows all the rules of composing. It must be a melody that actually expresses something great or meaningful. That means it must be a melody inspired from within. It must be inspired by the power, greatness, and meaning within yourself.

The same idea applies to creating a song that's also great or meaningful. So, following the rules when it comes to creating artwork doesn't make a great, memorable, or meaningful work of art. Rules are there just to assist you. They help you create a great or meaningful work of art. But, it really all comes down to inspiration. Once you've been inspired to come up with a great, meaningful work of art in your head, the rules would be there to help you convey your awesome vision to the audience.

Other Person's Response: If you created any melody, or theme, that follows all the rules of music theory, and said melody, or theme, has been successfully conveyed to the audience, you're saying it might still sound like senseless rubbish, plucked out by a baby? You're saying it's inspiration that creates the awesome, sensible melodies and themes, while the rules are simply there to help you convey said melodies and themes to the audience?

My Reply: Yes. You can have an awesome, sensible melody, or theme, that follows all the rules of music theory. But, it's possible to have a senseless, rubbish melody, or theme, that also follows all the rules of music theory. So, it's inspiration and talent that determines if you create some awesome, sensible melodies and themes, or not. The rules are just there to assist you, and help you make necessary revisions.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 05:45 pm
@MozartLink,
File #5: My Composing Dream (Part 8/12)

Other Person's Response: Imagine if there was a lame, mediocre song on the radio that many people hated. The melody is very lame, and people just find it bland. Even if the song was given much more craftsmanship to make it a skillfully crafted song, it would still be lame music. The melody, even though it was given much more artistic detail, would still be a lame, bland, mediocre melody. So, that says you can be a very skilled composer, with much knowledge and experience, who follows all the rules of composing. But, that doesn't mean you're going to create good music.

My Reply: Yes. It all comes down to inspiration, since that's what really creates the awesome music. If you're the type of person who's inspired to come up with lame, mediocre music, then that's unfortunate for you. But, if you're inspired to come up with some awesome music, then that's wonderful!

Other Person's Response: If our brains are equipped with musical knowledge, then why don't you naturally know things, like a good chord progression?

My Reply: Although I could naturally create a good chord progression in my head, since my brain can do that, I'd have to accurately reproduce that chord progression. I might get it wrong. Since there are so many different types of chords, then that makes it more difficult to reproduce chords than reproducing single notes I hear in my head. For example, if I was hearing a C chord in my head, I wouldn't know what type of C chord it is. So, I might reproduce the wrong type of C chord.

Even though I can naturally produce good music in my head, I don't actually know the technical aspects of what's going on. So, that leaves me in a position where all I can do is try to reproduce what's in my head without actually having any musical education to help me out. In other words, the type of musical knowledge I have is simply knowledge that allows me to naturally create good music in my head (i.e. knowledge gained through statistical learning). But, it's not the type of knowledge gained through education, which would help me out, and give me insight.

Other Person's Response: I heard your father is a talented musician. So, maybe you have some of his talent, and you are making some great tunes!

My Reply: I'm open-minded towards the possibility that these tunes in my mind are rubbish, even though I claimed they're great. I think they're great. But, that doesn't make it so. In regards to my father, he's a talented musician. He's a very skilled guitar player, and he's been playing the guitar for many years. My mother also has some musical talent, and the DJ tells her she's a good singer.

But, what about me? I could have some natural musical talent I have to convey to the world. Or, maybe, I never had any musical talent. Lastly, in this packet, I say a lot of things to give people an open mind to the possibility that I really do have a musical talent others don't realize yet. I have every reason to think these tunes I'm making in my head are great, and I explain these reasons. I also explain many more things.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I think you have no talent. You have no abilities whatsoever as a human being.

My Reply: Maybe you're right. If I'm no good at composing, then playing video games is the only other hobby I'm interested in, and it's the hobby I've been doing my whole life. I love the Super Mario and Zelda games because they're adventure games. I completed these games many times, and my mind loves to go on a beautiful, joyful, peaceful adventure through my positive emotions.

Other Person's Response: Do you wish to be a composer, since your dad is such a skilled musician?

My Reply: No. Composing is just something I wanted to do.

Other Person's Response: Does your brother have some musical talent?

My Reply: No.

Other Person's Response: What is the point in writing this whole packet? It's a waste of time and effort. All that time and effort could be dedicated to fully crafting your music, which you claim is so great.

My Reply: By writing all of this, I'm showcasing my own support and defense for my claim that I really do have a musical talent. Besides, I have an obsession when it comes to sharing my personal views, and that's why I write so much. But, if I don't have a musical talent, then all the things I say in this packet might as well be a matter of showcasing just how much of a pathetic joke I am. If I really have no talent, and amount to nothing as a human being, then why not waste time and effort writing all of this?

Other Person's Response: Well, I don't think it's a waste of time and effort writing these packets. If you're wrong, and you never had a musical talent, then people can look back at this packet anyway, and gain insight into your way of thinking, and looking at things. I think people would still find it interesting to read.

My Reply: Sure.

Other Person's Response: Is there another reason why you write this whole packet?

My Reply: Yes. If I have no mental, musical talent, and everything I'm saying is all lies, then I might as well amount to nothing more than someone who writes bull ****. So, I might as well write this whole packet.

Other Person's Response: I think your Super Sonic tune is really good!

My Reply: The thing is, I want the cold, hard truth as to whether my melodies are great or not. That means I must get feedback from professional musicians, rather than average people. So, just because you think my Super Sonic tune is good doesn't mean it is. It could be some average, lame tune. Or, maybe, it is great, and other people don't realize this yet, since more things are needed to bring out the melody's power and greatness. If it's the truth my melodies aren't good, then I'm prepared for such truth, and won't be upset one bit by it.

Other Person's Response: I think your tunes suck! Just because you envision yourself as a professional musician in your head, coming up with awesome melodies, doesn't make it so.

My Reply: What's wrong with my tunes, and what makes them so bad? Are there any technical flaws making them awful? I especially ask this question in regards to my Super Sonic tune because this is my most recent one.

Other Person's Response: What does your mother think of your tunes? If she thinks they're great, then she has no clue what she's talking about!

My Reply: I have shared them to her, and she does think they're great. My father lives somewhere else. But, if I shared my tunes to him, he might think they're awful. Even though my mother is naturally a good singer, she isn't educated on the subject of composing. So, my dad is the professional musician here, which means he might give me the cold, hard truth.

Other Person's Response: Then your mother must be like one of those families who think their sons, or daughters, should be the next American Idol. The families think their singing is great. But, they have no clue what they're talking about.

My Reply: This could be the case with my mother. She thinks my tunes are great, and they might be rubbish.

Other Person's Response: Your mother thinking your tunes are great is a good example of how human beings are irrational. People project meaning and greatness upon things that are just plain rubbish and meaningless.

My Reply: Yes. But, I think the tunes in my mind are great, and I have yet to accurately reproduce them, and make them fully crafted tunes.

Other Person's Response: If your mother likes one of your tunes, how would you know for sure if it's an awesome tune, and not just one she thinks is great, when it's not?

My Reply: First of all, I'd share my music online, and get feedback from others because I don't know for sure if some of my tunes really are great. Second, if I have one of my tunes play for my mother to listen to, but she doesn't respond to it while she's going about her daily activities, then it's probably not a good tune. If she stops and says something like: "Hey, I really like that tune!," then that's not a trustworthy judgment. But, if she says something like:

"WOW, THAT IS AN AWESOME, INCREDIBLE TUNE!!!," then maybe I do have a good tune here, since it would be a tune that really stands out to her, unlike my others tunes. However, I still wouldn't trust her judgment. I'd still share that tune to others online, and get their feedback. So far, I haven't had one tune where my mother gives the big, exclamatory response. If she did give such a response, then that would be like saying: "Jackpot! You could really have a good tune here!"

Other Person's Response: If you create music in your mind that you think is awesome, but is really senseless rubbish, you accurately transcribe the music in your mind, and people say it's great and meaningful, then these people must be attributing meaning and greatness to something that, in reality, is meaningless rubbish.

My Reply: Correct. Human beings are irrational, and they do attribute certain meaning to things that are actually meaningless. Even my mother said my melodies were great, and expressed certain scenes, when, in reality, they could just be rubbish tunes. If, for example, someone has no knowledge and experience in physics, then he could come up with an idea that pertains to physics.

But, due to his lack of expertise, his idea would be nonsense that he, along with other ignorant folks, thinks is a wonderful idea that makes perfect sense. Likewise, it's possible that the melodies I'm creating in my mind are just senseless rubbish that I, along with other ignorant folks, think are wonderful melodies that make perfect sense, and have yet to be realized as such by other people who think they're senseless rubbish.

Other Person's Response: I heard your mother is a good singer. But, does she also sing her own tunes?

My Reply: Yes. There's one tune she sung for me, which was a tune she made when she was in school. To me, it sounded good, memorable, and catchy. It sounded like one of those nursery rhymes for children. Even though she thought her tune was awful, I thought it was good. Now, my mother also sings other tunes she makes on seldom occasions. I think they are good, too. Maybe she also thinks they're good.

Other Person's Response: You keep using the term "catchy" to describe music. What do you mean by that?

My Reply: Music that's catchy is also called "earworms." That means they're tunes or songs that stick in your mind, and repeat over and over again. Like I said, I think I'm creating catchy tunes in my mind. I even hear professional, beautiful singers singing some of my created tunes in my head because I sometimes use beautiful singers to come up with melodies in my head.

Other Person's Response: You're the less capable individual, and your mother has to take care of you. But, since your mother is more capable, maybe she has the musical talent, is singing some good tunes, while you have no musical talent whatsoever. Or, maybe, you just like her tunes, she likes yours, but neither your tunes, nor hers, are anything good.

My Reply: It could be the case she is making awful tunes that I just think are great. Maybe she should get some feedback from others. That way, we'll know for sure if she's making some good tunes or not. If they are good tunes, then she should also get feedback as to whether her tunes express what she wanted to express. In my opinion, I thought that one tune she made in school was good, and was like a nursery rhyme. But, perhaps it's neither good, nor expresses anything of the sort.

Other Person's Response: You're good at doing certain things though. You're a good writer, since you have good punctuation, spelling, and grammar. You're also good at playing video games.

My Reply: But, these are average, basic things I'm good at. Having good spelling, punctuation, and grammar is an easy, basic skill to have. Being good at adventuring through levels as Super Mario is also a basic skill. Ask any child, or teenager, if he or she's good at playing Super Mario games, and I bet many of them will say "yes." But, when it comes to making music, or doing any other form of art, that's an advanced skill that's much more difficult to obtain. So, if I really am making awful music, then it would be very difficult for me to create good music that expresses what I want to express.

Other Person's Response: Learning good spelling, punctuation, and grammar was not some basic, easy skill you've acquired. You had to acquire this skill through schooling. You must also school yourself on composing if you wish to create some good music that makes sense to others.

My Reply: I think I'm naturally capable of creating great music in my head, and I just need some schooling to successfully convey the awesome music I hear in my head.

Other Person's Response: You don't have to go to a class to get education. You can just learn online.

My Reply: That's what I'm doing. I'm learning music theory online.

Other Person's Response: I wonder how poor people become good composers. They can't afford lessons, books, or the internet.

My Reply: I do find myself wondering how they manage to create good music in the real, physical world.

Other Person's Response: Instrument choice is also very important when making music.

My Reply: Sure. But, if someone grew up with a certain instrument, and played beautiful songs on that instrument, those songs would still be beautiful. My point is, just because you have a different instrument choice doesn't mean the power, beauty, and greatness of any melody, theme, or song you play should be taken away. The power, greatness, and meaning of music should still stand, regardless of what instrument choice you have.

Having the right instruments simply brings out the intended emotion even more. But, said music can still convey its intended emotion, and greatness, even without the proper instrument choice. This is because the series of notes, chords, rests, etc. chosen for a piece can still convey their power and meaning, even when the proper instruments aren't chosen.

Other Person's Response: Your tunes still suck, even with the recent revisions you'd made to them.

My Reply: When I created my tunes, I thought the chords and other things I've added to go along with them was good enough. I mean, even though these are basic chords I've added to my Super Sonic tune, aren't they the right chords? Apparently, my tunes still suck, and I want to know what's missing, and what technical flaws need to be addressed.

Other Person's Response: If our brains do have this natural ability of creating great works of art in our minds, then we'd be naturally following the rules of music theory without even realizing it when we naturally create great music in our minds.

My Reply: Yes. These are the rules we need to actually follow. Fortunately, our brains are machines that naturally work according to rules. They work according to the laws of science. The science of music would also be one of these rules our brains naturally follow. That's why our brains naturally follow the rules of music theory.

Since we can naturally choose a series of acts, tones, and gestures that conveys love, joy, hate, sorrow, and greatness, then we should also be able to naturally choose a series of notes and rests in our heads (i.e. create a melody or theme) that conveys love, power, joy, beauty, sorrow, and greatness. When we naturally display expressions that convey beauty and greatness to others, our brains are naturally working according to certain rules.

Therefore, our brains should also have the ability to naturally follow the rules of music theory to create great music in our minds. In other words, since expressing power and greatness through acts, tones, and gestures is a natural ability, then expressing power and greatness through creating music in your own head should also be a natural ability.

Other Person's Response: We can go outside of these rules if we wanted to because we could create a completely random series of notes and rests in our minds, and we could perform random acts, tones, and gestures.

My Reply: Sure. We could do that. Or, our brains can revert back to creating music in our minds that isn't random, and allowing us to perform acts, tones, and gestures that aren't random. So, your brain can create whatever it wants. It can create random, lame, or awful music in your mind. It can also make you perform acts, tones, and gestures that are just plain awful, or meaningless to others.

But, when you display expressions of kindness and love, these would be expressions that convey power and greatness. Thus, your brain would be allowing you to perform some awesome expressions. The same idea applies to music. Your brain can also naturally create some awesome music in your head.

Other Person's Response: None of what you're saying is true. I'm an experienced composer, and I can tell, just from looking at your melodies, that they're no good.

My Reply: Will there be other professional composers and musicians debating you on that? Perhaps they'd say I might have a great melody that I just have to convey to the audience.

Other Person's Response: When you create music, make sure you have a complete and thorough understanding of composing. Don't rely on a little bit of knowledge because that won't get you very far. Go all the way!

My Reply: I used a little bit of knowledge to create, what I thought were, the right chords to my Super Sonic tune. I've also learned how to create melodies that fit a rhythm. Apparently, my tunes still aren't good for other listeners. So, maybe you're right. Maybe I need to learn everything about composing. Only then will I be able to convey the power and greatness of my melodies.

Other Person's Response: Composing good music takes thought, time, effort, training, and talent. Expressing your emotions through music is not quick and easy, like expressing your feelings to someone. I'm not sure if you have what it takes to create good music.

My Reply: I'll admit, it would be lovely if it was quick and easy to create the awesome music I want to create. I'm very slow when it comes to understanding things, and my brain doesn't process information very quickly. So, if creating good music was quick and easy, I wouldn't have to go through all the trouble of thinking about anything, or trying to understand things.

I could just unleash my emotions through music instantly. If I felt angry, I wouldn't want to sit there and think about anything, or try to learn anything. I'd want to unleash that anger right then and there. Maybe I'd do it by beating up a punching bag. But, there are emotions I wish to express that I can't express to others. These are emotions that possess profound meaning and power.

Such emotions can only be expressed through art, and I've chosen the art of composing to express them. For example, one of these emotions would be the emotion I described for my Distant Future tune. I can't express that emotion through my words, acts, tones, and gestures. Even if I explained the emotion of my tune, that still wouldn't be enough to convey that emotion.

Sure, I could display some acts, tones, or gestures that convey a bit of mystery, and I could choose a way to explain the emotion of my tune that also conveys a bit of mystery, or bizarre atmosphere. But, that just isn't enough to express this profound emotion I'm feeling. That's why I must learn the things necessary to fully craft this tune, so that it conveys this profound emotion I want to convey.

Other Person's Response: You say you can instantly express whatever profound emotion you're feeling by creating a musical tune or theme in your head. From there, you're saying you must fully craft these tunes or themes, so that they convey the emotion you wanted to convey.

My Reply: Yes. As I said before, certain emotions I feel are profound, and they can only be expressed by creating a certain musical tune or theme in my head. But, just sharing the notes and rests to my tunes, or themes, isn't enough. That's why I must fully craft my tunes and themes. Learning how to fully craft them takes time, thought, and education.

Other Person's Response: If there's any profound and powerful emotion you're feeling that you can't express, then I think it's best to just keep that emotion to yourself. The reason I say this is because you have no talent. You have no way to express these emotions. By the way, if you were talented, you'd be able to express these emotions through poetry, painting, or any other art form.

Just explaining to the audience a certain emotion (such as being in a distant galaxy or time period) isn't enough, like you said. This is because there are certain emotions that can't be expressed by basic, shallow explanations, acts, tones, or gestures. If, for example, you were a talented poet, you could describe things in very profound, poetic ways.

I think said talent would be sufficient to convey that profound, bizarre emotion you want to convey. As you can see, it does take talent to convey profound and powerful emotions, and you can't expect to convey these emotions as an average human being with no talent (i.e. through basic tones, gestures, actions, words, and explanations).

My Reply: It sucks not being able to express these emotions. These emotions are inner greatness, and people would never realize my inner greatness if I can't express it. For example, some people might come up to me, and judge me as an ugly, pitiful, shallow excuse of a human being. But, if I had some amazing talent, and could express profound and powerful emotions I'm feeling, they'd see just how awesome and profound of an individual I really am.

Other Person's Response: At least there are certain profound and powerful emotions you can express. For example, you could show how much you love your family, or how much gratitude you feel when getting a present.

My Reply: I could express things like love and gratitude. But, said expressions just wouldn't be enough. For example, let's pretend I was feeling a profoundly beautiful feminine love, and said love had some sort of aquatic beauty to it. My masculine acts, tones, and gestures wouldn't be enough to convey that emotion. I could act like a female in a magical, aquatic, atmosphere. But, since I have no talent, I'd suck at conveying this emotion. As you can see, our inner experience is very profound and powerful, and I don't think the acts, tones, gestures, and explanations of untalented folks are enough to express their inner experience.

I think it really does require talent to successfully express that. Not having talent can only render you not fully expressing yourself to others. It would be lovely if people, with no talent, could telepathically share their inner experience to others. That way, others would know exactly what they were experiencing, and what emotions they were feeling. People would see into the inner universe of these individuals, and realize the true power that's there, rather than judging based upon the acts, tones, explanations, and gestures of these untalented individuals.

Other Person's Response: You said you feel feminine forms of beauty, joy, and love. Are you gay?

My Reply: No. Emotions take on many different forms. They take on many different characters, atmospheres, etc. So, even a girl, who's not lesbian, would feel emotions that have a masculine quality to them. For example, a girl could experience the masculine greatness of a bodybuilder. That would be an emotion the girl is feeling. The girl could even feel like she's a male bodybuilder, and that would be the character she becomes on the inside. Since she feels that way about herself, that's the same thing as saying she sees herself as a great, male bodybuilder.

Other Person's Response: Even if you have profound and powerful emotions within yourself that you can't express to your audience, since you have no talent, that's alright. Those emotions, in of themselves, are a work of art within yourself. So, that's something worth embracing.

My Reply: My goal is to create awesome compositions that express the emotions I wish to express to my audience, and I hope I can achieve this goal someday.

Other Person's Response: How can a powerful and profound emotion be a work of art within an individual?

My Reply: It's because, when you have a certain image in your mind, such as a beautiful, moving moment, that image is a work of art. Once that beautiful, moving image takes on an emotional form, that allows you to experience the beauty of that image, and allows you to be moved. Thus, that emotion is also a work of art.

Other Person's Response: You said you were mentally disabled, and that your brain has a difficult time learning and understanding things. I think having a disability is both a challenge, and an advantage, because it offers a means of character growth and perseverance. For example, Beethoven having deafness, and Stephen Hawking being in a wheelchair, challenged them more, and that's what built their character even more.

My Reply: Personally, I'd prefer to not have any disabilities because I just want to express myself through music to others, and not have to go through all the hassle of trying to learn and understand things. I don't care about building my character through tough challenges. Besides, I can grow as a person through creating great music for others to listen to. I don't have to grow by facing challenges.

That's why I'd prefer to have a genius brain that could understand, remember, and learn things very quickly. So, if I was Beethoven or Stephen Hawking, I'd prefer to not be deaf, or be in a wheelchair. What matters to me is that I achieve my goals. Having a disability just hinders that, since it takes longer to achieve goals, and not as much would be achieved. Imagine how much more Stephen Hawking and Beethoven would've achieved without their disabilities.

Other Person's Response: How is creating great music, without facing any hardships, a form of growing?

My Reply: It's because I'd become more of a person by creating more awesome music to share to the world. The more awesome music I create, the greater musical status I possess as a human being. Likewise, the more amazing discoveries Stephen Hawking would make without his disability, the higher status he has as a human being in science. Sure, his disability has already earned him a high status, since it has inspired others to do their best in the face of disabilities, or hardships. But, I'd prefer to have no disabilities or hardships. If I was Hawking, I'd prefer more amazing discoveries over inspiring others through having a disability.

Other Person's Response: It seems you're sitting here, complaining how your disability makes things difficult for you.

My Reply: I'm not doing that at all. I'm simply expressing my own preference of having no disability, and achieving as much goals as I can the quickest way possible. I'm doing this because I wish to express and share my personal views regarding music, hardships, disabilities, what makes life beautiful and worth living, etc.

Other Person's Response: You said you had speech problems when you was a child.

My Reply: Yes. My brain might've taken a lot longer to naturally learn the English language than normal people. Maybe that's why it took longer for me to start speaking the English language.

Other Person's Response: Just because you're deeply inspired doesn't mean you're going to have a talent. There are many deeply inspired people who suck.

My Reply: If I have no talent, then I hope I can develop a talent when it comes to creating music that expresses what I want to express.

Other Person's Response: I think you're lying when you say you're naturally creating great music in your head.

My Reply: If I am lying, then I don't realize it. Personally, I don't think I'm lying.

Other Person's Response: Since you're mentally disabled ,and a special needs person, then maybe you don't have any talent either. You say you have this natural, musical talent of creating great music in your mind. Perhaps you think you have this talent when you really don't.

My Reply: I hope I have it.

Other Person's Response: Is there anything else that slows you down besides having a mental disability?

My Reply: Yes. When I'm emotionally fixated on something, and trying to figure something out, that slows me down because, when your emotions are active, you can't think clearly, and that slows down certain intellectual processes. I find that, when my mind is relaxed, I understand things better and faster. However, I'm still mentally slow, due to my disability.

Other Person's Response: Let's pretend you could get a shot that would bestow you with all the knowledge and experience you need to create the awesome music you want to create. Would you get that shot? But, I thought you enjoyed the whole process of learning because you said earlier you'd enjoy the process if you had your positive emotions.

My Reply: I'd get that shot anyway because it's just a waste of time for me to sit there and try to understand things I have a difficult time processing and understanding. It would be best if I could achieve my goal of creating awesome music the quickest way possible, and that's why I'd get that shot. Since I can't get that shot, I'm willing to do my best to learn harmony and music theory. I'm also willing to improve myself as an artist when I need improvement.

Other Person's Response: Even if you did have all the knowledge and experience you need to create music, why would you think your music would be good? There are musical artists who have much knowledge and experience, but compose stale, lame music.

My Reply: As I said before, I have very awesome, amazing, powerful, and profound emotions to express. So, expressing said emotions through music would result in me creating awesome music. Think of it this way. If I had the ability to magically transform any powerful emotion I felt into a fully crafted theme, melody, or song, then it would turn out to be something incredible. I could also say the same thing about someone else. If another person felt a powerful and profound emotion, such as love towards his family, then if he had the magical ability to transform that love into music, his music would be incredible.

Other Person's Response: Let's pretend there was a cd that contained all possible songs, themes, and melodies. That means all compositions you have yet to create would already be on that cd. Not only that, but the greatest music that has yet to be heard would also be on that cd. If all that information on the cd was downloaded into your brain, then you'd know all the tracks on the cd. This would mean you could choose any track you love, and want to share. You wouldn't have to compose any music, since you could just choose any track you want to share. This would achieve your goal of sharing awesome music the quickest way possible. In the future, this might be a possibility. That means there'd be no need for composers, since people can just choose whatever tracks they want to share.

My Reply: Actually, since I wouldn't be the one who created whatever track I've chosen, given there was a machine that produced all possible songs, themes, and melodies, which were then burned on that cd, then that wouldn't be as special as opposed to if I was the one who created them. Sure, I could choose whatever track I want from that cd, and share it to express myself, just as how I could choose a T-shirt that expresses myself.

But, when I said I wanted to achieve my goal the fastest way possible, I meant I wanted to be the creator of my music. In other words, I'd want to create good music the quickest way possible. It would be boring if I could just choose any tune, theme, or song I wanted. If I create good music, that makes me the artist with a talent, and unique vision to share to the world. But, if I could just choose whatever music I wanted to share, then I'd no longer be that artist. I'd now be the equivalent of someone choosing a T-shirt he wants.

Other Person’s Response: There’s a youtube video where someone has created all possible melodies, and put them all on a hard drive. Here’s the video:

https://youtu.be/sfXn_ecH5Rw

My Reply: Thanks for sharing. If all the melodies on that hard drive were downloaded into my brain somehow, then I’d know which melodies on that hard drive convey the scenes, characters, etc. I want to convey, and I could share those melodies to others.

Other Person's Response: Wouldn't it be wonderful if there was a god, and he magically created all possible melodies and songs? They'd have all the right instruments, right chords, etc. You could ask him to give you an awesome melody, or song, that expresses whatever you wish to express to your audience. From there, you could share that melody, or song, to the audience.

My Reply: Actually, it would be wonderful. But, since that's not an option, then I'd have to create these melodies and songs myself. That actually makes it more interesting, since that makes me the creator/artist.

Other Person's Response: If you could have the ability to magically and instantly transform your powerful emotions into awesome music to share to the world, would you choose to have that ability?

My Reply: Yes, because I'd still be the creator of my music in this situation.

Other Person's Response: So, if you had the ability to magically and instantly create music that expresses any awesome emotion you're feeling, you'd choose to have that ability?

My Reply: Yes. Since I don't have the talent to create awesome music that expresses my inner feelings, then I'd choose to have that magical ability.

Other Person's Response: When a melody, theme, or song doesn't exist yet, and you're the one who created it, then that makes you the creator of said melody, theme, or song. But, when it already exists (such as, let's pretend, on a cd that contains all possible melodies, themes, and songs), then you wouldn't be the creator of it, and you'd just be choosing it from that cd.

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: You say you're slow at learning and understanding things. Are you also slow at taking tests, and doing exercises?

My Reply: Yes. Now, I did figure out why I failed those music theory exams, and it's because there were some complicated things that I didn't get right. But, when I took music theory exams on a certain website, I passed those exams.

Other Person's Response: How many of these music theory exams are you passing now?

My Reply: The 1st few. But, these exams cover simple, basic concepts. In later grades of music theory, things get a bit more in-depth and difficult. I have a very difficult time understanding more complex concepts. Thus, I might actually fail exams that cover these concepts. Fortunately, there are other things I do understand in these later grades because they're simple concepts. So, I tend to skip past the things I don't understand.

I try to understand them. But, if I absolutely can't, then I just skip past it. As you can see, my main weakness is understanding things. I can only understand simple, basic things. When something is simple and straightforward, it's easy for me to understand. But, when it gets more complicated, and there are many things to take into consideration, that's when I run into trouble. I get easily confused and lost.

Other Person's Response: What if a certain concept being presented is very long?

My Reply: It can be long, but still be easy to understand. It all depends on what it is. If it's long, but simple, then it's easy to understand. But, if it's long and more complicated, it's difficult to understand. Likewise, if something is very short, it can be easy or difficult to understand. Also, I misinterpret a lot of things, and my mind has a difficult time making sense of many things. But, like I said, there are many things that are easy for me to understand, and I understand them right off the bat.

Other Person's Response: Do you also have a difficult time remembering things?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: During your miserable struggles, is your mental capacity greatly hindered?

My Reply: Yes. My thinking is very muddled, and I have an even more difficult time making sense of things, and remembering things.

Other Person's Response: When you create music, do you take ideas from other artists? Do you derive from the works of others? You do realize great artists derived from the works of others, right?

My Reply: I don't derive from others at all. But, if my music appears like it has derived from the works of others, for whatever reason, then that wasn't my intention. In other words, I didn't intentionally derive from others. But, since my music is purely my own, then I don't think it should appear derivative. As a matter of fact, it should be quite unique, awesome, and interesting. The type of person I am is someone unique and original. I wish to create my own ideas or music, and not take from others.

Other Person's Response: It takes years of education and training to create great music.

My Reply: I don't think so. There are students who take music lessons at school, and they end up creating some good tunes. I think I just need to educate myself, so I can create the awesome music I want to create.

Other Person's Response: Just how talented do you think you are?

My Reply: I think I'm naturally talented, and am creating great music in my head. Some of my naturally inspired tunes are like great, catchy nursery rhymes (such as my Wedding Tune), while others convey completely different emotion. An example would be my Distant Future tune, and my Dark Tune.

Other Person's Response: Are you a delusional schizophrenic? You sound like one when you say your rubbish melodies are great.

My Reply: I don't have schizophrenia. Therefore, if my melodies really are rubbish, and I don't realize it, then I'd simply be ignorant of this. There's a big difference between ignorance and having a mental disorder.

Other Person's Response: The very fact you claim these melodies in your mind are powerful and awesome is plain arrogance! Especially when you said that one of your tunes could be as great as Koji Kondo's!

My Reply: You should be thankful I'm not saying it's a fact that these tunes are as great as I say they are. I'm very well open-minded towards the possibility these tunes in my head were garbage all along. So, you should, at least, appreciate that I'm being open-minded here, rather than harping on me. Besides, I'm an open-minded person in general.

I keep an open mind to many things, whether it be the afterlife, the soul, god, vaccines being harmful, conspiracy theories, and any fully crafted music I share later on being great or awful. Another thing. I'm not claiming I'm the only one who can naturally create great music in his head. I'm claiming other people have this natural ability, too.

Other Person's Response: What if you're just creating music you think is great and meaningful, when it's really rubbish?

My Reply: Then I'd beat myself up over this. Not literally though. So many other people have this natural ability to create great music in their minds, and I'd be one of the few people who doesn't have it. I just thought I had it. Hopefully, there'd be a way for me to create great music in my mind, so that I can fully craft it, and share it to others.

Other Person's Response: Well, let me ease your mind by saying that no human being can naturally create great music in his head. He must have musical training and education, so he knows how to do that. To beat yourself up over some natural ability that doesn't exist would be no different than beating yourself up over the fact you don't have the powers of Superman. No human being has such powers and, thus, there's no reason to beat yourself up over this.

My Reply: That would ease my mind if that's the case. I'd just have to learn how to create great music like everyone else then, and I wasn't this loser who should beat himself up. But, there are reasons why I think this natural ability could very well exist.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 05:59 pm
@MozartLink,
File #5: My Composing Dream (Part 9/12)

Other Person's Response: Could you just show me right now why you think people can naturally create great music in their heads?

My Reply: Sure. I think creating great music in our minds is a natural ability, no different than naturally expressing our love, joy, hate, and sorrow. Since music is an expression of our love, joy, etc., this means music is a natural expression, and that's why we can naturally create great music in our minds.

Other Person's Response: I don't believe you.

My Reply: If a therapist asked someone to envision a beautiful landscape he's never seen before (something of his own creation), then he'd have the ability to do that, even though he has no artistic training and education. This shows our brains are naturally capable of creating great works of art in our heads.

Other Person's Response: I'd like to hear more about this.

My Reply: Sure. Think of it this way. Let's pretend all human beings were telepathic, and we could telepathically communicate our thoughts and emotions to others. If I were to telepathically communicate a certain thought or emotion, such as a loving thought, or a loving emotion, other people would understand it, and they'd realize it's a powerful and profound message I'm sharing.

The same thing applies to music. Music is also like a thought or an emotion to be communicated. I should be able to telepathically communicate a great, powerful song or tune of my own to the audience, just as how I can telepathically communicate powerful thoughts and emotions. I think it's that simple.

I think I can create great music in my head, just as how I can create great thoughts and emotions within myself. A short tune would be like a short message/thought, while an entire song would be like a thought or emotion that tells an entire story. I mean, since I can naturally tell a story in my head, then why couldn't I naturally tell a story through music in my head, too?

My point is, creating great music in our minds was never about learning the technical aspects behind music. It was a natural expression all along. However, since I'm obviously not telepathic, and can't telepathically share the great music in my head to others, I have to do it the hard way, and learn how to fully craft my music so it becomes something great and meaningful to the audience.

Other Person's Response: I see. If a person can naturally tell a powerful story in his head (such as how he lost his loved one, or his life as a veteran), then why couldn't he also tell that same story musically in his head? Why couldn't he naturally create a great, powerful melody, or song, that expresses this in his head?

My Reply: Exactly.

Other Person's Response: You should also keep an open mind towards the possibility that this natural musical ability you claim exists doesn't exist.

My Reply: I'm open-minded towards that possibility as well.

Other Person's Response: If this natural ability to create great works of art in our minds really does exist, wouldn't it take more time and effort for someone to create visual artwork in his mind that expresses the story he wants to convey than simply explaining the story in his mind?

My Reply: Yes. It takes more mental effort and, thus, more time to come up with great and powerful artwork in our minds, whether it be music or visual art, than simply having a thought, or explaining a simple, short, story in our minds. However, for some, mentally coming up with great works of art doesn't take much effort at all, and they can do it very quickly. But, for those less fortunate who can't do that, there are methods that allow us to do that.

An example would be dreams, drug trips, or near death experiences, since it takes no effort in order for whole new beautiful and amazing works of art to be mentally created. You just automatically witness the artwork, since your brain automatically creates it. However, in our normal waking life, it takes effort to come up with artwork in our minds. But, like I said, for some, it doesn't take that much effort in their normal, waking life.

Other Person's Response: You can't expect to come up with a good, catchy melody in your head that conveys deep emotion when you don't know how music works. It's like expecting to come up with the cure for cancer when you don't know how stuff works. Sure, you could fabricate what you think is the cure for cancer in your mind. But, I dare you to share your "idea" to scientists, and I bet they'd tell you it's nonsensical rubbish.

My Reply: If that's the case, then I'd love to learn how to create melodies and themes that convey what I want to convey.

Other Person's Response: Have you learned some music theory, at least?

My Reply: I've been learning music theory lessons on youtube, and I've watched some videos so far. However, these music lessons cover technical aspects regarding music, such as scales, chords, key signatures, the circle of 5ths, etc. But, these lessons do not tell you how to create music that conveys the meaning and scenes you want to convey. Sure, they might explain to you that, if you want to create a melody or song that conveys a happy feeling, to put it in a major scale.

But, how would you create a happy tune that expresses someone having fun on a sunny day, as opposed to a happy tune that expresses someone coming along, and showing kindness? You see, there's more to creating music than just having the happiness and sorrow (i.e. the major and minor scales). You must choose the proper notes and rests for your melodies as well. For example, the Super Mario theme song is in the key of C major, since it's a cheerful theme.

But, how did the creator of the theme (Koji Kondo) know what notes and rests to choose for the theme, so that it conveys what he wanted it to convey? I admit, it's a catchy theme, and it's his choice of notes and rests that made it so great and catchy. I know I said earlier that we can naturally create such great, catchy tunes and themes in our heads. But, just in case the tunes in my head really are rubbish, then I need to know how to choose a series of notes and rests to convey what I want to convey, and to make my melodies great.

Other Person's Response: Here's my personal view. You don't learn how to choose a series of notes and rests that convey whatever it is you want to convey. You just learn the technical aspects behind music because that's all music theory can teach you is the techniques. From there, you utilize those techniques to create whatever melody, or theme, you want to create.

So, creating great music all boils down to your mindset, and if you have talent or not. Lame people will end up creating lame music, even though they utilize the techniques they've learned. Think of the lame music you hear on the radio. But, you're saying you're more than some lame, average joe, and that the music you're creating in your head is great?

My Reply: Which means you're basically saying what I've been saying all along, which is that creating great music in our minds is a natural ability, and isn't something we learn how to do through education? As for your question, I do think I'm creating great music in my head. But, in the event that I'm not, then that's why I'm asking how to do that. One might say to just live and be myself. But, how's that any advice? How's that supposed to help me create the music that conveys what I want to convey?

Other Person's Response: I don't understand why you're asking that question in the first place. The answer is quite simple. If you want to create, for example, a painting that conveys something mystical, after having learned the techniques of how to paint, then you'd just paint some fairies, rainbows, glitter, etc.

My Reply: It's a completely different scenario than that. Yes, if I learned the techniques of how to paint, then it would be quite obvious to me what I'm supposed to paint in order to convey the meaning and emotion I want to convey. But, when it comes to making music, I'd have no idea what series of notes and rests I'm supposed to choose to convey what I want to convey. It wouldn't be obvious to me.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I think you're one of those lame, untalented people. You're not creating any good melodies. As a matter of fact, you're worse than that because your melodies are meaningless rubbish, while lame music conveys some meaningful message.

My Reply: If I can never create good music that expresses what I wish to express, then I'd like to know the scientific explanation as to why I'm without the ability to create such music, while so many other people have it. Why can others create good music that conveys the meaning and scenes they wish to convey, while I can't? Perhaps knowing the science behind this will help me develop this ability.

I have some very profound and powerful emotions within myself I wish to express through music, and there'd be this big barrier preventing me from doing that. Such a barrier needs to be removed somehow. I'd need to know exactly what I need to do, what I need to experience, and what knowledge I need to gain to remove said barrier.

Other Person's Response: To be honest, I think you should just give up composing. You don't have what it takes to create the good, catchy tunes you want to create. In addition, you should also give up on any greater values because you don't have what it takes here either. So, you should stick with whatever previous hobby you were good at, and you should stick with your basic, emotional based values.

My Reply: Here's what I'm going to do. If I accurately transcribe these melodies in my head, fully craft them, and people tell me they do convey what I describe, and that they're great, then that would be awesome. That says I really had a talent all along people didn't realize. But, if I realize they were rubbish all along, then I'll do whatever I need to do to create the good music I want to create.

If nothing works, then I'm officially done with composing, and I'll go back to my previous hobby (which was playing video games). I've always been good at playing video games. As for my value system, if I ever lose my positive emotions, and can't sufficiently or fully regain them, then I'll do my best to change my value system. I can't promise anything though.

Other Person's Response: The value system you live by is ****, and your music is ****! Some life! Some talent!

My Reply: That's just your opinion. I have my own personal views, and I often times find myself disagreeing with a lot of people.

Other Person's Response: I have no answer for what notes and rests you're supposed to choose to convey what you want to convey. That's something that can't be taught. It's just called being an artist. If you really don't know how to do that, and you just think you know, then I think you lack life experience. When you go out into the world and experience more, then you'll know how to create music that truly moves, inspires, and motivates people. You'll know how to create the music you want to create.

My Reply: This doesn't really make sense to me. What exactly is it I'm supposed to be learning, or experiencing, besides going on youtube, and learning music lessons? Furthermore, how would this help me know the notes and rests I'm supposed to choose to convey the power and meaning I want to convey?

I'm just not seeing the connection here. If you're implying that I need to learn more things about music in the real world that I can't learn on youtube, or from other online sources, then it would make sense to me. But, if all you're telling me is that I need to go out into the world more, and experience more, then that makes no sense to me.

Other Person's Response: What do you mean when you say other people can't understand your recent melodies? I understood the series of notes of your tunes just fine.

My Reply: When I say other people can't understand these melodies, I don't mean they can't understand the series of notes I'm playing. I mean they can't understand the power and meaning these melodies of mine convey. For example, if I just had a powerful melody from any given song, then people wouldn't be able to realize the power and meaning the melody conveys without the things necessary to successfully convey the melody’s power and meaning.

All they'd understand would be the series of notes being played. My point is, I think the actual melodies themselves are there. But, I just need more things to go along with these melodies (the proper chords, beat, and more) to convey their power and meaning. I'm not exactly sure at what point a melody's power, greatness, catchiness, and meaning will be successfully conveyed to the audience during the crafting process. All I know is that I need to fully craft my melodies.

Other Person's Response: So, you're saying that, since your melodies aren't fully crafted, people will hear them as meaningless?

My Reply: Correct. A meaningless melody would be like listening to a child pluck out keys on the keyboard, or a certain instrument. It would just sound like a series of notes being played, and nothing more. It would be rubbish for others listening to it.

Other Person's Response: Why aren't your melodies fully crafted then?

My Reply: I mainly hear the melodies themselves in my head, and I just wanted to share that. But, I'll learn the things needed to fully craft them. I'll learn about chords, harmony, etc.

Other Person's Response: I know the lyrics you've added to your Wedding Tune convey meaning.

My Reply: Even though they're not the best lyrics in the world, they do convey meaning. But, I'm talking about the melodies themselves because they won't convey any power, greatness, and meaning in their current state.

Other Person's Response: What if people do get some sort of meaning from your melodies as they are now?

My Reply: I don't think it would be the meaning I intended to convey. If an artist creates a melody that's not fully crafted, and just leaves it out there for the audience to listen to, then that makes the melody open to a wide variety of interpretations.

For example, one person might envision the melody differently than another person. That's why the artist must fully craft the melody to convey his/her own personal vision. That way, the audience will know exactly what the artist was trying to convey all along.

Other Person's Response: It would be like if someone has written a sentence that's unclear to the audience. One person who reads the sentence might get a different message from it than someone else who reads it. But, if the writer makes the sentence absolutely clear to everyone, then everyone will know the real message the writer intended to convey.

My Reply: Yes. I must find a way to make my melodies absolutely clear to everyone who listens to them. That is, I must find a way to bring out their real power.

Other Person's Response: What if you described one of your melodies a certain way, and someone who listened to it got that same power/meaning from it, even though it's not a fully crafted melody?

My Reply: It still wouldn't be the exact power/meaning I intended to convey because, like I said, as long as my melodies aren't fully crafted, then that still leaves them open to a wide variety of interpretations. Also, if someone said one of my melodies is alright or mediocre, even though I claimed it was an awesome melody, that's because I haven't conveyed the power and greatness of said melody to that listener.

Other Person's Response: When you talk about conveying the power and greatness of your melodies, you're talking about the ones in your mind, perfectly transcribed, right? Because you said earlier that you might not be accurately transcribing what you hear in your head right now. So, you're not talking about the melodies you've presented in this packet, since they're poorly transcribed?

My Reply: That's correct. But, who knows, maybe I did perfectly transcribe some of the melodies I hear in my head.

Other Person's Response: Why do you think your melodies would convey power and meaning once they're fully crafted?

My Reply: I'll give you an example. The Super Mario theme song is written in the key of C Major. If Koji Kondo (the creator of the theme) has chosen random white keys for the theme, then it would be a theme that conveys no power and no meaning. It would just be white keys all over the place. The same thing applies if he has chosen random notes and rests for all his other pieces.

These pieces would no longer be that awesome Zelda theme many fans love, that awesome Metroid theme, etc. Even if these randomly chosen notes and rests adhered to the rules of music theory, they wouldn't be awesome, meaningful, catchy themes. My point is, I think I'm choosing a series of notes and rests that make my melodies great. I think my Distant Future tune is the best one, and it has a lot of power to it. People don't realize this yet, since it's not a fully crafted melody.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I still think your melodies would be meaningless rubbish, even when they're fully crafted.

My Reply: There's this one guy who created a song based off of one of my melodies. It was my Dramatic Tune. I'll first present the song, and then the links to that Dramatic Tune:

https://www.bandlab.com/msmcleod/mymusicisgoodenough-masterwav-7ae87?revId=89498e6b-9fbb-e811-af11-00155d60cb1b

Youtube Link:

https://youtu.be/Y5tW_I2hWdE

Soundcloud Link:

https://soundcloud.com/user-432115982/dramaticforce

As you can see, in that song he made, my melody did become something meaningful. It conveyed something, and wasn't just meaningless rubbish. But, he created the melody in his own vision. That means it doesn't have the dramatic power, nor the power/greatness I intended. Still, the very fact the melody conveys something must mean my melodies aren't meaningless rubbish. The guy told me that context is very important when making a melody.

He put my melody within the context of a song when he made his song. So, not only must I fully craft my melodies, but I must also put them within the context of a full theme or song. That way, they can convey power, greatness, and meaning to the audience. Sometimes, melodies, by themselves, do convey meaning and greatness to the audience. An example would be the McDonald's I'm Lovin' It tune. But, maybe my melodies need the context of a full theme or song.

Other Person's Response: It seems to me you're only fooling yourself here. You're not making any good choice of notes and rests. I think your melodies are still rubbish. You're not artistic. You're autistic, and you're incapable of creating a good melody.

My Reply: Since I can choose a series of acts, gestures, and tones that convey power, greatness, and meaning to my family, and to other people, then I can obviously choose a series of notes and rests in my head that convey power, greatness, and meaning. Therefore, I think I'm clearly capable of naturally creating a good melody in my mind.

Other Person's Response: I realize some of your melodies are just the melodies themselves without any chords or anything else. If they really are great melodies, then they should sound great and meaningful on their own, even without the accompanying chords, beat, harmony, etc. So, if people say they're awful, then that already means they're awful.

My Reply: I'm not sure if great melodies can sound great and meaningful on their own. They might still sound like musical nonsense. Even if they did sound great on their own to people, these people might be having their own vision in regards to the melody. In other words, the great melody might really sound like meaningless rubbish on its own, and people are imagining a fully crafted version of it. It's this imagined, fully crafted version that does convey greatness, power, and meaning. So, when I say my accurately transcribed melodies are great and convey certain scenes, that would be my own vision that I have to convey to the audience. I'm imagining what my melodies would be like in their complete form, and that's what I have to convey to the audience.

Other Person's Response: Then why can't other people create their own vision in regards to your melodies, and see them as great?

My Reply: It's because some people don't have the ability to create their own vision. Thus, they'll hear my melodies for what they really are at this stage: musical nonsense.

Other Person's Response: When a person looks at a great melody that doesn't have any chords or anything else to it, it can still be recognized as a great melody. A person can look at the structure of it, and other technical details about it, and conclude if it's a great melody or not.

My Reply: Sure. But, if someone listens to the melody, and doesn't create his own vision when listening to it, then I think the melody should sound like meaningless rubbish. Also, a melody can appear simple, and not that great when someone looks at it on the music sheet, and analyzes it. But, said melody can still be great, powerful, and meaningful when it gets fully crafted. My point is, when you look at my accurately transcribed melodies, don't judge them as simplistic rubbish. You might find yourself quite surprised once I fully craft them by adding in all the necessary chords, harmony, etc. Only then should you hear something great.

Other Person's Response: You claim you're this mentally gifted artist who can create great music in his head. I think you're giving yourself a title, or status, you don't deserve. Here's where you truly rank. You rank as nothing more than a mere child coming up with rubbish melodies. You are overly confident, proud, and arrogant. But, you'll be humbled to the real truth.

My Reply: I'm not sure what will happen. If it turns out my music is great once it's fully crafted, then I was right, and had every reason to give myself this status. People should then take back their insults, name calling, and doubts they've had about me. But, if I was creating rubbish tunes in my head all along, then that's the truth, and I'll be fine with it. I'm actually prepared for such truth.

Other Person's Response: You say your accurately transcribed melodies will convey power, greatness, and meaning once they're fully crafted. I don't think they will. Human beings are meaningful creatures, and we attribute meaning to things that have no meaning. For example, what's the meaning of life? It has no meaning. People just give meaning to it.

My Reply: Well, to me, this meaning seems absolutely real and compelling. People can attribute meaning to things, and be right in their assessments, while, other times, they're wrong. I don't know if I'm right or wrong in my assessments. I just go by my own personal judgments. I judge my melodies based on what I personally think they convey.

Other Person's Response: You're sending yourself on a wild goose chase. You think there's power and meaning these melodies have that you need to convey to the audience, and there's none. You should give up composing right now, and pursue a different hobby.

My Reply: I don't agree with you, and I'm going through with this, regardless of what others say. After all, people who don't listen to the opinions of others were often times very successful artists, and inventors. People would have doubts, name call, and mistreat these artists and inventors. But, that didn't stop them.

Besides, I'm someone who doesn't listen to the opinions of others anyway. The only things I listen to are important information I need to know, or things I need to learn and study, such as music theory. I don't bother with the opinions of others who say I'm a **** person, I'm a sinner, my music will be ****, even when fully crafted, etc.

Other Person's Response: You take pride in things that are nothing to be proud of. Your music isn't anything to be proud of.

My Reply: I think it is, and people will realize this later on.

Other Person's Response: I heard you sometimes have a difficult time getting the notes right to these melodies you hear in your head. Why is that?

My Reply: First of all, it takes practice to reproduce the exact notes you hear in your head. But, I do think I got the exact notes and rests to some of my melodies. Second, when I'm very focused and determined to transcribe the right notes on a keyboard, that actually hinders my ability to see if I've chosen the right notes or not. This is because you need to have a relaxed mind to think clearly, and see things clearly.

Otherwise, your mind will be muddled up. So, let's pretend I was a remixer, trying to adjust the volumes of the tracks to the right level. I'd have to keep my mind relaxed to clearly hear what the right volume would be for these tracks. If I had that overly fixated mindset, I'd have the tracks near the right volume level. But, not exactly the right level.

The same idea applies when reproducing the notes to these melodies in my mind. I might mess up and get some notes that are slightly off. But, there's a trick that allows me to get the notes right when I'm in that fixated mindset. My mind is overly fixated on getting the notes right to the forward version of my melodies, which leaves my mind settled in regards to the reversed version.

So, that makes it much easier for me to see what notes are off in the reversed version. I reverse my melodies and listen to them. If I hear a note that's off, then I'll know which note was off in the forward version. When I do get all the notes right to my melodies, that makes a melody that fully conveys its intended meaning with no "off"-sounding notes that sort of distort said meaning. Again, only I can see the meaning my melodies have at this stage.

Other Person's Response: Maybe you can't see the rubbish your melodies really are, since your mind isn't relaxed.

My Reply: That's not true. Even when I'm relaxed, I still think my melodies are great, and convey what I describe. I have always seen them this way.

Other Person's Response: I notice your Distant Future melody is supposed to either be in the key of Bb minor, or Db major. But, you're not starting on the tonal key (Bb or Db), and ending on that key. You also naturalize the E note.

My Reply: I basically create melodies through inspiration alone, and I don't limit myself to factors, such as creating a melody that doesn't have too many leaps or steps (i.e. too many big or small melodic intervals), starting on the tonal key, and ending on that key, etc. I don't think those factors always have to be necessary because you can still create great music and melodies through inspiration alone.

Think of it this way. Imagine if I told someone to sing the phrase: "I went to the store today." If that person was inspired to sing it, he'd just sing it through pure emotion. He wouldn't even think about those factors I've mentioned. Even though the melody was sung through inspiration alone, it might be a great, catchy melody he has yet to fully craft, so that said greatness and catchiness becomes realized by the audience.

Other Person's Response: The problem with you is that you think you can create great music in your head through pure emotion alone without thinking about anything. Some thought is necessary when creating a good melody. You must think about the technical aspects to create a good melody in your mind.

My Reply: I don't think that's the case. I think pure emotion/inspiration alone can result in the creation of great music in our minds. I'd like to use an interesting analogy, and it would be a Dragon Ball Super analogy. If you've never watched the anime, that's fine. I just want to share it anyway. There's a character named Goku who uses Ultra Instinct.

It's an ability where he doesn't think at all, and his pure instinct allows him to be an amazing fighter. I think we as human beings have our own little ultra instinct, and we can become great artists in our own minds. We don't need to put any thought into creating amazing artwork in our minds. We just let the inspiration do all the work.

Other Person's Response: So, you think the only thought that's actually needed to create good melodies is when you're going through the whole crafting process of figuring out what chords you need, and things like this?

My Reply: Yes. Your brain can start you off with some awesome music. From there, you need to figure out the rest when fully crafting your mentally inspired music.

Other Person's Response: You say a person can sing a great melody naturally on his own, having no knowledge and experience in the art of music. I don't believe this.

My Reply: Ask any normal person who knows nothing about music theory to expressively sing or say the phrase: "You will be my best friend forever and ever!" I bet that person would say or sing it in such a way that it becomes a good, catchy melody. Of course, if this person was an awful singer, he wouldn't be singing the melody too well. But, if the melody the person was trying to convey were put into note form on a notation software, and then made into a fully crafted melody with all the chords, harmony, etc., I bet it would turn out to be a decent melody.

My point is, creating good, catchy melodies is a natural ability. But, to say or sing a meaningless, rubbish melody, you'd just say or sing any phrase in a random manner, where the words of that given phrase are still being said/sung, but the notes are all over the place, which makes it sound like an odd, meaningless melody. It would be like a person who displays gestures and expressions that convey meaning, as opposed to someone who displays odd, random, meaningless gestures and expressions.

The thing is, human beings are naturals at conveying meaning. So, of course their gestures and expressions are going to convey meaning, and of course the melodies these people come up with in their minds are going to convey meaning. However, some people might come up with lame melodies that aren't that great, while others do come up with awesome melodies.

Therefore, even though melodies, or songs, do convey meaning, that doesn't mean it's going to be a great melody or song. Think of lame music you hear on the radio. Sure, it conveys meaning. But, it's lame music. There might also be some people who mentally come up melodies that are meaningless rubbish, even when they become fully crafted melodies. These would be those random melodies I was talking about.

Other Person's Response: Your Distant Future isn't a full theme though. I think there needs to be much more added to it.

My Reply: Perhaps that's the case. Maybe, once it becomes a full theme, it will start off on the tonal key, and end on that key. The first part of the theme is supposed to express someone arriving at the distant time period or galaxy. So, the melody you hear that has a bit of rest, and then goes into the full theme, is supposed to be the beginning. It's supposed to have a sort of settled, bizarre feel to it. Once it gets to the main part, it has a bit more energy as it expresses the touring, or the observing, of this bizarre place.

Other Person's Response: I can tell your Distant Future tune has a pattern because it alternates between 2 staccato notes, and 2 normal notes, the 2nd part of the melody raises and lowers back down, and there's a half rest throughout the piece.

My Reply: What's interesting is that I've created these patterns in my mind without even thinking about it. The inspiration alone has done it for me. From there, I've just replicated the notes and rests I heard in my mind onto a music notation software. If my inspiration alone can create musical patterns, then why can't it also create great music? I figure that, if I can naturally create musical patterns in my mind without thinking about it, then I can naturally create great music in my mind without thinking about it.

Other Person's Response: How would you respond if you fully craft your melodies, and people still say they're awful rubbish?

My Reply: There are 2 possibilities. The 1st would be that my melodies obviously don't convey what I described at all. They really were nothing great, and I was fooling myself all along. But, the 2nd possibility would be that they are great, do convey what I describe, and people can't see that, due to their high standards. If, for example, I fully craft my Distant Future tune, then there might be power, greatness, and meaning staring these people right in front of their faces, and they can't even see it.

They lack appreciation, and that's what blinds them. They expect too much when it comes to artwork. There's a big difference between how complex an artwork is, and the power, meaning, and greatness conveyed by an artwork. Just because my fully crafted Distant Future melody isn't a more complicated melody, is predictable, and repeats, doesn't mean it's a rubbish melody that conveys no meaning.

I think people are having too high of a standard, and that blinds them to the power and greatness of artwork. Even simple art forms, such as the drawing of a beautiful rose, can convey power and meaning. It doesn't have to be a rose with complex detail for it to be something great. My point is, a work of art can qualify as something great, powerful, and meaningful, even when it's not the complex work of an artistic mastermind.

Other Person's Response: So, if you do fully craft your melodies, and people still say they're rubbish, you're just going to blame and insult the audience for not liking them? You're going to blame and insult others for your incapabilities?

My Reply: Well, the question to ask here is if such blame is justified. If it's justified, then my fully crafted melodies really are great, and other people can't appreciate them. If it's not justified, then I'm the one to blame, since I'm really not creating any good music.

Other Person's Response: You can't go on about 'power, greatness & meaning' (something you seem obsessed by) until you finally finish something. Even then, you have to leave it to others to determine whether your work has any merit or not. That's for the audience to decide. Not you. Finish what you started. A half-baked idea is no good to anyone. You have to see it through, and that takes work. Lots of it.

You say that this melody is great and has lots of potential. Then you talk about 'if you decide to finish it'. Surely, if you think it has lots of potential, then you would finish it??!!?? Talk is cheap. Actions speak louder than words. I can't comment on the music until I hear the finished product.

'They lack appreciation, and that's what blinds them' ??!!?? You're wrong here. They appreciate good music, and that's what makes them decide what's good, and what's not. If someone doesn't like your music, that doesn't automatically mean they lack appreciation.

In fact, quite the opposite. It means they're discerning. If someone likes your music, they like it. Pure and simple. If they don't, they don't. That's life. Stop talking up your music and finish something. Then let the audience decide, and LISTEN when they respond.

My Reply: I will finish it then. I was just eager to share it now because I thought there was the possibility that people would realize the power and greatness this melody has. I see that's not the case, and I must fully craft this melody so that said greatness becomes realized. Lastly, there are people who don't appreciate good music. So, the audience isn't always right and discerning as you say they are.

Other Person's Response: I heard your father is also a musician. Do you wish to compose the style of music he makes, and learn from him?

My Reply: The style of music I wish to compose is something bizarre and out of the ordinary. It would be something completely different than the style he composes. That Dark Tune would be an example of one of those bizarre, out of the ordinary, tunes. Some tunes I put up there though have a normal and beautiful vibe to them. When I learn how to make fully crafted music, I wish to add my bizarre music to videos, such as Sonic the Hedgehog, and other types of video games and anime.

Other Person's Response: Could you explain more in regards to that Dark Tune because I'm already intrigued?

My Reply: First of all, I'll just say this as a reminder. There's one part of this tune that's at a softer volume than the other part. That part that has the lower volume is the leading tune, which is supposed to lead into the chorus. The chorus is the loud and powerful part.

It's at a lower octave, while the leading tune is at a higher octave. Now, this Dark Tune isn't just a tune. It's supposed to be the bridge and chorus of a song. I'll have to create the whole song myself someday. It would be like if I just shared this part of Michael Jackson's song "Man in the Mirror:"

"'Cause they got nowhere to go

That's why I want you to know

I'm starting with the man in the mirror

I'm asking him to change his ways

And no message could have been any clearer

If you want to make the world a better place

(If you want to make the world a better place)

Take a look at yourself, and then make a change

(Take a look at yourself, and then make a change)"

Other Person's Response: So, you'd just be sharing the bridge and chorus of a dark, powerful song you'd make in the future. I take it you just wish to showcase it in the meantime until you make the full song.

My Reply: That's correct. Also, I do envision a type of singing voice that would sing this dark and powerful chorus. It would be like the voice of a powerful, dark witch. If you listen to the woman's singing voice in this youtube video, then imagine a dark, powerful, choir version of her voice. It would sound similar to her voice, but in a dark and powerful way. It would be T'pau's voice from the song Heart and Soul. I'll go ahead and share the youtube video:

https://youtu.be/SwrYMWoqg5w

Other Person's Response: When you say a dark, powerful, choir version of T'pau's voice sings your chorus, are you referring to her voice in the beginning of her song "Heart and Soul?" Or, are you referring to her loud, singing voice that's heard in the chorus of her song?

My Reply: I'm referring to her singing voice in the beginning of the song. So, imagine a dark, powerful version of that voice singing my chorus. When you listen to how her voice sounds in the beginning, it sounds sort of heavy. It's almost as though that voice can become the singing voice of a powerful, dark witch. But, when you listen to her singing voice during the chorus of her song, it doesn't sound like that. So, I'm not talking about the chorus of her song.

Other Person's Response: I don't see how her voice can be the singing voice of a dark witch at all!

My Reply: Then forget what I said if that's the case. All I'm trying to say here is that a woman would sing the chorus of my Dark Tune. Her singing voice would sound like a powerful, dark witch. It would sound heavy and evil.

Other Person's Response: You're 30 years old, and even my own little daughter, with her little knowledge and experience in composing, can produce a better tune than you! At least her tunes convey meaning and emotion, while yours are just plain rubbish! Your tunes convey no meaning and emotion whatsoever!

My Reply: I think they do and people don't realize it yet, since they're not fully crafted melodies (i.e. just the bare bones laid out for others to listen to, which would be the melody itself, along with a few additional things). Also, if I feel a certain powerful, awesome emotion (such as a given character or scene), I wish to express that through music. I wish for the amazing power of my positive emotions to take on a musical form.

Otherwise, such amazing power would be contained only within myself, and wouldn't be expressed through music I create. I could certainly act out on such emotions (such as acting out a scene or character). But, I'd just be acting out, and nothing more. It wouldn't really express how I'm feeling, since it might give the impression I'm some crazy person. My gestures and voice just wouldn't convey the artistic emotion I'm feeling.

Other Person's Response: If it's really the case the fully crafted music you make is meaningless rubbish for other listeners, then it seems you can't relate to your audience. You wouldn't actually know how to create music the audience would love. You'd just think you know, but don't.

My Reply: If this turns out to be the case when I fully craft my melodies, then I'm not sure how to fix this problem.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 06:00 pm
@MozartLink,
File #5: My Composing Dream (Part 10/12)

Other Person's Response: Music comes from within. If you want to create music that is powerful and awesome for others to listen to, then the music you create has to come from within. It must be inspired, and not just rubbish.

My Reply: That's what I'm doing. The melodies I create in my head are created through inspiration. Some of them are created through channeling powerful emotion within myself.

Other Person's Response: Your melodies need more variation to them in order for them to be something good when you fully craft them. I also think they're too repetitive.

My Reply: Personally, I don't think they do, and I also think they're repeated the right amount of times. You need repetition in music. But, not too much.

Other Person's Response: I think you're a boring, dull, shallow, **** person after having read all your previous packets.

My Reply: I think there are other ways to grow and be a great, interesting person. For example, I wish to compose some pretty bizarre, profound, powerful, interesting music, and that would make me an interesting, awesome, profound person right there!

Other Person's Response: I'm sorry to say it, but magnetic therapy doesn't work, your music will be **** when fully crafted, and there's no afterlife. Those things you wanted to be true weren't! There's reality for you!

My Reply: I'm hoping it's the opposite.

Other Person's Response: You do realize that even great music has people ridiculing it, right?

My Reply: Yes. But, if far more people are saying my fully crafted music is great than there are people saying it's rubbish, then that says my music is great, and there are just some people out there who don't like it. But, if almost everyone says my fully crafted music is awful, then I'll know it's awful.

Other Person's Response: What about the beat of your Dark Tune? Do people also think it's rubbish?

My Reply: From my perspective, it's a very good, catchy beat that conveys power and meaning. It may not be the best beat in the world. But, I still think it's good and catchy. If anyone says it's rubbish, then perhaps it's because I don't have other things to go along with that beat in order to convey its power and meaning. The same idea applies to the beat, along with the melody. Or, maybe other people were right all along, and I just see it as good and catchy.

Other Person's Response: Even if it's the case that your melodies will become great once fully crafted, you're not making a proper beat. You don't have the right chords either. That's not how you make a beat, and that's not how you make chords.

My Reply: At least the melodies themselves are there for now. Now, I just need to learn how to make the right beat, chords, etc. to make them fully crafted melodies.

Other Person's Response: You said you have a memory there that allows you to realize the power and meaning your tunes have (including your Dark Tune). If that memory were to be taken away, you're saying you'd perceive your tunes like how any normal person would?

My Reply: Yes. I'd also see them as crap, rubbish tunes that convey no meaning. I know this from personal experience because I did, in fact, lose memories in regards to certain tunes. This is because the brain naturally forgets. However, certain memories can become permanent (unless taken away by brain damage, or any other factor).

I've brought back those memories I've forgotten because you can bring back memories you've forgotten. This means I now know what these tunes are supposed to be like in their fully crafted form. That even includes the Dark Tune. What's even better is that these memories are now permanent.

Having these memories will allow me to know how I'm supposed to craft these tunes. Since I see power and meaning in my tunes that has yet to be conveyed to the audience, this means I'll know what I need to do with these tunes to fully bring out said power and meaning. I'll know this when I learn how to fully craft a melody.

Other Person's Response: You already described the power and meaning that has yet to be conveyed by your tunes though. So, even if you did lose those memories again, shouldn't you still remember by reading your descriptions?

My Reply: I'd know what power and meaning my melodies are supposed to convey. However, that's not enough because there's a difference between having a memory from reading a description, as opposed to an artistic vision that has yet to become reality. Let me give you an example. If a person wrote a very powerful melody that's not fully crafted, then he'd know the power that has yet to be conveyed by said melody, since he's the one who created it.

He could even describe the power on a sheet of paper, and save that sheet. He has a vision of this melody that he has yet to bring into fruition to the audience. But, if he were to lose the memory of his artistic vision of that melody, then he'd just hear it as a rubbish melody, and nothing more, when he listens to it. Sure, he could read the description he wrote on that sheet of paper.

But, that won't bring back the artistic vision he had of that melody. If he tries to bring back that memory he lost, and can't bring it back, then he's going to have to create a new vision in his mind of that melody. If he doesn't create a new vision, then he'll continue to hear the melody as meaningless rubbish when he listens to it. But, if he manages to bring back his former vision, then he'll hear the melody as powerful and great when he listens to it.

Other Person's Response: I understand that your goal in composing is to express the things you describe because you wish to express yourself as an artist.

My Reply: Exactly. I said that Dark Tune was powerful, catchy, and conveyed deep meaning. It's supposed to convey an awesome scene of a gothic character, unleashing a magnitude of energy. I hope this gets conveyed once that tune is fully crafted. At this point though, I don't think any of that will be conveyed.

Other Person's Response: I'm a professional musician, and I can tell you right now that, even if that Dark Tune was accurately transcribed, and fully crafted, it's nothing good because not too many people are going to like it.

My Reply: Will there be other musicians debating against you on that? If so, then we don't know the real truth yet. I bet there will be other professional musicians and composers out there who might say something along the lines of:

"Give this man a chance! He could have something great here, and all of you are being dicks! I would love to see this melody in its fully crafted form to see if this man's claims of greatness were true or not!"

Given this, I see every reason to keep an open mind. I could have something great in my head as I say. But, then again, it could be garbage.

Other Person's Response: Do you have any way to show that we're just being dicks?

My Reply: This is a video of a song from Sonic the Hedgehog. It's called the Scrap Brain Zone theme. I'll show you the video:

https://youtu.be/NoVY7nvcel0

You can hear the melody, along with all the other musical elements that go with that melody. Now, if I just took the melody that goes from 0:04-0:17, and presented that like how I've presented my melodies, then I bet there will be people who'd say this melody is nothing great, it's crap, conveys nothing, etc. (that is, if these people have never heard the Scrap Brain Zone theme. If they've already heard it, then they'd know what it is just from me sharing the melody).

Even though the melody is simple, does repeat, and there's just a bit of variation at the end when it gets to 0:17, these people would be blind to the melody's greatness, personality, and memorable quality to claim it's garbage. But, once I share the fully crafted melody in that video to these people, I bet they'd now say it's something good and catchy. Take note that I'm not talking about the whole song here. Just that short portion that goes from 0:04-0:17.

Since these people would be blind to this melody's greatness, then they could be blind to the greatness of my melodies. Once I fully craft my accurately transcribed melodies, then I bet people would realize they're something great, too. So, I think the melodies I've presented are great, and it's simply the way I've presented them that renders people bashing them. I have to present them in their fully crafted form for their greatness to be realized.

Other Person's Response: So, you think your melodies are awesome, and it's simply the way you've presented them that's awful?

My Reply: Yes. This awful presentation prevents people from realizing their greatness.

Other Person's Response: That Scrap Brain Zone portion, even when fully crafted, is still nothing good or great on its own. It's having the full song that makes music great.

My Reply: I disagree. I think people would be having too high of a standard, which prevents them from appreciating the power and greatness of simple tunes. After all, why can't simple tunes be something great?

Other Person's Response: I think it's best if you learn how to fully craft your melodies yourself, rather than having other skilled composers do it. This is because only you know how to convey your melodies in a way you intended. If other people do it, then the melody might convey something different than you intended. This is because each person has his/her own vision of a melody, and you need to make your personal vision a reality.

My Reply: I agree. When I said earlier only I know what my melodies are supposed to be, and only I know their power and meaning, I was referring to my vision of my melodies that I have to bring into fruition.

Other Person's Response: You're right. There are simple tunes that are great as you say, and I agree that Scrap Brain portion, and the Frosted Flakes tune, are great and catchy. But, there's a big difference between a simple tune that's great, meaningful, and catchy, as opposed to one that's plain garbage, and doesn't convey any sort of meaning. I'm afraid your tunes are meaningless garbage, even in their fully crafted form.

My Reply: How do you know that? I haven't gotten the chance to fully craft them yet. So, I don't think people should be jumping to conclusions. Neither should I jump to the conclusion that these melodies in my head are great.

Other Person's Response: I could be crazy, but maybe you do have some great melody that people don't realize yet. But, to make it fully crafted, you need proper chords, a proper beat, and everything else that makes a fully crafted tune.

My Reply: Sure. I'll learn how to do that someday.

Other Person's Response: It seems to me you don't understand things, such as beats, chords, etc. If you don't understand that, then what makes you think you know how to create an awesome, powerful melody in your head?

My Reply: Melodies are very basic things, since they're just notes and rests. That's what makes it easy for me to come up with an awesome melody in my head. Sure, I could also come up with a proper beat, chords, and harmony instinctively in my head to go along with that melody. But, all of that's too complicated for me to try to transcribe at this point.

It's much easier for me to transcribe the melodies themselves. Thus, I've just decided to stick with transcribing the melodies in my head, and then adding basic chords and a beat. But, I don't think these chords and beats work well. However, when I learn more, and gain more skill in composing, that's when I'll add the proper chords, beat, harmony, instruments, etc.

Having more knowledge and experience will make matters much easier, and I prefer the easy way, rather than the painstaking, hard way of trying to transcribe the chords, beats, harmony, instruments, etc. I hear in my mind right now. It will be easier because I'll know my chords, and I'll have knowledge of other things. Think of a situation where a person has an amazing drawing he's created in his head.

Would it be easier if this person tried to painstakingly replicate the drawing in his head right now, when he has very little knowledge and skill in drawing? Or, would it be easier when he knows how to draw, and has more skill? The latter would be the much better alternative. Even if he took up the former alternative, that would only leave him drawing like crap.

Other Person's Response: You said melodies are very basic things. Not always. Some melodies can be very complex.

My Reply: I agree. But, the melodies I'm making are simple. Although, there might be some melodies I make in my head that will be complex. For now, I'm just sharing my simple melodies.

Other Person's Response: When you come up with melodies in your mind that don't have chords, harmony, etc. to go along with them, do you still understand their power and meaning?

My Reply: Yes. It's still possible to understand the power and meaning of a melody, even without the chords, harmony, etc. For example, if I hear certain notes of the melody emphasized in my mind, then that conveys the melody to me in a certain way, rather than just having notes and rests play in my head. In other words, the melodies I'm hearing in my mind aren't just melodies, and nothing more. There's something more there that allows me to understand their power and meaning.

Other Person's Response: I don't think that fully crafted Scrap Brain portion is enough. I really think you need a full song, with no technical flaws with it, in order for music to be something great.

My Reply: That's like a robot, or a machine, requiring the exact right input. Otherwise, it spits out an error. My point is, I don't think everything needs to be perfect in order for music to be something great or beautiful. You can still have a simple tune with some technical flaws to it, and it be something great. As long as the actual tune is there, then its power and personality should still be intact, and I think said power/personality should still be praised.

But, if the melody was completely messed up, then I'd agree it would be awful. We as human beings are not machines or robots. We should be able to see works of art as still being great, even though they're not perfected. We shouldn't be like these machines that spit out the following error whenever a great tune has some technical flaws, and isn't a fully crafted song. That error would be:

"It's still nothing good, or isn't that good. You must improve the craft to make it something good."

Other Person's Response: What do you mean by 'technical flaws?'

My Reply: I mean things, such as bad sound quality, crackles, pops, etc.

Other Person's Response: You said that Dark Tune was something simple, yet powerful, and that it's something you'd hear in the chorus part of a song. Sure, there can be simple, powerful things being played in the chorus of a song, and it does repeat. But, you need much more to make it a chorus.

My Reply: Understood. That's why I said I'll fully craft this melody someday. Remember, this tune is simply the chorus part taken out of an existing song I'd create. I could create the whole song myself if I want to, or just fully craft the chorus, share that, and leave it at that because it should still be something awesome and powerful on its own, even without the context of an entire song. Like I said, short tunes can still be something awesome and powerful.

Other Person's Response: Trust me. Once you become a skilled, educated composer, you'll look back at those tunes you've created in your mind, and realize just how awful they were. You'll come to realize they were meaningless garbage all along that never conveyed anything.

I mean, if you already think certain crap works of art are great, then this shows you're blind to the truth. After all, you said in your Undecided Packet that you're blind to virtually every truth there is.

You're currently living in a fantasy, since you believe your mentally inspired tunes are great. But, reality will strike you, once you head down the learning path of the composing art. In short, learning more allows you to see the real truth.

My Reply: Although you have a point, I can't be too sure if you're right. Only time will tell if these melodies I have in my head are great or not. For all we know, if I do become a skilled, educated composer, I might still think these tunes in my mind are great, and convey the scenes I describe.

Other Person's Response: If you still think they're great and convey what you describe, even after all the knowledge and experience you've gained, then there must be something wrong with you.

My Reply: Maybe you're right.

Other Person's Response: I heard you couldn't tell the difference between a crap work of art, and a good one. But, you can tell the difference when the absolute worst, crap artwork is compared to a great one. Your melodies fall under the category of being absolute garbage. So, I don't know why you can't see them for the garbage they really are.

My Reply: You're right. If my tunes, for whatever reason, fall under the category of being absolute garbage, then surely it would be obvious to me. The fact I think they're great could mean they're great, and that I just have to convey their greatness. Or, maybe, they're not absolute garbage, but still crap that I see as great.

Other Person's Response: Other people would say you're blind and can't see how awful your tunes are, while you say other people are blind and can't see how awesome they are. So, which is it? I personally think you're the blind one.

My Reply: That's a good question to ask, and I'm eager to eventually discover the real answer to it.

Other Person's Response: I thought I was a skilled basketball player once, only to find out later on I sucked, once I gained knowledge and experience in the sport. I think the same thing applies to you. You should eventually come to the realization those melodies in your mind were garbage.

My Reply: We'll see then.

Other Person's Response: If you think your tunes are great, and convey awesome scenes, but that people just don't understand your tunes, then you might as well be saying this to your audience:

"My music is great. You're just hearing it wrong."

My Reply: The tunes I'm hearing in my head I think are wonderful. But, what I'm reproducing is awful and jarring. I need to somehow make my tunes great like they are in my head.

Other Person's Response: No. Your melody really won't be anything good. It's overly simplistic, and too predictable. Your melodies are either too predictable, or discordantly unpredictable. There's either nothing to surprise, or nothing to latch on to.

My Reply: How are my melodies overly simplistic? If I came up with a melody, which had the notes C, D, E, F, and G going up, then that would be a very basic, simple melody. That melody wouldn't be anything great. But, my melodies are more sophisticated than that. I don't think they're standard, generic melodies like the example I've just given. I think they're great, and do convey the emotion I describe. It's not just a more sophisticated choice of notes I made.

I think my choice of notes and rests do convey the power and scenes I describe. My melodies might be too predictable, as you say. But, aren't there melodies out there that call for such predictability? Also, I do realize my melodies are lacking in many things to make them fully crafted, and I do agree with the advice other people give me to help me make them fully crafted. But, I just don't agree they're generic melodies that convey nothing. Surely, they must convey the power and emotion I describe once they're fully crafted.

Other Person's Response: Yes, your melodies are more sophisticated than some lame, generic melody. But, they're still too simple to be considered anything great, or conveying of any given scene.

My Reply: I said earlier there can be simple, powerful, repeated things in the chorus of a song. Are you sure it can't be something as simple as my Dark Tune, and still convey an awesome, powerful scene?

Other Person's Response: You can't just have the fully crafted chorus of a song, and that be good enough. You need to engage the listener. A good part of what makes a great piece of music is the same as what makes a good bit of comedy. It's about the setup and punch line.

You need to set up the expectation of where the piece is going, and then subtly deviate in an enjoyable, but unexpected way. In music, you can do this through tune, tone, texture, etc., or a combination. Then, keep doing it. Most people who do that well do it without even realizing that's what they're doing. It just comes naturally. It's called talent.

When writing your packets, you also need to engage the reader as well. Otherwise, people won't even bother reading, and won't think it's anything good. For example, when writing an article, it has to be done in such a way that readers would really want to continue reading it.

My Reply: I think that's too high of a standard because, let's pretend I did fully craft that chorus, then I think that, alone, is something awesome and powerful well worth appreciating. I think people just need to learn to appreciate things, whether it be my writing, ideas, music, me as a person, or anything else.

Other Person's Response: Although that Dark melody does repeat, I can tell there's a bit of variation to it because some notes are lowered, and then raised each time it plays.

My Reply: Some would say that's too predictable of a melody. But, some melodies do have such predictability, and said predictability works well with these melodies. It all depends on what emotion you want to convey. If you want to convey something different, then you'd have more variety to the melody.

Other Person's Response: I don't think it's a matter of people not understanding your tunes. I think your tunes really are ****. Also, there are many problems, and a major one would be the synth you're using because it's awful!

My Reply: How do you know people understand the music I'm trying to convey? We can't prove if the melodies I'm trying to convey are understood by other people. As far as we know, they could be perceived as ordinary, crap tunes a mere child, or complete beginner would come up with. If my tunes are being perceived this way by others, then it's because I need to successfully convey my melodies, so they truly become understood.

In regards to the synth, it was in FL Studio. I can't see how awful it is. It's just fine to me from my perspective. That's because I lack knowledge and experience to see just how awful it is. Maybe I got the wrong settings on it. That being the case, I'd have to learn how to get the right settings to make it sound good. Also, I don't have the proper instruments for my tunes either, and expected people to understand my melodies, and their intended power.

Other Person's Response: So, you're basically saying that, if people do get some sort of meaning or scene from your Dark Tune in its current stage (such as that it sounds like some awful, mediocre tune you'd hear in a child's movie), that it wouldn't be the intended meaning, and that you need to fully craft the tune, so its true power and meaning can be conveyed?

My Reply: Yes. Imagine if any musical artist tried to convey a piece, or a certain melody in his mind, that was amazing and tragic. But, other people got a whole new meaning from it, and said it was all garbage. That musical artist would be an unrecognized genius.

Other Person's Response: Maybe the melody you're hearing in your mind is great. But, if you can't reproduce it for anybody else, then it doesn't really matter, does it? I could insist that I've got the greatest story of all time in my head. But, if all I can write is: "Once upon a time, there was a dog who saw a bird," that's not really a timeless classic, is it? Can I blame the reader for not understanding my brilliant story?

My Reply: You can't blame the reader. I was hoping other people would understand my melodies. But, I see they can't, and my only option is to fully craft these melodies.

Other Person's Response: There's no reason why your Dark Tune can't make a great piece of music if performed well and inventively (and with more going on than you have currently). But, you've not done that. There are some tunes that are great by themselves. But, then there are those tunes that are great, but can't be great by themselves. Your tune is the latter because it needs much more development before it can become great.

My Reply: I'll consider fully crafting this tune then someday.

Other Person's Response: You do post the most complete collection of bollocks I've ever come across. Those melodies of yours have NO power and meaning. They're derivative, utterly predictable, crap. Stop defending rubbish, learn a bit about music (no, you haven't), learn to use the instruments and processors you find on the net (there's LOADS of free stuff, which is of extremely high quality), compose something consisting of more than a single-voice drone designed for an 8-bit game for kids (even medieval monks eventually discovered polyphony), and then join the VAST crowds of wannabee composers who struggle every day to get their works heard. I give you fair warning. There are some extremely talented people among that lot. You don't have a snowflake in hell's chance.

My Reply: But, even tunes that might seem simple, repetitive, derivative, predictable, crap, etc. end up becoming great tunes once they're fully crafted. When I say great, I don't mean the best thing in the world. I mean something that's still great and powerful in its own way. Any given tune doesn't have to meet the highest standard to be considered great. A tune can still meet a reasonable standard of greatness. What people consider to be a reasonable standard is subjective though. For example, some people would say that the Super Mario theme song doesn't even meet a reasonable standard of greatness, while I think it does.

The Super Mario theme isn't the best thing in the world. But, it's still something good. The same rule applies to simple, short, repetitive tunes. Tunes such as these can still be something great and powerful. My point is, my tunes might seem like simplistic, unoriginal garbage at this stage. But, I have yet to convey the tune's greatness and power. Only then should it become something great, and convey what I describe. Lastly, I'm willing to take the advice of others to help me improve and successfully convey my tunes. So, I'm not dismissing any advice people give me.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I don't see how your melodies are derivative. They seem quite unique, and there are some bizarre ones there, too.

My Reply: Exactly. When I'm inspired to create a melody, it's purely my own melody. I don't derive from the works of others at all. I don't know where people are getting this idea that my melodies are derivative. If they seem derivative to others, for whatever reason, then it wasn't intentional on my part.

Other Person's Response:

Step 1:

Matt: "Listen to my music. Isn't it great?"

Normal Person: "I listened to it. No, it's not."

Step 2

Matt: "...but it's a deep and powerful melody..."

Normal Person: "It's not. It's rubbish."

Step 3

Matt: "...but there are basic, simple melodies out there that are powerful, great, and memorable..."

Normal Person: "Yes. But, yours isn't one of those."

(repeat from step 2, occasionally step 1)

My Reply: But, you just told me earlier that this melody of mine could be something great if I carried out the necessary tasks you mentioned (i.e. performing it well, having much more to it, etc.). So, how can you conclude that the melody I'm hearing in my mind is nothing great?

I think I got the right notes, rests, and tempo to the melody, and I don't think it matters what anyone thinks in regards to this melody because there are many unexpected surprises in life.

You might find yourself surprised once I fully craft this melody to make it like the one I'm hearing in my head. You might find yourself looking back and realizing just how wrong you were to jump to the conclusion that I never had any talent, and that my melodies were meaningless garbage.

Other Person's Response: Why do you write so much bullshit?

My Reply: There are two reasons:

1.) If I fully craft my melodies, and it turns out people were wrong when they say they're meaningless garbage, then everything I've written would be a matter of people looking back at this packet, and realizing just how wrong they were. I also like to share and express my personal views.

I'm merely speaking up for myself, and keeping an open mind to the possibility that my melodies could be great, and their greatness not being recognized yet.

Many people are closed-minded, and I'm not one of those people because I also keep an open mind to the possibility that other people were right. However, if it's the case other people are wrong, then my tunes really were great, and I wasn't talking bullshit.

2.) If I really am talking bullshit, and my melodies were meaningless garbage all along, then I might as well amount to nothing more than an untalented loser who talks bullshit all the time. I might as well pester people with these lies.

Other Person's Response: You know, there is a #3. Even if #2 is the reality of the situation, you don't have to give up and deem yourself as some worthless loser. You said composing was your passion, and you can still go through with it, and learn how to make some good music later on. Therefore, it doesn't have to be all black and white like this.

My Reply: I'll consider #3 then if it's the case #2 is the truth. But, I think it could very well be #1.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I'm convinced it's #2. Imagine if I told a child to create a melody that conveys something powerful and profound, such as a couple falling in love. Sure, that child would come up with a tune, claim it's something great, conveys what he describes, and that he's an unrecognized genius who simply needs to make his melodies understandable for other listeners. But, that child knows nothing, and he's only deluding himself. From there, he'd only remain in denial to continue to stick by his claim, despite other skilled musicians telling him his tune is garbage (even when fully crafted).

My Reply: You could be right. But, I'm still going with #1. I don't think I'm the equivalent of a mere child. I'm more of a person than that, and I think I can be inspired to come up with truly great melodies in my head.

Other Person's Response: It has nothing to do with how great you are as a person. Music is like any other skill. If you have very little to no knowledge and experience, then you can't expect to come up with any great tune in your head. It doesn't matter even if you were the greatest, most compassionate, inspired person on Earth; without the necessary knowledge and skill, the melodies you come up with in your head will be crap.

My Reply: Music is something very personal to me, and I think I can come up with truly great melodies in my mind by channeling my inspired greatness as an individual.

Other Person's Response: Your conclusion that these created tunes in your mind are great, and convey the scenes you describe, is irrational. It seems you don't have much capacity for rational thought. If you were a rational thinking person, you would've realized your melodies are meaningless garbage, like other people have been telling you.

My Reply: We'll see who's the irrational one once I fully craft these melodies.

Other Person's Response: Do you wish to create good lyrics to your music?

My Reply: I don't need to. I'm concerned with just creating very good, emotionally powerful, and catchy music. Let's pretend I do create such music, and it had awful lyrics. It would still be great music, simply because of its power and catchiness. If anyone wishes to add their own lyrics to any fully crafted music I share in the future, that's fine. So, I'm not really concerned about being someone who comes up with good lyrics.

Other Person's Response: Even if your music turns out to be amazing, that doesn't make you an amazing person.

My Reply: Music is an expression of our personality. Therefore, if you create amazing music, that makes you an amazing person. If there was a horrible person who created amazing music, that person would be horrible in one area, but would be an amazing person in another area.

Other Person's Response: I could also restate your line of logic as:

"I completely disagree with others when they say the melodies in my mind I'm trying to convey are meaningless crap. Music is an expression of our personality. Since I know how to express myself as an individual, then that means I instinctively know how to express various forms of power and greatness through music in my own head. In other words, I don't need to study up on how music works in order for me to create great, powerful melodies in my head. But, I do need to study if I wish to convey these melodies, and their greatness/power in the real world (which I plan on doing)."

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Although I admire the type of inspiration you're channeling to create these melodies in your mind, since you're inspired to come up with awesome, evil, powerful, dark tunes, what good is that if all you're creating is **** music, both in your head, and in the real world? Just because you have an awesome inspiration doesn't mean the works of art you create in your head will be awesome, too.

My Reply: I don't think such awesome inspiration/emotion is yielding **** melodies in my mind. I think these melodies in my mind reflect the awesome inspiration used in creating them. I just have to find a way to convey these melodies.

Other Person's Response: I think you're confusing the amazing, powerful emotion used in creating your melodies with the melodies themselves. You see them as being one, when they're not.

My Reply: I can still be apathetic (emotionless) and come up with a melody in my head that I think is awesome and powerful.

Other Person's Response: How do you come up with your great, catchy melodies? Do you just pick what series of notes sound good to you?

My Reply: No. It's nothing like a student, being with a music teacher, who says to pick what series of notes sound good to him, while following the rules of music theory. An average lay person would use this method in coming up with melodies that sound good to him. How do you think Koji Kondo created the Super Mario theme?

I bet he didn't just sit there and picked what series of notes sounded good to him. What I do to create my melodies is I let the emotion/inspiration create the melodies for me. It's as though I can use pure emotion/inspiration alone to sculpt a musical work of art in my own mind.

This method is something greater, and goes deeper than just playing around on the keyboard to come up with tunes, or just casually coming up with melodies in your mind that sound good to you.

This greater method is like using your own soul, or your very life essence, to craft music, rather than just being an average person, coming up with average melodies. It would be like a person deeply inspired to come up with great music, as opposed to an average person, going to work, and making music as an ordinary job that he likes, and enjoys.

Other Person's Response: So, you're basically saying that music is a very profound, spiritual thing and, thus, you can come up with great, powerful tunes in your head through your very soul, rather than through actually studying up on things, and learning how to do it.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: You can't create any amazing, catchy music in your mind if you don't know how to do it. So, you're only deluding yourself into believing these tunes you have in your head convey scenes, are catchy, and are great tunes.

My Reply: I know instinctively how to express sadness, anger, or joy if I felt sad, angry, or joyful. The same idea applies to making music in my mind. I know instinctively how to create great, catchy tunes in my mind that express whatever emotion I'm feeling.

I'd call my musical instinct a higher instinct, and a more advanced form of expression, since I'm creating amazing, emotionally powerful, and profound tunes in my head, as opposed to simply performing certain gestures, or tones of voice. In other words, I can express myself through music far better than what any tones, acts, and gestures can.

Only in my mind though at this point. So, you are wrong. I don't need to know how music works. I just need to channel whatever emotion I'm feeling. The only time I need to know how music works is if I wish to successfully convey the music I hear in my mind (which I want to do).

Also, I only channel the positive emotions because I see nothing beautiful about negative emotions. When I create dark or dramatic sounding tunes, I'm actually channeling positive emotions. They would be powerful, dramatic, good feelings.

Other Person's Response: Your whole idea that you somehow know instinctively how to create good, powerful, and catchy music in your head is plain nonsense!

My Reply: Music is a part of me, since it's something so profound and beautiful to me. I may not know music technically. But, I do know it personally (instinctively). So, I consider music to be an extension of myself, which means I can instinctively create great music in my head. I don't need to know the technical information of how to express love, hate, sorrow, or joy because I can do that naturally on my own. Sure, there's technical information on that (which has to do with evolution and psychology).

If I was a robot, then I'd read this technical information because I wouldn't have the instincts of a human being. But, since I am a human being, then I can instinctively express things, like love and joy, without studying up on evolution and psychology. The same thing applies to music. That's how I instinctively know how to create powerful and catchy tunes in my head that express whatever I want to express. For now, I'm just creating tunes, and not anything fully crafted in my head.

Other Person's Response: I think I know what's going on here. You can't tell the difference between a tune that's awful gibberish, and a tune that's good and catchy.

Since you don't know what makes a good, catchy tune that conveys scenes or characters, due to your lack of musical knowledge, then that leaves you creating gibberish tunes in your mind that you think are good, catchy, and convey scenes.

In other words, fully crafting these tunes is futile, since they're all meaningless, awful gibberish anyway. It would really be no different than a child playing around on the keyboard, plucking random notes, and then saying he's got something great to fully craft, and share to the world.

My Reply: We can't say for sure if this is the case yet. Besides, if these tunes I've made convey such profound meaning to me, then they have to be good, catchy tunes. If I were to listen to some kids plucking out random notes on keyboards, or making random ruckus with their guitars, then I'm quite sure I'd see that as awful gibberish. So, the very fact I see my tunes as great and catchy must mean they're great and catchy.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 06:02 pm
@MozartLink,
File #5: My Composing Dream (Part 11/12)

Other Person's Response: What you're doing here is making an irrational judgment of these tunes you have in your head because it's a judgment that doesn't match up with reality. As a matter of fact, many people make such irrational judgments all the time. For example, I could truly perceive a random stranger on my streets as a horrible, disgusting person, simply because this is how I feel about him/her. But, that would be my own judgment, which doesn't make it true.

My Reply: I don't know about that yet. It could really be the case these tunes really are that great, and that I just have to find a way to convey them. Music is something so personal and profound to me that it could be the case I can naturally come up with great tunes in my head through inspiration alone. It would be like how an anime character is profoundly connected to the fire spirit and, as a result, is naturally gifted in the art of the fire spirit. That character would be gifted mentally, since it's a mental/spiritual connection with the fire spirit.

In other words, that character can be inspired with wonderful, amazing ideas through the fire spirit. But, some knowledge and training would be needed in order for that character to convey his ideas. This analogy applies to me because I'd be profoundly connected to the spirit of music, and can be inspired to come up with great tunes in my head. I'm not saying the spirit of music is an actual spirit. That would just be a metaphor.

Other Person's Response: What if you do become a fully trained and educated composer, but compose fully crafted music that's lame, and doesn't express what you want to express?

My Reply: Then I'd find that quite frustrating, and would give up composing if this doesn't change. Now, one would think that me being a fully trained and educated composer is all that's needed for me to achieve this goal. But, perhaps something more is needed that I just don't have. I'll give another anime analogy here to get my point across, since I love anime. Goku was able to achieve Super Saiyan.

But, Vegeta couldn't, no matter how hard he trained. In other words, Goku had something within himself that allowed him to become Super Saiyan that Vegeta didn't have. But, Vegeta did go Super Saiyan later on. However, that's beside the point here.

The point I'm trying to make here is that I could go through all the education and training I want to with composing. But, I'd always be lacking something necessary that would allow me to compose music that's awesome, and expresses what I wish to express. Such an ability would be something I can't obtain through education and training.

Other Person's Response: So, you're basically saying you'll never be any good at composing, no matter how much education and training you get?

My Reply: Correct. I hope that's not the case though.

Other Person's Response: I know you've talked about your mother in your previous packet. But, what about your father?

My Reply: I don't live with my father, and I only see him when it's my birthday (which would be September 1st). Although, he has practiced the guitar for years, and is a very good guitar player. He even composes his own music. Who knows, I might have inherited some of his talent and, as a result, am creating amazing, catchy tunes in my mind. As far as I recall, I've been creating such tunes in my mind ever since I was a very young child. I even sang them.

But, since I don't know how to sing, then everyone would just hear them as gibberish tunes. As for these tunes I've created in my mind when I was a young child, they were catchy, amazing, children's tunes, and not the style of tunes I'm creating in my mind now. So, I'm naturally talented when it comes to creating good tunes in my head. But, I'm not naturally talented when it comes to playing an instrument, singing, or getting the notes to these tunes right the first time. I have to keep toying around on the keyboard until I think I've gotten the notes right.

Other Person's Response: Do you remember one of these tunes you've created in your mind as a young child?

My Reply: Yes. I remember it like yesterday. I will convey this tune when I know how to do it, so everyone can listen to it. I'm not going to be a singer. I'm just going to compose tunes by figuring out the notes on the keyboard, and going from there on musical software. Also, back then, when I was a child, I was limited to creating catchy, childish tunes in my mind, since my brain didn't have enough musical information to create these new tunes I'm creating in my mind now. I talk more about this below.

Other Person's Response: Children think they're creating great tunes in their heads all the time. How are you special? Do you think you're gifted? If so, then can other people create great, amazing music in their heads somehow?

My Reply: Our brains are naturally capable of creating amazing works of art in our head, as I said before. There's a software known as Rosetta Stone, where people sit there, listen to new languages, and learn to speak them naturally. I think the same idea applies to other things as well, such as music, visual art, etc. However, learning to speak a language is different because you can automatically convey any message you want to convey, while it requires actual knowledge and training to convey the music and visual art you create in your mind.

Other Person's Response: If you know how to create amazing, catchy tunes in your mind, do you also know how to create amazing poetry in your mind, or how to create an amazing story?

My Reply: No. But, that's only because I never read poetry or stories as a daily routine. Had I done so, then my brain would absorb that information, and I'd know how to do it naturally, just like how I'm able to naturally come up with amazing, catchy tunes in my mind.

Other Person's Response: I know plenty of people who don't know anything about composing, but are unable to create good music in their minds, since they don't know how to do it. By your logic, they should instinctively know how to do it.

My Reply: Yes. Their brains already know how to create good music. They just need that inspiration, which would allow their brains to tap into that knowledge they have. By tapping into that knowledge, they'll be able to create good music in their mind. There are certain methods that allow our brains to tap into that knowledge to create amazing works of art in our minds. The example I gave was dreams, near death experiences, or psychedelic drugs. But, inspiration can also do the trick.

Other Person's Response: What works of art are our brains naturally capable of creating then?

My Reply: It could be anything. Even a new song by Michael Jackson that's just as great, powerful, profound, memorable, and catchy as any one of his songs. If you've ever listened to MJ's music, then your brain already has all the information it needs to create a new song that is just as good as MJ's songs. Your brain would know the very soul, or personality of his music, and create a whole new song.

Other Person's Response: Do you have any tune that has more than just the melody and a beat to it?

My Reply: I do have this tune, which has chords to it. This is supposed to be the chorus part of a song I'd make in the future.

Soundcloud link:

https://soundcloud.com/user-432115982/motivationaltune

Youtube link:

https://youtu.be/NBBLpuvu-RY

Music Sheet:

https://ibb.co/fJ59SK

Other Person's Response: I'm sorry. I think that tune has been successfully conveyed. But, it's really nothing good and catchy.

My Reply: But, like I said before, there's more to conveying tunes than just having the melody down. You must have the proper beat, harmony, and chords. So, it could be the case I just don't have the right choice of beat and chords. There might also be additional harmonic elements needed to convey my tunes as well.

Given this, this tune might not have been conveyed. I mean, the chords and beat I've chosen still adhere to the key signature (C Major). But, I could just be having the wrong choice of beat and chords. My choice might be very basic and generic. This choice might instead be conveying my tune in a whole new way.

So, it might be perceived as a completely different tune than the tune I'm trying to convey. I think various choices of beat, chords, and harmony will convey your melodies in many different ways, and the idea is to have the right choice to convey the melody how you want it to be perceived.

So, that's why I think I must learn more about music theory in order to convey my tunes how I want them to be conveyed. I already know the great, catchy tune I'm trying to convey. But, perhaps it's being conveyed entirely different for other listeners, due to my choice of beat, chords, and there being no additional harmonic elements. Maybe this is the reason why other people are telling me this tune is nothing good and catchy.

Other Person's Response: How simple do your tunes have to be in order for you to think they're great? Do they only have to consist of 3 notes?

My Reply: Let me try to illustrate my point here. I'm quite sure many people have listened to one of Beethoven's symphonies, which begins with that famous and catchy:

"Bom bom bom booooooooooom (higher octave). Bom bom bom boooooooooom (repeated at lower octave)."

Even though this portion of his symphony is just 4 notes repeated, it's still great. Of course, it isn't just the 4 notes repeated. There's also proper chords and whatnot to go along with that repeated 4-note melody. Now, even if Beethoven stopped there, and decided to only share that, it would still be something great.

That repeated 4-note melody Beethoven has chosen obviously wasn't some basic, lame, mediocre tune. Anybody could choose a repeated 4-note melody like Beethoven. But, it takes a great artist to choose the right repeated 4-note melody that conveys something great.

For example, some lame, techno music producer could choose some 4-note melody to repeat, and make into a fully crafted tune. But, it wouldn't be anywhere near as good as Beethoven's repeated 4-note craft.

I don't think I'm the equivalent of some lame composer, choosing any old notes in his mind. I truly think I'm making an excellent choice of notes that I have yet to make into a full craft. These fully crafted tunes should be something very good and catchy.

Other Person's Response: I think it's ridiculous to think that Beethoven just sharing his 4-note craft (motive) is all that's needed for his music to be great.

My Reply: I don't think so at all. If people listened to it, then they'd find themselves excited, and really wanting to listen to more of the symphony. The very fact they're excited to begin with just shows that this repeated 4-note craft was something great by itself.

It would be no different than if someone was putting on an amazing light show, but only shared a very brief performance of his/her act. Just because it was a very brief performance doesn't mean it was nothing great. It was simply a brief demonstration of greatness that gets people excited to want to witness the full act. But, that brief demonstration can still be appreciated, since it was still something great and beautiful.

Other Person's Response: I'm sorry. But, I have to disagree. I really think it is ridiculous.

My Reply: For someone who's used to living his life by a high, professional, musical standard, it might very well seem ridiculous. But, imagine the casual standard of a music teacher, teaching students who are complete beginners to composing.

If a student has chosen a melody with a few notes, and this choice was something more than what some average composer, plucking out any old keys would up with, then that student might get the gold star. He might be praised by this teacher.

That goes back to my Beethoven example with how his choice of a repeated, 4-note melody, was something more than what the average, lame composer could come up with. To me, that's all that's needed to make music good. Making it into a fully crafted song would be much better.

But, just having the melody itself is good enough, and should be appreciated. A professional standard would say that's not good enough, and that it's nothing more than something very basic and simple. But, a casual standard would say that's good enough. Like I said, I think this casual standard is a reasonable standard.

Other Person's Response: You're only embarrassing yourself to compare your tunes to Beethoven's.

My Reply: I'm not embarrassing myself, since I'm not embarrassed at all. Neither am I afraid or ashamed. I'm simply expressing my personal views. I might be embarrassing other people if they felt embarrassed. But, I'm not embarrassed. Also, I don't think my tunes meet the standard of a fully crafted symphony by Beethoven. I just think my tunes are the equivalent of a professional musical artist (even Beethoven) choosing simple, good, catchy melodies.

Other Person's Response: I'm going to quote a few things you said and respond to them:

Quote:
That goes back to my Beethoven example with how his choice of a repeated, 4-note melody, was something more than what the average, lame composer could come up with...


Actually, any lame composer could have come up with exactly that repeated 4 note melody.

Quote:
... To me, that's all that's needed to make music good.


No, it's what's needed to START making good music...

Quote:
Making it into a fully crafted song would be much better.


Making it into a fully crafted song IS the thing that distinguishes lame composers with good ones. It's not that it "would be much better." It's what's required to make it anything.

Anyone can come up with a short melody. But, developing it into a full song, or symphony, is the art of writing music, and where all the hard work lies.

I wonder if Beethoven hadn't bothered writing the rest of his symphony. Would people even take notice of those 4 repeated notes? I suspect it's because those 4 repeated notes remind them of what comes next is what makes it good. Not the 4 repeated notes on their own.

My Reply: Then you might as well say that a powerful portion of one of Michael Jackson's songs is something lame, and would make MJ a lame composer if he only composed that, and shared it. I personally do not agree with this. I think making a fully crafted song really isn't necessary.

Other Person's Response: Look. It doesn't matter what you say, and how many arguments you come up with to support your personal views; you're never going to get other people to convert to your standards. So, you either produce fully crafted songs that achieve your intended goal of pleasing the audience. Or, don't even bother, and just share your tunes to your friends or family.

My Reply: I'll definitely consider creating fully crafted songs then. Personally, I just don't agree that a fully crafted song is necessary to make music good or catchy. All I was doing here was sharing my personal views, and I think sharing my views is still well worth sharing anyway. Again, it would be like a person writing in his personal journal, and sharing it.

For example, a person can write an extensive essay, which includes a Q&A Section on his personal views of Christianity, and how he disagrees with the doctrine of hell. Another example would be someone who writes an extensive essay that talks about how he disagrees with the standards of others, which say that homosexuality is wrong.

Other Person's Response: The theme in the intro of Symphony No. 5 by Beethoven is not great. It's just sounds. The greatness of the Allegro con brio is how he uses this theme. If you learn music, you hear how he twists it through the first part. That's great music.

If you wish to create music for others, research what they like. Not doing that is disrespect. If you want to sell anything you make yourself, make what people want. If somebody hired you to make a metal tune for them, and you give them something else, you won't get paid, and your not a good composer. Not even a decent one.

If you show your music to others, the first thing you need to do is try to understand what was successful, and what's not. Even the greatest composers did change their compositions after feedback from the audience. Saying the audience is wrong is not only dumb, but rude. You're insulting their taste of music.

My Reply: But, I heard that greatness is entirely subjective when it comes to music. If that's the case, then a person, who sees one simple tune as great and catchy, would be something great and catchy for that person.

But, someone, who sees it as nothing good or catchy, wouldn't be anything good or catchy for that person. So, there are people out there who'd embrace and appreciate simple melodies, such as that repeated 4-note melody of Beethoven's, which you said was nothing more than sound.

Some people require more than just a simple melody, while others are just fine with simple melodies. It all depends on your musical standards. For example, friends and family might very well appreciate a very simple melody, while professionals require a fully crafted song.

Friends and family have, in fact, praised and appreciated simple tunes I've made. They sung them to themselves, and thought they were good and catchy. My point is, if I wish to create music that pleases many people, then my music would have to be fully crafted songs that meet their expectations.

But, if I only wish to please a crowd who appreciates simple, good, catchy tunes, then I don't need to create fully crafted songs. Any fully crafted melodies I share should be good enough. Now, I'll definitely consider creating fully crafted songs. As a matter of fact, I think I'll l do that someday when I become a skilled and educated composer.

Other Person's Response: When you say that simple tunes can be great, do you mean they can be something amazing?

My Reply: Some of them can, while others would have a lesser form of greatness that doesn't render people praising them as something amazing, but merely pleases these people. For example, if I just shared a powerful portion of MJ's music, that would be an amazing tune right there.

But, if I just shared my beautiful tune (fully crafted), then it would be something good. But, it wouldn't be as good as that portion of MJ's music. I do think that some of my tunes would be amazing once fully crafted though. They'd be my absolute best ones.

Other Person's Response: I'm going to make a joke out of this, and share this simple 4-note melody by Beethoven. I think it's very good and catchy:

https://soundcloud.com/oyvind-skald/beethoven-5-sym-repeat

My Reply: But, you forgot to repeat the melody at the lower octave to make it complete. After all, that's what conveys the greatness and catchiness of Beethoven's melody (along with, of course, having chords and other things to go along with that melody). When I create melodies, I usually don't have just one simple melody like that. There's a bit more to my melodies.

So, my melodies are complete, and that's why they convey greatness and catchiness to my friends and family. However, some of my melodies don't need to repeat at higher or lower octaves. An example would be my Haunting Tune because some melodies convey their personality, or atmosphere, as they are. Also, just so you know, some of my melodies have more than just 4 notes to them.

Other Person's Response: In regards to what you just said in your above reply, well, there you are then. You've done it. You're better than Beethoven. No need to write anything else. Forget any chords and 'whatnots.' Don't need any of that. You're not deaf as well, are you?

My Reply: I'm not saying my simple tunes are as great as a fully crafted symphony by Beethoven. So, I'm not saying I'm as great or better than Beethoven. I have added chords and a beat to some of my tunes though.

However, some people might actually get the melodies I'm trying to convey without any chords and a beat. For example, I think people would definitely get that repeated 4-note melody of Beethoven's, its greatness, and catchiness, even without anything else to that melody. Lastly, I'm not deaf.

Other Person's Response: Well, let's keep in mind that Matt said he was autistic earlier. So, either that was him playing games, or he's actually autistic. That could explain this disconnect between emotion and music, and how it just seems to escape his understanding. Or, he could be having fun with this personality, and driving us all nuts...

My Reply: I'm not playing games, joking around, or just having fun with people. I'm serious.

Other Person's Response: I dare you to show me great music with just a 4 note melody. Do you have any example of this great art? The Beethoven one is not 4 notes; just the motive is. The greatness is not the motive itself, but how he uses it throughout. Like the part right after it's played 6 times in upwards motion, and released with an extended version of the motive. That is just the 6 bars in. How he uses the motive here is what makes it great.

My Reply: I'm saying that Beethoven's motive alone is good music. I do have an example of how just a few notes can be good, catchy music. In the game The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, when the character Link obtains an item, such as a piece of heart, a very brief tune plays, which conveys the acquiring of that item. Here's a link to it:

https://youtu.be/ldYCM6F3Xhw

Other Person's Response: That Zelda tune isn't simple. It's very complex orchestration to get those harmonies. It's not melody, but chords in progress.

My Reply: But, that's all based off of a simple melody, is it not? If I crafted my simple melodies, wouldn't they be good, just like that tune in the video? However, even if the tune in that youtube video didn't have all those complex elements to it, was just a simple melody, and had something simple to go along with it, such as a beat and chords, then I bet it would still be a good tune.

Other Person's Response: No, sorry. That’s why I recorded the Beethoven intro without strings, and just a mono piano to make you see that the sole melody is not strong at all. It's just 4 notes with almost no movement at all. Everything you love with the Beethoven Symphony 5 opening is the musicianship, orchestration, and how it's repeated through with small and greater changes of the motive.

Same here. In your Zelda example, you hear many instruments together making rich chords. Things like this are almost always used as a short instrumental part in a song. Like Earth Wind and Fire- Shining Star. Just a musical effect in the song, to make it less boring. It starts at 1:01 in this youtube video:

https://youtu.be/vwc0AW67CmA

My Reply: So, if I took my simple melodies, and made them strong, then would they be as good and catchy, or even better than that Zelda tune? I don't think I need to do anything with the melody, such as making smaller and greater changes to it, do I? Couldn't I just have the strong, crafted melody itself, and that be something good and catchy? Like I said though, I do plan on creating fully crafted songs someday. However, I'm merely asking if this would be good enough for now.

Other Person's Response: The very fact you claim you've created good, catchy melodies in your mind must mean you're hearing strong melodies. But, simply having these melodies down with the proper chords and beat will not do, since it won't make them strong. That won't strongly convey their greatness and catchiness.

My Reply: In which case, I'll add the orchestration and everything else that's needed along these melodies to fully convey their greatness and catchiness. In other words, I'll fully craft these melodies.

Other Person's Response: I don't think that short Zelda tune you've presented is anything good.

My Reply: Many Zelda fans love it. As a matter of fact, they've made a meme out of it, since they love it so much. For example, a person made a video of someone getting an item, such as jewelry. You then hear that tune play as the person obtains the jewelry. That's enough to say that this tune is good and catchy. Another example would be with short Super Mario tunes.

Other Person's Response: This inspired me to write a song....

https://www.bandlab.com/msmcleod/mymusicisgoodenough-masterwav-7ae87?revId=89498e6b-9fbb-e811-af11-00155d60cb1b

Although the above is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, I was actually trying to demonstrate a point here. I took that dramatic melody you presented, and developed it further. The lyrics were just based on the theme of this whole packet.

Now, I'm not saying what I did is any good (the AlterEgo voice is BAD. But, I've got a cold, and can't speak, never mind sing), but it does give your tune context. Context is important for any tune.

Even if you take those 5 notes from Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind, which have no chords or anything, it does have context in the film, and that's what invokes the emotion. Nobody knows the context of your tunes. So, you have to provide one.

My Reply: I did explain the context of my tunes. For example, with my Haunting Tune, I said it was good, catchy, and conveyed profound horror. But, even so, people still told me it was nothing good, catchy, didn't convey any horror, and was just an awful tune. As for that song you just did, my dramatic melody you used has one note missing. Of course, you could've done that intentionally.

Other Person's Response: If your friends and family like your "excellent choice of notes," good for you. They are your audience, and there's no need to seek approval here, elsewhere, or put in the work to create fully crafted songs.

If you're exploring the potential for something more than the obvious career choice of music for electronic games, perhaps your destiny is to be a jingle writer, where you can be well paid for a simple, catchy melody to sell burgers. In my experience though, the professionals that pursue either direction are highly trained, hard-working, and proficient musicians.

Or, maybe nursery rhymes, which have an element of cognitive simplicity that transcends language/cultural boundaries. You could look into Leonard Bernstein's lectures at Harvard on the universal appeal of certain melodic fragments, many of which can be found in classical compositions.

My Reply: I'll learn what I need to in order to create fully crafted songs. I was just explaining my personal views is all.

Other Person's Response:
Quote:
I did explain the context of my tunes. For example, with my Haunting Tune, I said it was good, catchy, and conveyed profound horror. But, even so, people still told me it was nothing good, catchy, didn't convey any horror, and was just an awful tune.


I'm aware of that. But, the point I was making is that the context shouldn't need explaining textually. If someone heard it on the radio, how would they get that context? Things like sound effects, or the musical equivalent (like the stabs in the Psycho shower scene) can help to convey the context you're trying to portray.

My Reply: As for my dramatic tune I shared to you, does my melody convey a dramatic scene? I don't mean anything sad, miserable, or depressing. I mean something heavy and dark, such as something serious about to happen. Also, I could choose a scene to go along with my melody if I wanted to.

But, I'm not sure if people would say my melody conveys what I described. The same idea applies to my Haunting Tune. As a matter of fact, people might tell me my melodies are awful, gibberish, and convey nothing, regardless of what scene, or sound effects, I choose to go along with them. I'm not sure if people would find them catchy either because I also say they're catchy.

Other Person's Response: I understand your disagreement with what people say. After all, there are many people with false opinions out there, and many people can't appreciate things. But, when professional composers tell you that your melodies aren't good and catchy in their current stage of development, then it would be wise to heed their advice.

My Reply: Understood. But, once I make my melodies strong, as I mentioned earlier, and add the proper scenes and sounds to go along with them, shouldn't they now be good, catchy, and convey what I describe? I figure that, since these melodies in my mind, by themselves, convey greatness and scenes to me, that they should do the same for others, once they become strong melodies.

Other Person's Response: It all depends on the person. For some people, they need a fully crafted song in order for some melodies to become something great, catchy, and convey certain scenes in their eyes. However, some people can pick this up very fast, and only require a simple melody.

My Reply: I can relate to this because I had a friend who had a simple, catchy rap melody he created himself, and shared to me. Even though it was just a melody, and nothing more, I got the intended vibe already from that melody. So, for me, he didn't need anything more to that melody; the melody was already great and catchy in my eyes.

I bet if I never heard of Beethoven's 5th symphony, and someone just shared the motive in the beginning of his symphony to me, and nothing more (those 4 notes on the higher and lower octaves), that I'd already pick up on the greatness and catchiness of that melody.

I bet I'd already perceive it as a melody worthy of becoming famous. But, for other people who can't pick up on that as fast as me, they require the rest of the symphony or, at least, some of the symphony in order for the melody's greatness and catchiness to get across to them.

I think it all depends on who you are. Since professionals have adapted to a higher standard, then they sometimes require more than a simple melody in order for the melody to become something great and catchy.

It would be no different than how a person has adapted to a higher standard of writing. They'd require more than the basic, average writing skill in order for it to be good writing, and for them to get the intended message of the writer.

For example, having some spelling, punctuation, or grammatical errors might render a professional English teacher not understanding the student's writing, and perceiving his/her writing as awful gibberish.

If not awful gibberish, then something that's not good writing. But, someone who has adapted to a lower standard of writing would see that student's writing as something good, and that person would clearly understand the intended message of the writer.

Other Person's Response: But, again, you can't expect people to adapt to your lower standards. You must meet their standards if you wish to please them.

My Reply: Understood.

Other Person's Response: Have you ever listened to Beethoven's 5th symphony? Or, have you only heard his motive in the beginning?

My Reply: Actually, I haven't listened to his symphony yet until someone pointed it out to me (and that was today). In other words, the only thing I've heard from that symphony was that repeated 4-note motive being played in certain shows and movies. An example would be the movie Beethoven, which is about a dog who's named Beethoven.

When I listened to that motive of Beethoven's piece being played in the movie when I was younger, I thought it was a great and catchy melody, despite the rest of the symphony being absent. So, clearly, the melody's greatness and power has gotten through to me, despite not hearing the rest of the symphony. Also, just so you know, that motive is played the moment the dog is named Beethoven.

Other Person's Response: It seems to me you're not listening to anybody here. So, I think it's a waste of time to engage with you any further.

My Reply: Again, don't worry. I said I was going to produce fully crafted songs in the future, and that I was going to learn what I needed to learn. However, I was just making a point here is all. Some people can pick up on the greatness and catchiness of melodies without anything further needed, while some people need more than just a simple melody.

Other Person's Response: Nobody's going to take you serious. They don't think your melodies are that good at all.

My Reply: I take it then that people aren't understanding my melodies because, if they did, then they wouldn't be taking me lightly, and saying my melodies aren't that good.

Other Person's Response: I think you're right about that.

My Reply: I took it people did understand, for example, my Dramatic Tune. But, that they were just dismissing its greatness, due to its lack of full craftsmanship. But, then, I later assumed that people weren't understanding the melody at all. If it was the former, then I told people to lower their standards, so they can appreciate and embrace the melody's greatness and catchiness. But, if it's the latter, then I need to fully craft the melody, so that people can understand it.

Other Person's Response: Having an understanding of a melody isn't enough to make it good though. It could very well be possible other people do understand the melodies you're trying to convey, but that they still convey something bland, dull, and lame, due to their craftsmanship. That's why you need to fully craft these melodies to bring out their power, which you claim is great and catchy.

My Reply: Understood. But, for me, I can already understand some melodies just as they are, and see their greatness. Someone could jot down a good, catchy melody, along with just chords and a beat. Not only would I be able to understand that melody, but I'd be able to perceive it as good and catchy upon listening to it.

As a matter of fact, some melodies don't even need chords and a beat. An example would be how I already understood Beethoven's short motive, and perceived it as a good, catchy melody. I think Beethoven's motive was just a melody by itself playing, and nothing more.

Other Person's Response: As for your dark and dramatic tunes, they don't sound dark or dramatic at all. To me, they sound like incidental music in a cheerful, young kid's TV show.

My Reply: Then clearly, you did not get the melodies I was trying to convey. That's fine. Also, they're not cheerful tunes (except the motivational one, and a few other ones, because these ones are in the key of C Major). The dark and dramatic tunes have black keys. So, they're in a different key, which makes them heavy and dark.

Other Person's Response: What if you play the notes C, E, G, & B flat......would that make it 'heavy & dark'?

My Reply: My point is, my motivational tune, and some other ones, are the cheerful ones, while my dark and dramatic tunes aren't cheerful.

Other Person's Response: You really need to learn some music theory. 'Having black keys' in a tune doesn't mean you're playing in a minor key, which is usually where 'heavy and dark' will be found. Learn your major and minor scales. It's basic, and you'll never move forward until you do.

My Reply: But, for example, my Dark Theme is in the key of C minor, since it has an Eb, a Bb, and an Ab.

Other Person's Response: That doesn't mean you're playing in C minor. Eb, Ab, and Bb are also in the F major and Eb major scales (Eb is the relative major to C minor). Your dark and dramatic tunes have a major key feel. Like I said, until you learn this stuff properly, you'll be floundering in the dark.

My Reply: But, doesn't every minor key have a major equivalent?

Other Person's Response: Not 'equivalent.' 'Relative'. You have to know which root you're working from. Watch this. The guy makes a couple of small errors. But, you'll get the gist. Especially from 4.30 onwards. Get that theory of half and whole notes in major and minor scales in your head, and things will fall into place.

https://www.youtube.com/w..?v=_Hj9v6pwTf8&t=0s

My Reply: Maybe I used the wrong description for my Dark Tune then. I wasn't trying to convey something miserable, sad, or depressing. I was trying to convey something awesome, but, at the same time, dark. It would be like awesome power being unleashed from a dark villain, or a dark character, as opposed to a person mourning the loss of a loved one, or being tortured alive in agony.

So, perhaps the major key feeling you was getting was actually the "awesomeness" of that character's power. But, that awesomeness has to be in a minor key to make it a dark form of awesomeness, which is why my tune was in the key of C minor. So, both C minor, and the relative major, should convey something that's both awesome, dark, and heavy.

Other Person's Response: Look Matt, I haven't got the time or inclination to school you in music theory. There aren't any shortcuts to this stuff. It's up to you to learn or not. What I've heard lately is a step forward from your earlier efforts, I will say that. Try aiming for 'good' instead of 'great'. All the best with it.

My Reply: Understood.

Other Person's Response: Do you just create melodies in your own mind, or do you create full songs or themes in your mind as well?

My Reply: I'm very well capable of creating full themes or songs in my own head. For now, I'm just creating melodies, and sharing them as a means to showcase my mental musical gift. Unfortunately, showcasing my melodies isn't going to work because people can't understand my melodies in their current stage.

Other Person's Response: Are you sure you've gotten the notes of that Dark melody right?

My Reply: I might've actually gotten them wrong. I have a hard time telling the difference between the tunes I hear in my mind, and what I'm reproducing on the keyboard. I can't tell if the notes I've chosen on the keyboard are the ones I hear in my mind or not.

It becomes much more difficult when I have black keys to work with because I can't tell if the note I'm hearing is a black key, or a white one. It becomes much easier for me when the tunes I'm hearing in my mind consist only of white keys.

Although, I do sometimes get a few notes wrong, even with tunes in my head that only have white keys. It's much more difficult when I try to replicate dark or dramatic tunes in my head, since these are ones that have the black keys.

Perhaps the reason why it's so difficult for me is because the tunes I'm hearing in my mind are so faint that it's hard to make out what notes they are. Even if I say the notes out loud, it's still difficult for me to determine what note that is. I'm not sure why it's difficult for me. Maybe I just need more ear training.

Other Person's Response: I find this whole packet to be comical and a joke! People have every reason to mock you!

My Reply: I don't really see why, and I'll give you 3 reasons:

1.) I could've gotten the notes and the key wrong to some of my tunes. That's perfectly understandable for someone who's just beginning at composing. I think such a person simply needs ear training.

2.) Even if I did get the right notes to some of my tunes, I understand my own melodies, since I know what they're supposed to be, and I thought that, by adding chords and a beat to them, other people would understand them as well. As a matter of fact, I thought, at one time, that my tunes didn't even need a beat and chords to them, and that they could just be melodies, and nothing more, in order for people to understand them.

I don't see why that's something to laugh at because, if a person makes a work of art, or writes something that he clearly understands the meaning of, then it's only natural for that person to think other people would get the intended meaning, or the artwork as well. But, that person would soon learn he needs to be a skilled writer, and artist, in order to successfully convey his message and artwork.

3.) I said a short tune, that has the right choice of notes, is all that's needed for music to be good and catchy. I think that's understandable, considering there are short tunes out there that are good and catchy. An example would be that Zelda tune I posted earlier, the McDonald's I'm Lovin' it tune, which is used to sell burgers, and other short tunes.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 06:03 pm
@MozartLink,
File #5: My Composing Dream (Part 12/12)

Other Person's Response: I just have a quick, random question for you. Are you tone deaf?

My Reply: I don't think so. If a person were to play two keys a tone or semitone a part, I'd be able to hear the difference. Also, when I look at the keyboard or a music sheet, I know all my note names. If anyone were to choose a note on the keyboard or a music sheet, I'd be able to tell them what note name it is (such as if it's a C#, a D, a G#, etc.).

But, if I were to look away, and someone were to play notes, I wouldn't be able to tell them what notes they are. Another thing. If someone were to sing a song (such as someone on American Idol), I wouldn't be able to tell if that person is off pitch or not. That might give the impression that I'm tone deaf. But, if I really was tone deaf, I wouldn't be able to perceive the difference between two pitches when a person plays two keys on the keyboard.

Other Person's Response: If you're not tone deaf, then it makes no sense why you can't tell if someone is off pitch when they sing a song.

My Reply: It might work like this. If there were was one red apple (which is the original apple), and someone put another red apple next to it, which which has a slightly different shade of red, I'd be able to see the difference in color.

But, if I went into a different room, away from those apples, and someone brought in the red apple, which had the slightly different shade of red than the original apple, I wouldn't be able to tell if this apple was the original or not. This is because I don't have the original apple as a comparison.

What I'm trying to say here is that, when someone sings a song, I can't tell if it matches up with the original song or not, since I don't have the original song as a comparison. I can't compare the notes the person sings to the notes of the original song side by side.

Other Person's Response: Then you might need to develop perfect pitch. This will allow you to tell if a person is singing the right notes, without having to compare to the original song. In addition, having perfect pitch will allow you to immediately know the notes you're hearing regarding those tunes you've created in your mind, rather than having to play around on the keyboard to figure it out.

My Reply: But, I heard you can't develop perfect pitch when you're an adult. I heard perfect pitch is a rare gift to have. So, the best that can be done is to develop a good sense of relative pitch. That simply means having a good and efficient sense of comparison regarding pitch.

This means I'd have to toy around on the keyboard to get the right notes to these tunes in my mind, and I'd have to have the original song as a comparison when listening to people sing songs. But, if I have a good sense of relative pitch, then I can figure out the notes to these tunes, and I can tell if a person is off pitch in a much less amount of time.

Other Person's Response: You may have chosen certain notes. But, they're all in the wrong order.

My Reply: My notes do adhere to a key (although, I haven't specified that key signature on the music sheets of my tunes).

Other Person's Response: Your whole claim that you have these amazing, catchy tunes in your mind is self-delusion at best.

My Reply: I can create funny scenes in my head. But, I can convey them, since I know the English language, which means I can just write them down, share them, and people would understand them. Since, I'm a natural comedian, then it's quite possible I'm naturally creating great, catchy tunes in my head, too.

Of course, I don't meet the highest standard of comedy or composing. But, I think that, according to a reasonable standard, my scenes are comical, and my music (when fully conveyed) would be great and catchy. As you can see here, certain people can be naturally gifted at certain things.

Other Person's Response: Would you mind sharing one of your funny scenes?

My Reply: Sure. A tough guy challenges other tough guys to slam their fists into him to see how much he can take. The tough guy takes these brutal punches, and isn't phased one bit. But, a little kitten arrives on the scene, scratches a weak spot on the tough guy's leg, meows, and casually walks away, while the tough guy screams:

"GOD DAMN THAT ******* HURTS!!!"

After which, he falls down and is defeated. Now, if people don't find this scene funny, then I think it really is funny, and people just don't like me as a person, or the things I say in my writing. It could also be the case that they have unreasonably high standards of comedy.

If I were to present this scene as a normal, polite, humble human being without sharing my packets to them (which brag about these tunes I hear in my mind, and how the lives of others can't be beautiful without their positive emotions), then I bet these people would find this scene comical.

That is, if them not liking me as an individual, and the things I say in my packets, is the only factor preventing them from seeing the comical greatness of my scenes. So, there are factors that can blind people from seeing the greatness and comedy of certain works of art.

Other Person's Response: I found that scene quite comical!

My Reply: If I can naturally create such comical scenes in my head without knowing anything about comedy, then why can't I also create great, catchy music in my head? I personally think my music will be better than any comedy scene I make.

Other Person's Response: Your melody appears as a series of randomly placed notes.

My Reply: If you look at the music sheet of the Dark Theme, you'll see how there's a pattern. A certain portion is played at the higher octave, and is then repeated at the lower octave with a few modifications.

Other Person's Response: Remember, your notes must have a pattern to them in order for your music to make sense to people. Otherwise, it would just be randomly placed notes.

My Reply: Actually, I'm not sure if this is true. I think you just need to have the right choice of notes and rests in order to convey any given scene or personality. Also, the notes must adhere to a key (which my tunes do).

Other Person's Response: If you don't mind, could you share another funny scene?

My Reply: Sure. This funny scene is a Sonic the Hedgehog one I made. If you've ever played the Sonic games, or watched Sonic, he has a female, pink hedgehog named "Amy Rose," who's very attracted to him. I've created a funny scene based off of this. It would actually be a short story. I'll give the title of the story, explain it, and end it:

Give Amy A Treat To Keep Her Quiet!

Amy and Sonic meet again. She becomes very attracted to him, starts to wag her tail, and barks like a puppy, attracted to another puppy. Sonic notices, and walks up to her. They meet face to face.

Sonic: "Amy."

Amy: "Yes, Sonic?," Amy quietly and eagerly asks, as though awaiting a proclamation of love from Sonic.

Sonic: "Hedgehogs aren't supposed to bark," Sonic quietly and gently informs Amy.

Amy: "Oh. Okay," Amy states in a normal, casual tone of voice.

Sonic and Amy then have a normal conversation as they walk into the sunset.

~The End~

Other Person's Response: That short story was the most lame, stupid, and awful piece of crap I've ever read!

My Reply: The very qualities that you think makes this lame, stupid, and awful are the very qualities I think makes it comical and great.

Other Person's Response:

Give Jake A Cheese To Keep Him Happy!

Jake and his sister, Amanda, meet again. He becomes very hungry towards her, starts to hear his stomach growl, and mentions putting cheese on some spaghetti with homemade sauce when he gets home. Amanda notices this, and walks up to him. They meet face to face.

Amanda: "Jake."

Jake: "Yes, Amanda?," Jake quietly and eagerly asks, as though awaiting a proclamation of metric cheese measurements from her.

Amanda: "There's no cheese available to buy from the store until Monday," she quietly and gently informs Jake.

Jake: "Oh. Okay," Jake states in a normal, casual tone of voice.

Jake and Amanda then have a normal conversation as they walk into the sunset.

~The End~

My Reply: I'm not sure what you're implying by creating a variation of my story. Are you implying that my story is so comical that it should be considered a meme, where many people take my story, and create their own variation of it as a means to carry on its comical legacy? But, if you're implying that my short story is awful, then remember to have a standard that's not too high, nor too low.

Other Person's Response: To be honest, I don't think your comedy scenes are good at all, and nothing about them is worth praising.

My Reply: Fine. Whatever. I'll share them to people who can appreciate them.

Other Person's Response: I see you have an issue with people who have high standards. Is this issue just limited to your comedy scenes and music? Or, does it extend to your daily life?

My Reply: It extends to my daily life because people don't appreciate who I am as a human being. Instead, they expect things from me and, from there, treat me with a bad attitude, and name call me for not meeting their standards. If I ever wish to improve as a person, and as a composer, I will. But, I think I'm a person well worth appreciating, and I think any fully crafted tunes and music I share in the future is well worth appreciating.

Other Person's Response: Do you ever wish to meet the higher standards of other people?

My Reply: If I ever want to, I will. But, I'm satisfied with the reasonable, moderate standard I live and compose by. Like I said before, I'm not expecting to be as great as Beethoven or Bach, and neither do I expect such greatness in myself as a human being. As long as I produce fully crafted tunes and themes that are awesome and catchy, according to my standard, and as long as I'm a kind person who doesn't harm anyone else, then that's good enough and worth appreciating.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I think the bizarre style of music you wish to produce in the future will be well worth appreciating.

My Reply: Yes. I think it's power is well worth embracing. As for me, I need my positive emotions in order to embrace the greatness, beauty, and joy of things.

Other Person's Response: I can honestly tell you that your comedy scenes don't even meet the reasonable standard.

My Reply: There are many popular cartoons that make us smirk and laugh. Even though these cartoons don't meet the highest standard of comedy, they still meet a reasonable standard. I think the comedy scenes I've made meet that standard. In other words, my scenes would be like the ones you see in cartoons. I disagree with anyone who says my scenes don't meet that standard.

I think they're liars, and they're just saying this because they don't like me, the things I say, or because I'm not a popular, famous person. There could be other factors as well. The same idea applies to any fully crafted music I share in the future. For people to say my music doesn't meet the reasonable standard would make them liars, too.

Anyway, I'm actually going to share another comedy scene. This short scene, without a doubt, should definitely be like the ones you see in cartoons, and should be just as comical. I'll just make up my own characters for this one. There's a character named Josh who's taken on a tour through various, deep, philosophical debates.

He's shown one group of people who are debating something deep, another group who are also debating something deep and philosophical, and then he's shown this particular group. He's told that this group is also debating something deeply philosophical. There are just two characters in this group, standing next to a tree. The 1st character says:

"If it looks like a tree, sounds like a tree, and feels like a tree, then it must be a tree!"

The 2nd character replies:

"I don't know, man. I have to disagree."

The 1st character replies:

"Hmm. This is some pretty deep ****! Even I can't figure it out!"

Other Person's Response: How's that scene funny, and how does it make any sense?

My Reply: Because it's an absurd, comical twist on things. It would be like being taken on a tour through various forms of currency, and then looking at one form of currency, which is a complete joke, and stands out from the rest. It would be a form of currency that looks completely silly. Such a scene is something you'd witness in a cartoon. If you want such a scene as an example, then imagine if a character was shown various forms of human currency, and then being shown a currency for rabbits (which would be carrots).

Other Person's Response: You must think you're pretty important for you to claim your music and scenes are great, and that other people need to lower their standards. This also applies to how you think you're good enough as a person, and that other people need to appreciate who you are. Who do you think you are to say things like this?

My Reply: I don't think I'm high and mighty at all. I just think I'm a messenger of truth, sharing and expressing the truth. I share the truth in all of my previous packets I've written, and I'm sharing the truth here, too.

Other Person's Response: You talk about how any fully crafted music you make in the future would meet the reasonable standard. But, do you think your music will meet a higher standard?

My Reply: I really think so. Any fully crafted music I share that's only as good as those Forest Temple tunes you've witnessed in that youtube video wouldn't be my best. So, they'd just meet the reasonable standard. But, the powerful, profound tunes and themes I hear in my head (fully crafted) would meet the high standard. I look at it this way. Those comedy scenes I've made meet the reasonable standard.

Therefore, any fully crafted music I produce that's better than those scenes would meet a higher standard. But, like I said, they wouldn't meet the highest standard, such as Bach or Beethoven's music. Now, I'm not trying to please an audience that has a high standard. I'm just creating music that, to me, is very awesome, powerful, memorable music that I think meets a high standard.

Any music that conveys powerful, profound, memorable emotion (besides Bach or Beethoven's music) meets a high standard. For example, the song "Diamonds" by Rihanna would meet a high standard, the songs by Michael Jackson meet a high standard, and any memorable, powerful, profound song by any musical artist would meet a high standard.

I'd put my fully crafted music into that category. I envision the powerful tunes in my mind to turn out to become fully crafted songs that are just as great as the songs by these musical artists. But, like I said, my songs would be nothing like the songs produced by these artists. My songs would be something completely bizarre and out of this world.

Other Person's Response: Let me point out one last thing here to talk about. You've updated your avatar, and I really like it.

When I go on your soundcloud account, I get the impression of some badass, professional, anime composer, just from looking at your username, and the images you've chosen.

I think this shows a lot about you as a person. Maybe you do have some great potential that has yet to shine. So far, it hasn't shined at all. But perhaps you can make that happen in the future.

My Reply: I hope it does happen. But, I need my positive emotions in order to make that happen.

Other Person's Response: You might as well make this packet a comedy/composing packet. So, go ahead and share another comedy scene.

My Reply: Sure. There's a black guy who's racist, and doesn't like white people. He, therefore, doesn't like the color white. His name would be "Andre." His cupcakes, that were cooked, are done, and white frosting is put on them. Andre notices and replies:

"Oh no you didn't! You just put white frosting on those cupcakes! I need black frosting on my cupcakes!"

The scene then switches over to a new one with Andre. There are some writing mistakes on a white sheet of paper, and someone uses some whiteout. Andre replies in a disappointed tone of voice:

"Is there any blackout around here? Anybody? Didn't think so. On a further note, when I look at sheets of paper, I expect them to be black sheets next time!"

The scene switches over to another one with Andre. He's walking outside, and a random, black stranger, for whatever reason, feels the need to share the fact that he has a white dog with him. The black stranger exclaims:

"Yipee! Look, everyone! I'm a black man, and I have a white dog!"

Another guy there replies to him:

"Umm, yeah. Okay. Why are you sharing this?"

The black stranger replies:

"I don't know! I just feel like sharing this and, now, I'm going to randomly go up to that black guy over there, and share this random fact that I feel like randomly sharing!"

The black stranger walks up to Andre, and exclaims:

"Look at me! I'm a black man with a white dog!"

Andre replies:

"You wouldn't want to meet my black dog. He'll tear your white dog to shreds!"

The scene then switches over to one last one with Andre. His black friend, Mike, arrives to greet him. But, Andre is in a pitch black room, and Mike asks why. Andre replies:

"Because I'm black, and I expect things to be black around here."

Mike turns on the light, which is a white light, and Andre exclaims:

"Ahh! The white! Turn off the white! It's ugly!"

Mike replies (while giving a Star Wars reference):

"No! It's time for you to convert from the Black Side to the White Side, and I'm the man to help you out!"

Other Person's Response: I love that comedy scene! It sounds like something from Family Guy, or maybe even the Cleveland Show, since it talks about black and white people.

My Reply: Since I've watched shows like Family Guy, then I'm able to come up with comedy scenes that match the level of comedy these shows have. Some people would say that level of comedy is mediocre. But, I still think it classifies as great comedy, and many other people, who watch these shows, would think the same. Now, if I've watched displays of the greatest comedy acts throughout my life, then, chances are, I'd be able to come up with comedy scenes that are pure gold. The best of the best.

Other Person's Response: You're into music, and you're learning music theory. Do you have a comedy scene in regards to music?

My Reply: Sure. There's a guy on youtube with the username "Andrew Furmanczyk." He's very popular, and his music theory videos have over a million views. I'll give you a link to one of his videos:

https://youtu.be/6gHEIF0rT2w

Anyway, this guy does joke around a bit throughout his music theory lessons. The comedy scene I make here would be one of his jokes. It's a joke he's never made. So, I'm making my own joke here, and not taking one of his jokes. Andrew draws a note on the white board, but realizes he's made a mistake. So, he attempts to erase the note. But, it doesn't erase. Andrew keeps on trying to erase it. But, it still doesn't erase.

He then goes into a comical form of rage as he tears the note off the board and eats it. The note is shown as a cartoon animation, screaming, as Andrew eats it. Andrew then settles down and says: "Sorry for that random moment. Let's continue with the lesson." So, there's my comedy scene. It would be interesting if Andrew made these sorts of random, comical scenes throughout his music lessons. It would certainly be an upgrade to the style of humor he's already presenting.

Other Person's Response: You certainly do have the spirit and passion of an artist, since your goal is to create powerful and profound music that amazes the audience. But, without the actual talent to compose some amazing music, then you won't get anywhere.

My Reply: That's why I hope I can create the amazing music I want to create someday.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 06:19 pm
@MozartLink,
File #6: More On My Philosophy (Part 1/26)

More Support For My Philosophy + Extensive Discussion Section

Note to Reader: You might wonder why this packet is so long. It's because I discuss other things in addition to my philosophy/worldview. Although I do think these other discussed things are important, I don't think they're that important to warrant their own files, and they were relevant to the discussion of my philosophy.

That's why they're all discussed in this big file. Many people might say this is an entire book I've written, rather than a packet. I had nothing better to do than write all this material, since I couldn't enjoy my life or hobbies, due to my miserable struggles (especially this recent struggle, which took the longest to recover from).

I Think I Can Prove The Emotional Perception Theory: Considering how there are many people out there who disagree with the emotional perception theory, I think there's a way for me to personally prove it. This is my own personal argument, which is an attempt to translate emotions into perceptions of good, bad, etc. Positive emotions are the reward wanting and liking in the brain. When you want something and like something, this means it matters to you.

When something is good, bad, beautiful, disgusting, etc. from your perspective, this means it matters to you. For example, if getting a new video game, or movie, was something good or bad for you, that means it was something good or bad from your perspective, which is the same thing as saying it mattered to you. As I mentioned before, positive emotions make things matter to us in good ways, and negative emotions make things matter to us in bad ways, since positive emotions are the perception of good, and negative emotions are the perception of bad.

Now, the only way something can be good, bad, etc. in your eyes is if it matters to you. How can you say that helping someone was good, bad, etc. in your eyes if it didn't matter to you? It makes no sense. A life that doesn't matter to us would, thus, have to be a life that has no goodness, badness, etc. from our perspective. Lastly, here's a link (study) that shows how positive emotions are the reward wanting and liking in the brain:

We have found a special hedonic hotspot that is crucial for reward 'liking' and 'wanting' (and codes reward learning too). The opioid hedonic hotspot is shown in red above. It works together with another hedonic hotspot in the more famous nucleus accumbens to generate pleasure 'liking'.

‘Liking’ and ‘wanting’ food rewards: Brain substrates and roles in eating disorders

Kent C. Berridge 2009 Mar 29.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2717031/

For Those Who Disagree Positive Emotions Are Wanting And Liking: I think there will also be people out there who disagree that positive emotions are a form of wanting and liking. So, here's proof for them. Emotions are a form of motivation. When you have a positive form of motivation to do something, this means you want to do it and like to do it. The religious form of my worldview would say that the force of light (positive emotions) motivates us to have a relationship, create works of art, and to live our lives to the fullest.

Yes, The Light is unreliable, since it can result in harming us and others. But, it's still the only source of beauty and joy in our lives. The Darkness can also motivate us, but makes our lives bad and horrible. The force of light is from the heavens, and the force of darkness is from the lower realms. Our positive emotions make us angels on the inside, our negative emotions make us demons or beings of darkness on the inside, and having apathy just makes us empty vessels on the inside.

A Little Experiment: I have performed a little experiment here, and it's already clear to me that my emotions really are perceptions of beauty, horror, good, bad, tragedy, etc. that give my life perceived beauty, horror, etc. There are certain stimuli that trigger positive or negative emotions, and then there are the types of stimuli that trigger no emotional response. When I look at the cup sitting there on my desk, it triggers no emotional response. I can clearly tell this cup doesn't matter to me and has no perceived beauty, horror, etc. It's nothing more than just a cup sitting there.

Sure, I can think it has perceived beauty, horror, etc. in my life, and that it matters to me. But, those thoughts are just ideas going through my mind that don't make the cup matter to me, or perceived as beautiful, horrific, etc. Now, when I turn my sights over to something that does trigger a positive emotion, such as a character from a video game or anime, I can clearly tell this character matters to me, and has such beauty from my perspective upon feeling a positive emotion.

I clearly notice that all stimuli that trigger no emotional response are stimuli that don't matter to me, and have no perceived beauty, horror, etc., while stimuli that do trigger an emotional response are the stimuli that do matter to me, and have perceived beauty, horror, etc. If people perform this little experiment and report the opposite of my results, then this is just something I don't understand. We live in a society where we're expected to go beyond our emotions.

Thus, we tend to dismiss them as trivial when, in reality, they're vital and the very source of perceived beauty, horror, etc. in our lives. So, maybe this would be a contributing factor to any results opposite of mine in this experiment. I have a keen sense of introspection, and I can clearly tell that emotions make things matter to me and give my life beauty, love, or horror. Maybe others don't have this keen sense of introspection.

My Nightmares: During my worst miserable moments, I've had very horrible nightmares. They've profoundly affected me, since they've consisted of very horrible emotional states far worse than anything I could experience in my waking life. But, then there were those nightmares I've had, which didn't have these horrible emotions.

These nightmares didn't affect me at all, and I've woken up from them like they were nothing. They were nightmares I've had when I was almost fully recovered from those miserable moments. This clearly says that emotions are what give us beautiful or horrible experiences, and that you can have nightmares that consist of the most gruesome, demonic, or hellish imagery and sounds.

But, as long as said nightmares don't have any horrible, disturbing emotions to them, then they're nothing more than images and sounds. They can't possess any horrifying or disturbing power to them. Another thing about dreams and nightmares is that spirits can contact us.

They can be angel spirits, demon spirits, or any spirit in general. Their spiritual energy will be received by our brains during our dreams and nightmares, which allows us to experience their angelic beauty, demonic horror, misery, despair, happiness, etc. via our emotions.

Changing My Philosophy Might Prove Very Difficult: As I said before, my philosophy is profoundly spiritual to me like a religion. Therefore, it would be that more difficult to change. It would be like trying to convert a Christian over to some other worldview, such as atheism, or to some philosophy. Most Christians I know remain Christians their entire lives. Few of them convert. As for me, I’m 31 years old now.

Chances are, I might have this philosophy my whole entire life. Also, most Christians have a disagreement and conflict with atheists, or people with different worldviews. This is no different than how I disagree and debate with other people. What makes this situation even worse for me is that there are many factors that can take away my positive emotions.

If I'm ever put into a position where I lose my positive emotions, and they can't sufficiently recover back to me, this would put me in a position where changing my philosophy is the only option of changing my life for the better, and giving me a whole new set of values.

Unfortunately, this would be no different than putting a Christian in a position where converting over from his religion is the only way to change his life for the better. It would obviously prove very difficult to try to convert this Christian, since he thinks any other worldview is false, and that any set of values not founded upon Christianity aren't the truth.

Lastly, my religion would be a religious form of the emotional perception theory of value. It would be a hedonistic religion. This religion of mine is meant for people who are casual and wish to live happy, fun lives. It's nothing like other religions, which expect us to refrain from and transcend our hedonistic impulses, and to serve a god, even if it made us feel unhappy or miserable.

We Need The Light: People who have near death experiences report they've met a being of light in the higher, heavenly realms known as "God" or "The Light." It is a ball of light that consists of pure joyful, loving, beautiful energy. If positive emotions are god’s holy light within us, then our brains would be receivers that pick up on his invisible, spiritual energy here on Earth. It would be like how a radio picks up radio waves. Even though these waves are invisible, they still exist.

Once received by our brains, god’s energy becomes a divine mental state. It becomes a positive emotional state. Positive emotions are, therefore, the experience of god’s divine power within us. We need this light within us to make our lives beautiful, and to create a paradise here on Earth for us. Without the light, then our lives would amount to nothing good or beautiful.

As for our negative emotions, this would be dark/negative energy from the lower realms, picked up by our brains. So, our goal is to receive as much light as possible, and to avoid receiving the darkness/negative energy, as well as apathy. Sadly, there are many factors that can prevent our brains from receiving the light, and it would be no different than preventing a radio from receiving the signal.

I Need To Become The Being Of Light; Not The Being Of Darkness: If I had the choice, I'd choose to have no negative emotions in my life. Some people would say this is unbalanced. But, if there was an item that could only make my life horrible, bad, or disgusting, then I'd obviously choose to rid of that item out of my life. I treat negative emotions as being that item. If I never had negative emotions in the first place, then I wouldn't have struggled much of my life with all those horrible, miserable moments, and neither would I feel violent or disgust towards myself or others.

When I have negative emotions, I become a horrible, disgusting, violent, or morbid being of darkness, and I can only see things in life from a negative perspective. But, when I have my positive emotions, I become a being of light, since I become something positive, beautiful, and joyful. I need to become that divine, magnificent, angelic being of light, which is the reason why I'd choose to only have positive emotions. But, I'd also want to avoid apathy, since apathy is how I become an empty vessel (neither a being of light nor a being of darkness).

Anime Metaphor: Since I love anime, then I'm going to use an anime metaphor for my worldview. As I said before, I'd describe the perception of beauty, greatness, and magnificence to be a divine state of consciousness, since it's something so vital and precious to our lives. This goes quite well with the anime metaphor I'm going to give.

The anime I'm going to use is Dragon Ball Super, if you're familiar with that show. Imagine if I was a character out on the field, meeting another character. I then induce a profoundly beautiful positive emotion by thinking of something very beautiful and joyful.

This positive emotion is a powerful, intense surge of divine beauty and joy through my conscious being. It transforms me into a Super Saiyan God. I'm now in a divine state of consciousness through this positive emotional state, and that's the reason why I'm now in this god-like/divine form. This form has beautiful aura, and there's beautiful music playing to express my divine form.

I then tell the other character on the field that this form is the ultimate thing in this universe, and nothing compares to it. I tell this character that positive emotions are, therefore, the ultimate divine things in this universe, and that he cannot match such power through his intellect and character.

Especially euphoric states, since these would be the most powerful god-like forms. The character then responds back to me by saying that I transform into the Super Saiyan God through my positive emotions, but that he transforms into the Super Saiyan God through his intellect and character. Now, there are two possibilities here.

The 1st is that this character would transform into a Super Saiyan God, which would mean he really is in that divine mental state (that state of perceiving beauty, magnificence, etc.). As a matter of fact, his Super Saiyan God form could be much more powerful and beautiful than mine.

He might tell me he has much more knowledge and life experience than me, and that's the reason why his form is so much greater than mine. From there, he'd tell me his form is everlasting, unlike mine, which only lasts for a short while. If this 1st scenario is the case, then I'd be very interested in obtaining the Super Saiyan God form this guy has.

It would bring my life perceived beauty and goodness that, not only goes beyond that of my positive emotions, but is everlasting. But, there is a 2nd possibility here. That is, this guy could attempt to transform into a Super Saiyan God through his intellect and character, but won't.

He then might say to me he's a Super Saiyan God, when he really isn't. If this is the case, then he doesn't have that divine state of consciousness. He believes he's perceiving beauty and goodness in his life when he really isn't.

From there, I'd tell him I'm the real god through my positive emotions, and that his intellect and character is nothing compared to positive emotions. So, there's my anime metaphor. I wanted to give this metaphor, since it makes my worldview more interesting.

While I'm on the topic of anime, if I were to feel profound beauty and joy from, for example, a female character, then it's as though her joyful and beautiful presence is there within my conscious being for a limited time only. So, not only do we experience the beauty and joy of moments and things in our lives through our positive emotions, but also the beauty and joy of certain characters.

I Blame It On The Creator: If there is a creator (god), then I put the blame on him for giving me the capacity to feel negative emotions, and I also put the blame on him for making this life filled with misery, suffering, and hardship.

This is a life that's very unhappy, which makes positive emotions something very fleeting. We need to live a blissful, utopia life. I mean, why did he have us live a life that takes away the one and only thing that can make our lives beautiful, joyful, and worth living (our positive emotions)?

Surely, if god wants his creations to become beautiful and joyful beings of light like him, then he would've created a blissful utopia for us all. I realize we're supposed to be multidimensional beings, which means we're beings capable of experiencing more than just the beauty and joys of life.

We're also capable of experiencing sorrow, misery, and despair. Personally, I think it was a mistake then to make us multidimensional beings. We need to be those one dimensional beings who can only feel positive emotions.

Another thing here. I realize it was my own unhealthy thought processes that induced my states of misery. But it's really his fault because god, and the spiritual beings in the heavenly realms, could've at least rendered me without the capacity to feel any negative emotions. That way, any unhealthy thought process wouldn't have made me felt miserable.

This would mean I wouldn't have struggled with all those horrible, miserable moments, and I could've instead been happy during that whole time. This whole miserable struggle of mine was a complete waste of my life. So many people struggle with misery, whether it be misery due to unfortunate circumstances, or unhealthy thought processes that need to be changed.

If it weren't for suffering and misery in the first place, then we wouldn't be able to create our own hell on Earth. We'd only be able to create a beautiful paradise on Earth for us through our positive emotions. Having hell, suffering, torment, and misery only creates major problems, and I think there's no good reason for those things to exist.

Some people would say there is a good reason, and that reason being it's for our own learning and growing. But, learning and growing is nothing good. Only positive emotions are good, since they're the only good things in life. Therefore, learning and growing is all pointless, and life should've been a blissful utopia right from the start. Actually, positive emotions are what make learning and growing something beautiful and positive.

So, learning and growing through misery and despair is pointless. It can only be happy forms of learning and growing that are good and beautiful. An example being me having fun and enjoying the whole learning process of how to compose. Also, my mother has an unhappy struggle of her own, which would be money issues, and I see no reason for her to go through this whole struggle, when god could've made her rich and happy right from the start.

She always complains how living this poor life is a **** way to live, and that she would've been much better off if she was rich from the beginning. That way, she could have luxuries for herself, and she could give money to the poor. But, since she's poor and has no way of earning big bucks, then that denies her of her needs, and that denies other poor people of their needs.

Not only is my mother's financial issues one of these pointless struggles, but there are forms of suffering so horrible that they're obviously pointless. An example being Hitler burning the Jews alive. How's that anything positive for the Jews, and how's that any form of learning and growing for them? The way I see it, life was much better off being a fun, happy, beautiful, joyful adventure (a utopia world).

After all, many people are trying to make this world a better place, and many scientists hope to create the blissful, utopia life for us in the distant future. Therefore, what does this say about diseases, illnesses, struggles, misery, and suffering? It says it's all pointless, and was something to be eliminated since the very beginning.

But, god didn't eliminate these things in the beginning. Therefore, we are left to go through all this trouble of trying to eliminate these things ourselves, and it's not a happy process. Some god that is! He could've made us perfect creations who don't suffer, and he could've made this life a utopia for us all. But, he didn't. Or, maybe, god isn't someone to be put to blame.

Maybe he's just a thing like water that has no intentions. I mentioned earlier that god was this ball of light energy. So, perhaps it's the case we need the light within us, just like how we need water/liquids. You can't blame water if you're someone living in an area of the world, where you're suffering and scarce of water.

Likewise, you can't blame god (the ball of light) if you're someone suffering and scarce of positive emotions. Water is our body's sustenance, and The Light would be our soul's sustenance. We can be physically and spiritually deprived, and neither water, nor The Light, can be put to blame. So, as you can see here, I treat beauty as being a materialistic thing like water or money.

Thoughts/beliefs alone won't give you water or money, and they, alone, can't give any real beauty to your life either. Many spiritual believers talk about transcending our materialistic desires. One of these people would be the Buddhists. But, I really think all things beautiful, positive, and joyful amounts to one, materialistic thing: the positive emotions/the inner light. So, when Buddhists talk about another form of happiness besides positive emotions, they're lying.

They think, if they practice and meditate long enough, they can achieve this form of happiness they claim exists. But, would practicing and meditating long enough allow you to have a new form of hunger and thirst, a new way to feel physical pain, or a new way to hear sound? No! If you're not hungry, thirsty, feeling any physical pain, or hearing any sound, then no other mental state can be real hunger, thirst, physical pain, or sound.

Discussion Section

Other Person's Response: I disagree with your translation of emotions into perceptions of value that was presented above.

My Reply: Emotions make things matter to us, as I said before. Now, if your mother or father died, and their loss didn't matter to you, how could you say that you've experienced the horror and tragedy of their loss? It wouldn't be a real experience. Since perception and experience are the same thing, this would mean you wouldn't be perceiving the horror and tragedy of their loss.

I could also apply this same argument to perceiving/experiencing beauty, greatness, and joy. If there was the celebration of a new millennium (such as the year 2000), and it didn't matter to you, how could you say that you've experienced the beauty, greatness, and joy of that grand moment? Again, it wouldn't be a real experience.

Other Person's Response: When you say that the person needs to experience the beauty or greatness of things, you act as though things already have beauty or greatness, and that the person just needs to perceive/experience said beauty or greatness.

My Reply: Actually, things hold no beauty and greatness in of themselves. But, once we feel that they're beautiful and great, then they become beautiful and great from our perspective.

Other Person’s Response: I think some of your writing is incoherent.

My Reply: If some of this is incoherent gibberish to you, then I don't know what to say. I've tried my best to explain, and that's all I can do. Sometimes, when I write things, people might not be able to understand them, and I'd be willing to clarify some things if need be.

Other Person's Response: In this big, document file, do you go outside your emotional definition of good, bad, etc.?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: There are many things you say that have been repeated.

My Reply: Some things I say might be repeated. But, there are also many new things I say as well. I think everything I say is mostly new things though. Even though it may seem like I just repeat some things, there are new things I say within the context of those repeated things.

Other Person's Response: Do you think you're an intelligent person, given that you've written all of this?

My Reply: No. I know absolutely nothing about life or any given subject. So, I wouldn't consider myself to be intelligent. I'm just an average person who's explaining his philosophy and life predicaments.

Other Person's Response: You sure do write a lot!

My Reply: It would be no different than someone taking photos throughout his life and putting them all into one, big, photo collection. As time goes on, I add more and more things to say in my packets. So, consider everything I've written to be one, big, written collection of material. Sharing my packets to other people would, thus, be no different than someone sharing his huge photo collection.

Other Person's Response: There's one thing I'd love to see in this one, big collection of written material. That would be you discovering greater value and worth to life than emotions. I hope you develop a new, better philosophy, and discuss it someday.

My Reply: I'm not sure if that's going to happen. But, alright.

Other Person's Response: Are all the responses and replies in this extensive Q&A Section randomly assorted? In other words, do you discuss one thing with someone, and then go into a whole new discussion with someone else?

My Reply: It's sort of randomly assorted. So, don't be confused if I discuss one thing in regards to my philosophy, and then discuss something else in regards to my philosophy, or in regards to a different topic.

Other Person's Response: You say many people understood your writing and said you're a skilled writer. How do you know they weren't just saying that to be polite? Maybe you're not a skilled writer, and people just didn't want to come right out and tell you the truth.

My Reply: Well, when people responded to the things I've written, their responses have shown a clear understanding of what I've written. So, my writing is good enough if people are clearly understanding it.

Other Person's Response: You say people would be having too high of a standard if they say your writing is awful. What people consider to be a reasonable standard is subjective though.

My Reply: Well, most people would think my writing is good. So, that says my writing really is good enough. But, if I wanted to become a professional writer, then my writing wouldn't be good enough, since it doesn't meet that standard. If I was trying to meet a professional writing standard, I'd have to make my writing appealing to readers, rather than explaining things in a normal, conversational tone. I'd also have to present and explain everything in a professional way. But, I don't think I need to do any of that. If I was an author who was selling books, then I would have to do that.

Other Person's Response: I think you should be a writer, and not a philosopher. You're no good at philosophy, since you lack so much knowledge and life experience necessary. But, you're a skilled writer.

My Reply: Regardless if I'm a skilled philosopher or not, I wish to share my personal experience with others, since it's important they know that my positive emotions are what make my life beautiful and worth living.

Other Person's Response: Since you're not a good philosopher, or have much knowledge and life experience, then many things you say make no sense. If someone had no knowledge and experience when it comes to physics, then the things he'd say would make no sense either.

My Reply: Well, I'm trying my best to make sense to others.

Other Person's Response: Also, I've seen you go on forums and debate with other people. When you debate, some of your responses are poor, and don't really address what's been said.

My Reply: Again, I think that's because I'm not an intelligent person who can put up a good debate. I can only do my best, and if my best isn't good enough, then whatever. I don't care. Also, since I'm not very skilled at having a discussion, or a debate, I might give poor responses that don't really address what the other person has said. I could even misinterpret what the other person has said.

Other Person's Response: Do you wish to be an expert philosopher someday, so you can have an intelligent debate with others, rather than putting up poor, flawed arguments?

My Reply: No. My goal is to be a composer who makes good music. So, I'm just writing everything to get it off my mind and share it.

Other Person's Response: If you simply said that you need your positive emotions to experience your life as beautiful and worth living, that wouldn't make sense to many people. So, that's why you explain everything, so that it all makes sense to people.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Since there are emotion theorists with the same philosophy as you, then why not just give us links that present their arguments, rather than going through all the trouble of typing your own arguments to support your philosophy?

My Reply: First of all, I don't even know where to look online to find these arguments. I tried finding them, but couldn't. Second, intelligent people often write, or say things, that are very difficult for the average reader to comprehend. I know I have a difficult time comprehending what intelligent people say and write. So, that's why I explain my philosophy in a way that's clear and simple for readers.

Think of my written material as being one of those books for dummies, such as Music Theory for Dummies, or Philosophy for Dummies. But, there's one exception, which would be that I'm not a professional writer. That means I wouldn't write a well-written book. But, I could, at least, write well-written packets because, as far as writing packets is concerned, my writing should definitely be good enough.

Other Person's Response: I'm sorry to say it, but your writing isn't good enough, which means you're going to have to learn how to be a skilled writer, whether you want to or not.

My Reply: If that's the case, then I'm not going to even bother. I only take up those pursuits I have an interest in, and learning how to be a skilled writer isn't one of those pursuits. But, all my written material wouldn't have been written for nothing. There are some people who understood my writing quite well, which means sharing my packets isn't a futile endeavor, since some people will understand them. Also, I could have professional writers improvise my writing. But, that would cost me, and only few professionals would do it for free. Especially since there's a ton of written material.

Other Person's Response: I'd consider this entire document to be a poorly written book.

My Reply: It's not a book. It's a personal compilation of information I've written, and I think my level of writing skill qualifies when it comes to writing things like this. But, as for writing an actual book, my level of writing skill wouldn't qualify.

Other Person's Response: Those links you presented in your other packet have many arguments to support the views of emotion theorists.

My Reply: Even so, there might be arguments I'm explaining that haven't been explained in those links.

Other Person's Response: Couldn't you go to online forums, find some intelligent people who'd present links to you that explain everything in regards to your philosophy, and you present those links to people? In addition, couldn't you go online, find professional writers, and see if they can revise your writing?

My Reply: Yes. But, again, it's best if I personally explain my philosophy to make it easy and comprehensive for readers. As far as having professionals revise my writing, I'd probably only get a few revisions done for free. After that, I'd have to pay them, and my mother doesn't have the money for that right now.

Other Person's Response: I think your philosophy is very dumb.

My Reply: I don't care how dumb others think it is. This has been my personal experience, and I'm not afraid to share it.

Other Person's Response: You also give very poor analogies that don't make sense to people.

My Reply: If that's the case, then I'm just no good at making analogies.

Other Person's Response: Since this packet is so long, do you talk about other things besides your worldview/philosophy?

My Reply: Yes. I talk about these immortality rings I purchased, I talk about Christianity, I talk about my phobias, and more. Since all these other topics were relevant to the discussion of my philosophy/worldview, then that's why these other topics are discussed in this packet. It would be a bit too much work for me to make those other topics into other packets. I'd have to go through this whole packet, find the responses/replies that discuss these other topics, and make them into different packets. Besides, I think it's alright having all these other discussed topics in this one, big packet.

These other topics aren't really all that important to me anyway. So, they don't warrant their own packets. For example, it's not really important that others are aware of my phobias. Another example would be that I do care if Christians tell me I'm going to hell (since I discuss with them in this packet). But, I really don't care that much. Now, when it comes to the things I discuss in my Composing Dream packet, that warrants its own packet. So, I only make different packets when it's something I think is very important that others need to know about me, or about something I wish to discuss.

Other Person's Response: Do you think your writing skill is above the average skill level?

My Reply: Actually, I do think so. Average people tend to have poor or, moderately poor, spelling, grammar, etc. I know this from personal experience, and I'm quite sure others have had this personal experience as well. Since my writing skill is better than that of an average adult, then I'd consider my writing skill to be above average. But, there are some flaws with my writing, and I am limited when it comes to my vocabulary. So, my writing skill wouldn't be at a professional level.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I think you're wasting your writing talent on writing all of these pointless packets. You could instead be using that talent for something better.

My Reply: I don't want to take up writing stories, poetry, or anything of the sort. I just want to write these packets, since I personally think they're important to share.

Other Person's Response: You share a lot of worthless things. For one, your philosophy is pathetic, ****, and utterly worthless. Who'd want to live by, or even bother with such a philosophy? Secondly, your musical tunes are worthless rubbish.

My Reply: People who'd think my philosophy is **** or worthless would be living by, what they think are, greater values than the values my philosophy advocates/preaches. Thus, they'd just ignore my values and deem them as worthless. They'd say they have a greater purpose in life than living for positive emotions. But, things people abandon and ignore sometimes become the truth. People often times deny the truth and go about their daily lives. So, my philosophy might be true, and people are just dismissing it. They might be living by false values, which means they're living a lie. I think emotions are the only real source of value.

Other Person's Response: I think some people would actually find your philosophy worth reading and taking into consideration.

My Reply: Yes. One man's trash is another man's treasure. So, even though many people would think my philosophy is worthless, there will be people who'd be interested in it. Especially the emotion theorists. I think they'd find it interesting how I turned their emotional perception theory of value into a religion.

Other Person's Response: Many people won't accept the notion that this is the only life we have. So, they believe in an afterlife. Likewise, people won't accept the notion that positive emotions are the only way our lives can be good and beautiful. So, they believe there's more beauty and goodness to life.

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: I heard you say you have a limited vocabulary. That's why you tend to use the same words time and time again. That shows you're a limited individual. So, you could also be limited in terms of your experience. Maybe there really is more beauty and goodness to life than positive emotions, and you don't realize this yet.

My Reply: That could be.

Other Person's Response: Why do you write so much?

My Reply: It's an obsession, it's to get everything off my mind, and share it. If I just left it at a simple statement that gets right to the point, then that wouldn't explain everything I needed to explain. Not only that, but it also wouldn't address all possible objections others have to my personal views. Having a simple, brief statement would leave room for plenty of objections, and I don't want that.

As long as people have objections that leave them name calling me and whatnot, then they lack understanding of me and my whole situation. That's why I address these objections, so that people can finally understand. Think of two people having an argument, such as a daughter, who has broken a plate, and her mother complaining, and calling her clumsy. If that daughter really wasn't being clumsy, then the mother lacks understanding.

Sure, the daughter can give one, simple argument to explain how she wasn't being clumsy. But, the mother would only continue to stand by her position in the argument. Eventually though, the mother would finally understand once the daughter continues to address the mother's arguments. That is, if the mother takes consideration into these arguments, and doesn't say to the daughter that she's just making excuses.

People lack understanding when they say my emotions aren't perceptions of value, or when they call me a childish, piece of ****, since my positive emotions are the only things that make my life beautiful. They would say things, such as that I'm worthless and better off killing myself. This is why I've written all of these essays and Q&A Sections. Not only that, but I'm trying to prove something, and I also like to share all my personal views with others.

Other Person's Response: In the future, we might be able to instantly share our thoughts and ideas telepathically. That means people could immediately know everything about you and your whole predicament in the blink of an eye. Thus, you wouldn't have to sit there and argue with people, or have them read all the things you've written. You could just instantly share all the information in your brain to other people. Unfortunately, that would be in the distant future, and you won't live long enough to see that day.

My Reply: That would be a major advantage if I could do that. This means I wouldn't have to worry about people not reading the things I've written, since they don't have the time, patience, or if my writing skill doesn't meet their higher standards. Also, if supernatural beings do exist, then they could know everything about me and my predicament. Thus, they'd have a complete understanding of me and my whole situation. I wouldn't have to explain anything to them. Lastly, as for me not living long enough to see that day, I could if these immortality rings work for me. I talk about them in this packet.

Other Person's Response: I heard that you've copied and pasted all the material you've written in these packets into your journals on your Deviant Art account. You've also uploaded these packets onto Mediafire. That way, they're backed up. If there's a way for people to download all information from the internet into their brains in the future, then all the information in your packets would be instantly downloaded into their brains, since all that information is already there online.

My Reply: That would be interesting.

Other Person's Response: Are you obsessed with getting every thought off your mind in regards to your philosophy?

My Reply: Yes. That's why I write so much. I wish to share what's on my mind.

Other Person's Response: If you think that anything's unfair or unjust, you write about it?

My Reply: Yes. In this packet, I also talk about fundamentalist Christianity, and why I personally think hell is unjust and unloving.

Other Person's Response: Do you find it difficult to articulate to readers?

My Reply: Sometimes. For example, I might not be explaining things that need to be explained. So, others might find certain things I write to be unclear. I might also use certain words and phrases others would find confusing. I could write something such as: "It's all fine!" Someone might ask me what I mean by that. I'd respond and say to them that it means:

"Everything's alright. I won't have any issues here." That's why I must sit there and really think what I type before I type it. I wish to communicate to readers in such a way they can understand it. To do that, I must type the right things. In the past, I didn't do that. I just wrote things and expected readers to understand. I wasn't being as clear as I possibly could.

Other Person's Response: Do you sometimes explain things in such a way that the reader gets a different message than you intended?

My Reply: Yes. That's why I have to be careful about how I explain the things I wish to explain.

Other Person's Response: When writing your packets, do you try to write in such a way that it's universally understood by readers? For example, if you said you beat a video game, some people would understand that, since they know you meant that you completed a game. But, some people wouldn't understand that, and might think that you literally beat one of your video games with a hammer. So, by instead saying that you've completed a video game, everyone would understand that.

My Reply: Yes. I try to make my explanations universally understood my readers. I also try not to leave out explanations that are needed, so the reader gets the right message. For example, if I just said we don't know the truth when it comes to debatable topics, some people would come along and say we can never know the truth with absolute certainty, since the closest we can get to the truth is 99.9%.

But, if I said we don't know the truth as to whether it's likely a certain claim is true or not, since there's so much debate/controversy about it, then that was the point I was trying to get across to readers. So, the reader would've gotten the wrong message in my first attempt at explaining something. But, once I revise my explanation, the reader gets the right message.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 06:35 pm
@MozartLink,
File #6: More On My Philosophy (Part 2/26)

Other Person's Response: There are shows that perform dangerous stunts, and, sometimes, there's a warning message on the screen, which reads: "Don't try this at home." Someone might respond to this message by saying: "Alright. I'll try it somewhere else then!" Even though it should've been obvious that the message really meant to not attempt these stunts at all, there are some viewers out there who might get the wrong message. Thus, they might attempt these dangerous stunts outside their homes. So, it's important that you're very specific to your viewers, or readers. Otherwise, they might get the wrong message.

My Reply: Yes, and that can be difficult to do. Especially when you're writing a lot of material, and have to think about everything you've written to make sure it's very specific to readers. I, myself, have been in many situations where I've written things, and thought the intended message of my writing should've been obvious to readers. Still, they got the wrong message, and there were also many people who thought my writing was incoherent word salad. But, I've taken this issue into consideration, and that's why I'm a better writer today than what I was a while ago. I'm much more clear and specific to my readers now.

Other Person's Response: You think your writing is good enough. But, is the reader really to be put to blame if he says your writing is awful?

My Reply: I think so. I think it would be justified to blame the reader. My writing should be more than acceptable at this point.

Other Person's Response: I know you do repeat some things in your writing, and you say you have obsessive compulsive disorder. Maybe you don't have OCD, and you just have autism. People with autism also repeat things, and have obsessions.

My Reply: Yes. I know I have autism, since I used to line up objects when I was a child. As for ocd, I might not have that.

Other Person's Response: I heard you used to wash your hands over and over again when you were younger, until they were very dry, and to the point of almost bleeding. I think this says you really do have obsessive compulsive disorder.

My Reply: I wanted my video game discs to be in the best condition they could be. That means I didn't want any grime, finger prints, or scratches on them. So, I'd wash my hands every time I handled them, and I handled them a lot. Some people would say I'm a perfectionist, rather than someone with ocd, since I wanted my discs in perfect condition. Maybe they're right. But, now, even though I do wash my hands before handling my discs, I don't do it as often anymore. The only time I wash my hands before handling them would be if my hands are covered in grime. For example, if I ate some ribs, then I'd wash my hands. So, I no longer wash my hands when it's unnecessary.

Other Person's Response: Who knows. If you manage to prove your philosophy, you might earn a Nobel Prize, and you would compel many scientists to create a better, happier life for us all. If scientists realize positive emotions are the only things that make life beautiful, then they'd come to realize people struggling with depression is unacceptable, and they'd be very compelled to find cures.

My Reply: I'm not sure if that's going to happen. But, a man can dream.

Other Person's Response: If positive emotions really are the only things that make life good and beautiful, then it really is unacceptable for this life to consist of such suffering and unhappiness. I do agree with you when you say that this life needs to be a utopia.

My Reply: I have my rights as a human being, which means I have a right to live a life that's good and beautiful. This life being an unhappy place only imposes upon said rights. If god and these spiritual beings exist, then them creating a utopia life for us would be no different than Abraham Lincoln setting the slaves free, or soldiers fighting for our freedom. It's simply unjust for this life to consist of mental illnesses that take away our positive emotions, and it's even more unjust for life to consist of immense, emotional suffering. An example would be my miserable struggles, since they were the most horrible experiences of my personal life. God and these spiritual beings are apparently doing nothing about it, and I don't know why.

Other Person's Response: You writing this whole packet would also be no different than someone speaking up for his rights and explaining how his rights have been imposed upon.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Your philosophy says positive emotions are the only things that make life good and beautiful. How do you make it in life with such a philosophy?

My Reply: Normally, I'd always be happy and enjoying my life. So, my philosophy poses no problems for me when I'm happy. But, when it comes to miserable moments in my life, that's when I'm in trouble, since I don't have my positive emotions. If I developed some sort of mental illness that took away my positive emotions, that's when my philosophy would become a problem, too. Other than that, it's no problem for me. My philosophy hasn't been a problem for me for many years, since I've always lived my life as a happy hedonist. But, later on, I struggled with much misery, and that's where I was in serious trouble.

Other Person's Response: Are you writing all of this as a con or hoax?

My Reply: No. I'm just sharing my personal views and experiences.

Other Person's Response: You say readers can't appreciate your writing, due to their unreasonably high standards. I don't think that's the case. I think they'd have every good reason to think your writing is bad, or not good enough.

My Reply: There are many people who can't appreciate things, whether it be certain products, certain works of art, life in general, etc. So, I think these people wouldn't be appreciating my writing.

Other Person's Response: Different people will have different standards though, and you just have to accept that.

My Reply: I realize this. But, if it's possible, all I'm asking is that people, who do have high standards, to lower them. My mother is an awful writer, and she spells terribly. But, the person she writes to understands her writing quite well. He even accepts her writing. I think it's because he's used to reading material that's poorly written. Even I understood her writing.

Therefore, even if my writing was just as poor as my mother's, it's still possible for people to understand and accept my writing anyway. They can do so by adapting to a lower standard. But, my writing is much better than that of an average person who spells terribly and writes poorly. So, there's no excuse for people to complain about my writing skill, and not read my packets.

Other Person's Response: By complaining about readers having too high of a writing standard, you're going to turn readers away. They won't bother reading your packets.

My Reply: That's fine. If some people don't read my packets, then they don't read them.

Other Person's Response: I thought the way you presented and explained things was a bit difficult and challenging.

My Reply: All I'm doing is presenting and explaining things in a very simple, clear, and straightforward fashion. I don't understand what's so difficult and challenging about that.

Other Person's Response: There are some flaws with your writing, and that's what makes it a bit difficult.

My Reply: Plenty of people have understood my writing quite well. Besides, human beings aren't like machines that require the exact right input, and spit out an error if the input wasn't perfect. My point is, human beings should still easily understand my writing, even though it's not perfect, or nearly perfect. If I was sharing my material to a robot, then, yes, I'd have to give him material that's written perfectly (or near perfection) in order for him to understand it, and not spit out an error. But, like I said, human beings aren't robots.

Other Person's Response: I think your writing has to be more interesting in order to attract readers.

My Reply: I'm not concerned about that. People can take it or leave it. If they choose not to read it, even after everything I said about people having too high of a standard, and not accepting my writing as it is, then that's their choice. But, I do know some people out there would take the time to read through my packets.

Other Person's Response: I thought you said you'd be willing to improve your writing. That would even include making your material more interesting for readers.

My Reply: Sure. But, I don't have an English teacher, or someone who could help me with that. So, people should just accept my writing as it is. It's not like it's horribly written, like a 6 year old making all sorts of spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors, and presenting/explaining things so badly, that nobody can understand it.

Other Person's Response: Since there's so much to read in this packet, then how are people supposed to know where they last left off reading?

My Reply: If they open this document in, for example, Microsoft Word, then I think the software automatically gives this whole document page numbers. So, people can write down the page number they last left off reading.

Other Person's Response: If people stopped reading at a certain point, they could select a portion of text they last left off reading, copy it, paste it into another document file, and save that document. From there, they could select that text, copy it, and paste it into the Find function at the top of this huge document, which would allow them to continue reading where they last left off reading.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your philosophy, reality is almost never a happy place. I told you before that you've painted yourself into a corner, and left yourself open to inevitable disaster. This is highly likely to lead to your eventual suicide. Think about the millions, billions of people, and years that have come before you. You've seen movies depicting life hundreds of years ago, yes? People's lives have generally always been filled with extreme misery.

From hunger and famine, to brutal, hard labor, to medical issues and injuries, to wars and isolation, to the idea that we all become confronted by the fact that, one day, each and every one of us, yourself included, will die. I mean, the most immediate inevitable problem that comes to my mind is: what will you do when your mother, whom you claim to be so dependent on, dies?

To face such an inevitable reality must be terrifying. How could you even come close to being happy while having the capacity to know these things? I really don't know how you get through the day with the philosophy you put forward. It would take a strong will to live in a complete fantasy, divorced of reality. Yet, that can only protect you until the point that an event actually occurs. At which point, you'll fall into despair. I wouldn't want anyone to be subjected to that nightmare.

I say these things not to be mean, but to impress upon you that the answer to this question, and the advice you're seeking, has already been offered to you numerous times before in other parts of the forums. Your "worldview" (your philosophy of hedonism) is your undoing. It is the single, greatest threat to your life and your happiness, precisely because the world isn't fair, it doesn't care about your feelings, and every time reality hits, you'll sink into an ever-deepening well of depression that will eventually scar you so much that it consumes you whole. It will destroy you. Only by seeking knowledge and learning will you uncover better philosophies, and better tools to protect yourself.

For example, Stoicism would be far more beneficial of a philosophy than hedonism. Especially for you. All the hedonists I've ever known were essentially bi polar, going from super highs of happy, to deep depression, anger, hatred, and self-loathing. It ripped apart their relationships, leaving them alone, only to sink deeper into drugs and alcohol for an escape. Their intoxicating, happy moments would lead others to follow them, only to be destroyed by them when the happy moments run out. To me, it's an evil, harmful, dangerous existence. This is my personal opinion, experiences here, and justification for the advice I'm giving you.

In short, the only answer, the only protection, and the only advice myself, or anyone else here, could really give you on this particular question is to utilize whatever capacity you're able to in order to develop yourself as a person. You need to enrich your mind with knowledge, and you need to understand that, unless you can find security and stability in the worst of life's moments, the best of life's moments will become less and less happy until all you're left with is darkness and despair. When that happens, you will kill yourself. I speak from experience here, man. I've seen a lot of **** in my life, and this is a serious answer to your question.

My Reply: Maybe all I need is a whole new personal experience that can give my life positivity. Perhaps there's a way for me to acquire this new personal experience (mental state). Therefore, maybe I really don't need to study up and learn things. Maybe I just need to do something new with my life, or get the proper help from a therapist. Also, if I need help, I'll get it. I'm not just going to end my life.

One last thing. If there's a god, then why isn't he ensuring my happiness and well-being? I take personal issue with that, and I think it's cruel, uncaring treatment. If you're going to provide a service for your customers, then you have to make sure it's a good service that makes the customers happy. Likewise, a loving god should've provided us with a blissful, utopia life to make us all happy.

I would've expected this life to be a good service that provides us with immortality, eternal bliss, freedom of misery and hardship, whatever we desire, etc. But, I didn't get that, and I'm more than curious as to why an all-loving god wouldn't provide us with that. Who knows, it could be the case that there's no god, and this is the only life we have.

In which case, I hope these immortality rings work for me, so I can live to see a better future. It would be a future meant for our longevity and happiness. Since there'd be no god giving us a good service, then it's up to scientists to do the job. If these rings don't work for me, then I'm also out of luck. Not only in terms of happiness, but longevity.

Other Person's Response: I'm going to quote something the above person said and respond to it:

Quote:
Yet, that can only protect you until the point that an event actually occurs. At which point, you'll fall into despair. I wouldn't want anyone to be subjected to that nightmare.


I heard you said earlier that you're no longer going to have anymore miserable moments, since you're keeping your mindset positive from now on. In the past, you've had a negative mindset of worrying, which brought you much misery. But, now, you're having a mindset that will no longer bring you such suffering, right?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Let me butt in here for a moment. If there's a god, then I think we were meant to serve him. I'm a Christian, and I think life was meant to be filled with hardship because we were meant to bear our cross for Jesus.

My Reply: I disagree. I think an all-loving god would serve us, and make this life free of hardship and misery. Especially considering that positive emotions are the only things that make life beautiful. It would be a caring, generous act of scientists to create a utopia life for us, just as how it would be a caring, generous act of an all-loving god to create such a life for us.

Other Person's Response: If scientists do create this future, utopia life for us, then what about those people who see value in a life of hardship, pain, disease, misery, and want that? There are people who value tough, brutal battles, and character growth/strength. I don't think we should leave these people out of the picture.

My Reply: I mentioned earlier that a utopia life would also give us whatever we desire. So, for those who wish to live short, hard lives, filled with struggles, can choose to have that, while people, who wish to live blissful, easy, immortal lives, can have that. I think having life one way isn't going to work out for everybody. For example, if this life were blissful, and free of hardship and misery for everybody, then that wouldn't work out for those types of people who value hardship and misery.

Likewise, this being a life that's unfair, and filled with misery, unhappiness, pain, disease, and hardship obviously isn't going to work out for everybody either. It clearly doesn't work out for me. To expect me to find value in a life of misery and unhappiness would be no different than expecting a tough, brutal person, who values hardship, to find value in an easy, happy life, free of hardship. So, I think the best solution would be to create a life that's suitable for each individual. I think scientists need to make that happen somehow.

Other Person's Response: If, let's pretend, this utopia life were real, and you got to live it, would you ever choose to live the life of hardship, pain, misery, and struggles?

My Reply: If I ever wanted to change and grow as a person, then I'd choose that life. In the meantime, I'd want to live the blissful life of my dreams all I wanted to. I'm not sure if I'd ever want to grow as a person. A hedonistic lifestyle has always been the life I've been familiar with, and found value in. It's like home to me. So, it would be very difficult for me to prefer another way of life. Think of someone who's lived as a tough, brutal man in a life of hardship and misery. It would be very difficult for that person to prefer a happy life, free of hardship, if his tough, brutal life was the life he's always found value in.

Other Person's Response: You said you might not be able to develop a better philosophy, no matter how hard you try. So, it might be pointless and futile for you to live a life of hardship, pain, and misery. All the miserable struggles you've already had never resulted in you developing a better philosophy. So, I think it would be best for you to just live that utopia life, without ever choosing a tough life.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: I personally find your preference of an eternal, blissful, utopia life to be depressing and sad. It's a meaningless existence.

My Reply: I don't think it is. Think of a happy, carefree child, living the blissful Disney life of his/her dreams, and for said life to last eternity. I fail to see that as sad, or a meaningless existence.

Other Person's Response: You wish life to be a happy, fun adventure that never ends. But, that's the opposite of what life is. It's a life filled with misery, unhappiness, hardship, and people die, whether it be sometime soon, or when their lives are over. This life is very temporary, and not a happy place.

My Reply: In a way, it would be like people are characters in a video game, playing a war where they all battle, struggle, and die shortly. But, I'm the character in that game who just wants to be happy, have fun, adventure, never dies, and never struggles. I would, therefore, be playing the game in a way that it's not intended. But, my method of playing the game isn't compatible with the game I'm playing because it's a war game, where we all battle, struggle, and die.

That's why I'd want to put in a new game cartridge, if you will. This new game would be a happy, fun, adventure game, where it's free of hardship, death, and misery. Unfortunately, I'm stuck with this loathsome game. That means I have to play a game I don't like, and don't want to play. I consider this game to be someone else's, and not my own. I'd want my own game to play if I had the choice. That's why I'd choose to live my own blissful, eternal, utopia life.

Other Person's Response: If god made this life perfect, then there would be no learning and growing.

My Reply: If god couldn't make this life free of suffering, for whatever reason, then he could've at least bestowed me with all the life lessons I needed to learn upon my very birth. If he did that, then I would've known to keep my thought processes healthy right from the start in order to avoid all that suffering I've been through.

I think it would be better if god put knowledge in a person's head right from the start that, for example, smoking would definitely be hazardous to his health, rather than allowing that person to smoke, and have his health destroyed later on. That way, this person would definitely see his future, and avoid smoking in the first place. Scientists are making our lives easier and preventing suffering, and I think god should be like these scientists.

Other Person's Response: Clearly, I was too harsh last time. I'll try and say it more nicely.

1. At this stage, you really should seek help from a professional.

2. How can anyone help you if, when you go to a place for help, ask for help, and someone answers you in a meaningful way, you ignore them, and refuse the help that was offered? So, please, seek professional help.

My Reply: Understood. But, I think this change of my values would require a change in my whole personality. I'm someone who wants life to be a beautiful, joyful, fun adventure that never ends. The most important things to me in life are longevity and positive emotions. Hence my yearning for the eternal, blissful afterlife of my dreams. Longevity without positive emotions would be nothing positive, and I wouldn't want to live that life. But, positive emotions without the longevity would be a positive life for me. However, I'd really hate a positive life to be something so temporary. That's why a combination of longevity and positive emotions would be the greatest life for me.

Other Person's Response: Also, your idea of permanent happiness would be impossible without some sort of mind control device, or highly destructive drugs, which would strip you of all aspects of your person hood. How do I put it.....

Hmm...

Well, you'd be sad if your mom died, yes? I mean, she's going to die one day, and that's sad. When that day comes, would you really want to be smiling and happy, feeling nothing for your mother, and just happily dancing on her grave? How can you claim to love someone if they mean so little to you that their death doesn't make you sad?

What I'm trying to say is, what you're trying to achieve isn't possible, and if it was possible, choosing that would be the most heartbreaking thing I could imagine. I would cry.....

My Reply: I think you can care about someone through positive emotions alone without the negative emotions. As for me losing every aspect of my humanity through an eternal, blissful life, I'm not sure if that would happen. Some spiritual believers claim it wouldn't happen.

Other Person's Response: So, according to you, we should look at the situation of our loved ones dying in a whole new way that brings us joy? If heaven exists, then we should see it as a situation where our loved ones, who've passed away, have simply relocated to a better place? It would be like a family member going on a beautiful vacation, and staying there. But, we get to meet him/her someday.

My Reply: Correct. Looking at it that way will, hopefully, prevent any emotional trauma or misery.

Other Person's Response: Would you grieve if your mother died?

My Reply: I'm not sure how I'd feel. If this is the only life we have, then human beings are just biological machines. We'd live, die, and that's it. Thus, we'd be insignificant in the grand scheme of things. So, maybe, it wouldn't really matter to me if she died, since she'd be insignificant in this universe. Now, if we are special in this universe, and we get to live a heavenly afterlife, then I wouldn't grieve over her death either because I'd know she's in a happy place, and I'd meet her there someday.

Other Person's Response: What if you were a spiritual being (a soul) who got to live a blissful afterlife, while your mother was also a spiritual being, but would die, and that be the end of her?

My Reply: That's when I might start to feel bad over her death. This is because she'd be significant and special in this universe, but wouldn't get to live on in a happy place like I would.

Other Person's Response: I realize you had an emotional trauma at one point in your life, and it was in regards to the idea that you might die, and that be the end of your existence, since we might just be biological machines. If you're insignificant in this universe, then why should it matter to you if you die for good? Why should it even traumatize you? You wouldn't be traumatized if your mother died for good. So, I don't understand why you were traumatized about the idea of your existence being finite.

My Reply: I'm not sure. I guess our ego seeks to survive, and we become traumatized when we realize our existence is finite or, at least, consider the possibility that our existence is finite.

Other Person's Response: When you say you wouldn't be sad about the idea of your mother dying for good, since we'd be insignificant in this universe, is that a coping mechanism you're using to prevent yourself from suffering?

My Reply: Actually, that's just the mindset I'd normally have. But, it's also a coping mechanism anyone could use.

Other Person's Response: There are 2 forms of significance a person can have. The 1st would be that he's a special, spiritual being who's eternal, and loved by higher beings. The 2nd would be, even though his existence is finite, and he's not a special, spiritual being in this universe, he was still a beautiful person. As you can see, you can still be a naturalist who doesn't believe in any supernatural things. Yet, human beings can still be beautiful and precious to you anyway.

My Reply: I personally see no value in the 2nd form of significance. So, the 2nd form means nothing to me. That's why I might not grieve if my mother died (in the case of the 2nd scenario). That's because her death would be of no significance to me. Only the 1st form of significance holds profound meaning to me. So, that's why I might feel sad if my mother was a special, spiritual being, but died, and that was the end of her existence.

Other Person's Response: So, what you're saying is, if this universe is purely naturalistic, then your attitude would be: "We all live, die, and that's it. So what? We're nothing special in the grand scheme of things. I don't care if you die, mother!" But, if we are special in the grand sense, and we live in a spiritual universe where supernatural things exist, then your attitude would be: "You're very special in this universe, mother! I don't want to you die, and that's it! It would be sad if your beautiful spirit didn't get to live on, and got destroyed somehow!" I personally think this is a very black and white mindset because you see your mother as precious in one scenario, but don't see her as precious at all in the other scenario.

My Reply: You could be right. Even if this universe was purely naturalistic, I'd still feel joy from being with my mother, which means she'd have some significance to me. But, if she died, I don't think I'd feel sad one bit. It would be a very shallow existence if we just live, suffer, die, and that's it. I think it would be profoundly beautiful if this was a universe where we're all special, eternal, spiritual beings who got to live the eternal, blissful afterlife of our dreams.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your philosophy of hedonism, my heart breaks for hedonists, precisely because they can't see what it is they're missing. I would not advice you avoid pain, hardship, or sorrow for a few reasons:

Our shared pain and hardship brings us closer, forging stronger bonds, and helping us to have more meaningful relationships. Shared hardship can forge bonds so strong that virtually nothing could tear them apart. You'll have people in your life that you know would never abandon you, and leave you alone. Superficial relationships built on only "happy" feelings aren't that strong, and they do shatter.

Your mom may not abandon you. But, it's also possible, and highly probable, that she sees you as a hardship, regardless if she admits it or not. To be fair, that's not entirely a bad thing if she does. She'd seek out help from her community, and forge other bonds to help her because she has to support you because you're not developed enough to support yourself. Also, this isn't an insult. Just your reality, and you may not be able to help it.

But, you see what's happening here? Your desire at forcing happiness comes at the expense of others around you. They can hide it for a while. But, it can't last forever. Even your mom does have a breaking point and, by choosing to not try and grow as much as you can, you burden her more. Nothing about your outlook on life is good. Not for you, or anyone in your life. People who tell you otherwise aren't your friends, they don't care about you, and they aren't helping you, even if it seems good.

Ever watch Star Wars? Yoda: "Quicker, easier, more seductive." That's what he says about the dark side. That's kinda similar to the path you're on now. Those who choose the dark side think they have very good reasons for doing so. But, in the end, it destroys them. You think you have good reasons for choosing the path you're on and, yet, many people have told you how dangerous it is, and how it can, and will destroy you.

You're not finding success in it at all anyway.... "Life often isn't a happy place." You said so yourself. It's not working for you. If it was working for you, why do you seek help? If your outlook on life was healthy for you, you wouldn't have ever come here, and you wouldn't have come into the personal support section. Assuming you're being honest about all this, it's pretty clear even you realize that there's a problem with what you're doing.

Fear is the mind killer (to quote the book Dune). I'd advice you to try and take the offer of help you're getting, and see if maybe there's a better way. A way to truly be content with your life. The highs will be higher, and the lows won't hurt so much. You'll be happier, you'll enrich the lives of those around you, and make their lives better. It's certainly better than draining them of their happiness to feed your own.

My Reply: I've taken this path, and have remained with it because I was highly doubtful about this idea that there's more good and beauty to life than positive emotions. Also, I do support myself, and I'm really not a burden to my mother.

Other Person's Response: You claim emotions are perceptions of value and, yet, emotions are fleeting, ever changing, and completely transient. They always have been, and always will be, for very good biological reasons. They're simply a natural process, and nothing more. You aren't getting "value" or "values" from your emotions. You're just getting well-understood chemical reactions from them that you either like, or don't like.

I mean, look at it this way. Some drugs feed your brain exactly what you crave (take sugar, for instance, along with heroin). By your own standards, the things you should value most, because they'll make you happiest, are sugar, heroin, meth, or whatever. Take your pick. They release chemicals in your brain that make you feel good, and the sad reality is, they aren't always effective.

Other sources of happiness, whether they be people, toys, movies, books, etc., those make you happy. But, their effectiveness will always diminish over time. Therefore, by your value system, you should be completely addicted to drugs and sugar (which I think is also a drug. But, that's another story).

But, what would happen if you just took sugar, and had lots of it all the time? You'd have diabetes, like I do. Want to know how horrifying living with diabetes is? I can tell you. What about drugs? Ever seen a meth head? Do I need to describe to you how terrible their lives are?

Because I understand WHY you have feelings (since I understand the biology behind it), I understand why you can't achieve your goal of happiness long term. The brain gets bored of most things that cause happiness after a while. So, you'd have to constantly be seeking new sources of happiness. But, eventually, you'd run out. Then, your brain would be bored, and you'd get depressed. You'd feel empty, and not even know the source of that emptiness. The word to describe that state is melancholy.

You go down this path long enough, and you'll find it near impossible to ever feel happy. Things that used to make you feel happy will just be hollow and empty. I know this because I've been there. I wasn't dedicated to the path you're on. But, I took my own path that led to a similar place. This state is a state of depression. You could then turn to medical science for a solution. You could try antidepressants, which aren't really the best solution.

But, you've already destroyed almost all other options. Or, you could turn to illegal drugs, which will be a problem for you. In the end, there's no happy ending on the road you're choosing. Think of me as a road sign. I'm telling you that the canyon you're trying to cross has a bridge out, and you're speeding towards it so fast that, by the time you can see it for yourself, it's going to be too late.

My Reply: I already realize that, according to my value system, getting high off of drugs would bring my life the greatest joy and beauty, and that said beauty and joy wouldn't last me. Nonetheless, I'm still going with my personal experience here. My personal experience was something powerful and profound. Thus, I'm going with the idea that emotions are the perceptions of good, bad, etc. But, I can still make choices, such as not doing drugs.

Other Person's Response: Well, I don't recommend this, but I can only give you one answer to achieve your stated goal. Meth.

It will make you feel good, and your brain will never get tired of it. Please understand I'm not recommending it. I just know it's effective. That's a fact. Shouldn't that give you pause that the most effective (and, frankly, the only way) to achieve what you say you want is an illegal drug?

Shouldn't that suggest to you that maybe your feelings aren't always right?

Edit^ You know, when I was a kid in Christian school, they always said "The only thing that separates us from the animals is our ability to think and reason."

My Reply: My personal experience was something so powerful and profound that nothing will convince me otherwise. As for your question, this statement already implies that emotions tell us things. They tell us that certain things are good, bad, horrible, or disgusting. Haven't you ever felt that someone, or something in your life, was beautiful, horrible, or disgusting? This is what I mean here when I say that emotions really are the perception of good, bad, etc.

Other Person's Response: ?...I don't disagree. Emotions do "tell us things." But, that doesn't mean emotions are always right. From a biological standpoint, emotions are critical to our survival as individuals, and a species.

Example 1: I had to correct myself earlier because what you said I found offensive, and I was snippy with you. Julep kinda corrected me there, and I also realized it, and corrected myself. That was an emotional response I shouldn't have acted upon.

Example 2: Numerous other biological responses can be deadly. As I recall (I could be wrong here) in the presence of fire, the throat can close up to protect the body. Problem being, it can do so in such a violent way as to cause the human exposed to this to suffocate from their own bodily response. Thus, effectively killing themselves before the fire can get the job done. There are other examples. The fight or flight response to danger can often cause problems that lead to pain injury, and death.

Example 3: People get fooled all the time by con artists, trying to take advantage of them, steal their money, or hurt them. They make these decisions largely because someone is manipulating them by manipulating their emotional responses.

Example 4: Ever want a toy? Ever want a toy so bad you think you might die if you don't get it? You want it, and you think it'll make you so happy if you get it. You're so excited. Even more so when you get it. But, then you start to play with the toy, and are completely disappointed. Your emotions aren't always right.

To some extent, these are experiences everyone alive have faced, and we know how they work. That is why I can give you thoughtful, meaningful advice on these issues, even though I'm not you, and I've never had your specific experiences.

Just because you feel something doesn't mean it's right, or that it's the best path. It just means you feel something. What you choose to do after that, ideally, would be after careful consideration.

My Reply: But, emotions are still the only source of good, bad, etc. in my life though, and I'm not sure if there are other ways I can perceive good, bad, etc. besides emotions.

Other Person's Response: Matt, want to know where my values come from? I don't draw value from something that can change on any day of the week because anything so easily destroyed isn't a stable platform to build values from. I draw value from my integrity. You could say I draw value from my honor. This is something people have drawn value from for as long as there's been written history.

I honor myself by living consistent with the things I think are worthy of my commitment. Being honest with myself. Trying to be honest with the world around me. My commitment to never lying to myself means I can't be religious. It's a personal thing, and something that wouldn't work for anyone else.

Or, rather, how do I put it?...Someone else could share my value to never lying to themselves, and still somehow be religious. It's not the only reason I'm not religious. But, it's one core reason. I don't rape, I don't steal, I try to never lie (though, let's be honest, everyone lies).

I treat myself with dignity and respect, and require that of others (though, I don't get offended by insults, and am willing, and able to insult back. That's a complicated issue. But, something to be aware of. My values are different from a religious person's. Lets just leave it at that).

I strive never to derive value from arbitrary things. So, I don't derive value from old books or emotions, since both are inherently arbitrary (emotions are good, but require thought to be worth anything. At least, from my perspective), and I'm always willing to admit when I'm wrong. Both to myself, and everyone around me.

These are the things I think make a person honorable, and this is where my value, and values, come from. These values are older than I am by far, and will be around long after I'm dead. So, I think they're a more reasonable foundation than my blind emotions.

My Reply: But, the good and beautiful things in life are often times fleeting things. For example, a colorful rainbow would only be there for a little while before it fades away. So, the beauty in our lives might work the same way. The only way to live a beautiful life might be through positive emotions, which are very fleeting things, just like that rainbow.

Other Person's Response: As for what you said a while back, which was that some spiritual people tell you that you wouldn't loose your identity, I've kinda agonized over sharing this because I'm not entirely sure if it would be considered ok for the personal help section....

But, the problem with what they're telling you are 2 fold. First, in order for you to be happy in heaven, when people you love are suffering, your identity would have to be removed. You'd be a mindless zombie, or you'd have to lose all your memories. I mean, otherwise, how could you be happy, knowing people you love, possibly even your own mother, are being tortured in hell and, yet, you're up in heaven, all happy forever...

I'm not going to embed this video. It's a youtube video that explains exactly the kinda thing I'm talking about. It has bad words 'n stuff in it, and isn't meant for everyone, even though it's safe for youtube. It's a video by a guy named Darkmatter2525, and exactly details the issue described here. I'm going to share it in good faith. I really just don't know any other way to help you see the problems with what they're telling you.

https://youtu.be/5GjCRWeG_AQ

My Reply: I think I would feel horrible if they were burning in hell for eternity, and I might feel that way for a while. But, that feeling would pass on its own, just as how all my other negative emotions passed on their own, such as the ones I've had during my miserable struggles.

Other Person's Response: Life isn't compatible with hedonism, since positive emotions are fleeting.

My Reply: That's what really gets to me, since this life imposes upon my philosophy, with all of its hardships and misfortunes. I really wish life was a blissful utopia.

Other Person's Response: But, having control and dominance over your emotions should give your life a whole new set of values.

My Reply: I'm not sure about that. People, who have control and dominance over their emotions, might be fooled into dismissing their emotions as trivial when, in reality, they're the very source of good, bad, etc.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 06:36 pm
@MozartLink,
File #6: More On My Philosophy (Part 3/26)

Other Person's Response: Our mindset alone really does allow us to experience real beauty and joy. Your life's experience and knowledge is just limited is all. Imagine a person, who was born blind, and I explained to him the color blue. He wouldn't be able to comprehend blue, since he's never seen blue. It's an experience he's never had. But, that doesn't mean blue doesn't exist, just because this blind person hasn't experienced it. You're like that blind person, since you've never experienced any positivity through your mindset. But, that doesn't mean such positivity doesn't exist.

My Reply: I can only hope you're right.

Other Person's Response: I don't care what your philosophy says. I can assure you that positive emotions are nothing compared to my intellect. Positive emotions are nothing more than just pleasant feelings.

My Reply: Here's an exercise I'd want other people to perform. This would actually be a great example for people who take psychedelic drugs. If a person took a psychedelic drug, and experienced the most profoundly beautiful bliss of his life, then he might report that it was a profoundly beautiful experience that was out of this world. This would be his emotional-based beauty.

If that same person later struggled with the worst misery of his life, and did something with his life, such as being there for his family, or contributing to the world, despite that horrible misery, then he might report that this was also a profoundly beautiful experience in his life, even though he was unable to feel positive emotions. This would be his intellectual-based beauty.

I'd want that person to actually think twice here. In other words, I'd want him to compare the two mental states. If he pays close attention, then he should come to realize that mental state #2 (his intellectual-based beauty) is literally nothing compared to mental state #1 (the profoundly beautiful bliss he felt from being on that psychedelic drug).

Once he discovers this, then this should reveal that positive emotions are the only perception of beauty, goodness, etc., while our intellect and character alone is not. But, if he still says to me that mental state #2 is a perception of beauty, goodness, etc. in his life, and that it's something far greater than mental state #1, then I have no way of knowing whether he's delusional and in denial, or if he really is telling the truth.

I'm not inside his mind, and I can't experience what he's experiencing to find out. As for me, I've payed attention to my mental states and, for me, my positive emotions are the source of beauty, goodness, and joy, while my mindset alone is not. One last thing here. I don't think that both mental state #1 and mental state #2 are perceptions of beauty, goodness, etc. Only one mental state can, and I think it's mental state #1 (the positive emotions).

Other Person's Response: Sure, you could live the longest, happy life you want to live, if you had the choice. But, you'd never be satisfied. You'd just keep craving more and more happiness (positive emotions).

My Reply: You're right. I'd never be satisfied. But, that lack of satisfaction can't be anything negative in my life. It can only be a positive experience for me if I just felt positive emotions. It would be no different than how a person craves more and more fun and adventure. As long as that person isn't unhappy, or miserable about his/her lack of satisfaction, then it can only be a positive experience for him/her.

Other Person's Response: Are you male or female? Females tend to be emotional, and males tend to be intellectual. If you're male, then I would've expected you to live by intellectual based values.

My Reply: I'm a white male, and I'm quite sure there are many males who live by emotional based values. An example would be the hedonists who wish to have fun, and enjoy their lives.

Other Person's Response: I think our intellect alone can give us positive experiences.

My Reply: Consider any positive experience in your life to be a golden gem that shines very bright. Can your intellect alone give you that gem? No, it can't. That gem is an actual thing, and just thinking of that gem won't give you that gem, and believing you have that gem won't give you that gem either. That gem would be our positive emotions. If you lose that gem, due to any number of factors, whether it be clinical depression or emotional trauma, then you're screwed for the time being until you can regain that gem. It's only once you regain that gem would your life be filled positivity.

Other Person's Response: If you think emotions are the only way to perceive good, bad, etc., then that's your personal experience. Not mine. You don't know my personal experience. So, how can you conclude I'm not perceiving my partner as beautiful, even though I don't feel any particular emotion at the moment?

My Reply: You're right. I don't know your personal experience. This means I'm basing everything off of my own personal experience. But, I do have every reason to think emotions are the only real perceptions of good, bad, etc., and I present these reasons/arguments in my packets.

Other Person's Response: If I didn't feel physical pain at all, then there's no way I'd believe I'm in physical pain. It would be clearly obvious to me that I'm not in physical pain. The same idea applies to hunger and thirst. I could also apply the same argument to beauty.

If I wasn't perceiving beauty in my life, then there's no way I could believe I'm perceiving beauty. Likewise, if nothing mattered to me, then there's no way I'd believe things mattered to me.

So, the very fact people do believe there's more beauty to life than positive emotions must make it true, and the very fact people do believe their thoughts can make things matter to them must make it true.

My Reply: I think people have been taught the wrong definition of perceived beauty, and live by it as though it's the truth. Many people have been taught lies, and believe them. As a matter of fact, you don't even need to be taught, and you can delude yourself into believing lies.

Other Person's Response: When you have a thought, such as a thought of certain forms of beauty, horror, or tragedy, and these thoughts make you feel emotions, the emotions would possess that quality of beauty, horror, or tragedy?

My Reply: Correct. So, if you had the thought of tropical beauty, and that thought made you feel a positive emotion, that emotion would be the experience of tropical beauty. Thus, that positive emotion possesses the quality of tropical beauty. It would almost be like how, if you had the thought of a tropical scent, that thought might trigger the experience of a tropical scent in your brain. In a way, emotions are like smells or tastes then.

That positive emotion you felt would be like a tropical scent, since it was an experience for you that possessed a tropical quality to it. But, it's the experience of beauty, and tastes or smells can't give us the experience of beauty, joy, or love. In summary, there are tropical tastes, tropical smells, tropical sounds, tropical visuals, and tropical emotions. Therefore, emotions are like tastes, smells, sounds, and visuals.

Other Person's Response: Speaking of scents, you could transform any emotion you feel into a certain scent. For example, if you feel joy from being in a field of flowers, then that could be expressed as the smell of flowers. If you feel love, then that could be expressed as a loving scent. I wonder what type of horrible scent would exist if your miserable struggles took on the form of a certain smell.

My Reply: It would have to be a scent worse than the absolute worst scent because, if I were to smell the worst scent, that just wouldn't express how horrible my miserable struggles were. Especially the horrible experiences I've had in my nightmares.

Other Person's Response: In regards to positive thinking, therapists always talk about thinking positive.

My Reply: Yes. When you hear therapists tell you to think positive, and have a positive outlook on life, they mean to think of beautiful, good, or amazing things, rather than thinking of the worst. But, thoughts and beliefs themselves don't give us a positive or negative outlook. Only our emotions do. Therefore, therapists should change the type of advice they give to patients. They should tell patients to feel as much positive emotions as they can, rather than thinking positive during moments they can't feel positive emotions.

So, it's futile to tell people, who struggle with chronic, clinical depression, to think positive, since these thoughts can't make them feel positive emotions. Lastly, there's also another definition of positive and negative, and that would be something like a positive charge, and a negative charge. Given this, I'd give the emotions the former definition, and I'd give the thoughts the latter definition. So, yes, I could describe thoughts and beliefs to be positive and negative. But, it wouldn't be in terms of beauty, horror, etc.

Other Person's Response: So, your views oppose the vast majority of therapists. Many would assume that emotions don't give us a positive or negative outlook, that they're nothing more than how we feel, and that it's our thoughts and beliefs that give us a positive or negative outlook. But, you're saying it's the other way around. From there, you describe a positive outlook to be a divine mental state and, thus, you describe positive emotions as being divine states.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: I see. Now I understand why you think genius artists, who struggled with misery and depression, had nothing positive in their lives, since they couldn't have a real positive outlook in regards to their lives, artwork, and endeavors. They claim they had a positive outlook. But, you're saying it's not a real positive outlook. You define a positive outlook differently than most people.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your philosophy, I understand how metaphors aren't the real things. Metaphorically describing myself as water wouldn't make me the actual chemical compound H20. Also, if I was dehydrated, and needed to drink water to save my life, then a metaphorical version of water wouldn't save my life.

My Reply: Yes. If people wish to experience real love, joy, happiness, or beauty in their lives, then it must be the real experience (positive emotions), and not just metaphors.

Other Person's Response: Many people would say it's the thought that counts. But, your philosophy says the opposite.

My Reply: Yes. It's not the thought that counts. It's the emotion that counts.

Other Person's Response: I heard you give up composing during your miserable struggles.

My Reply: Yes. This is because I have all these subconscious, negative thoughts during said moments that make me feel negative emotions, such as misery, hate, rage, the desire to give up, etc. But, once I'm fully recovered from these miserable moments, and have my positive emotions back to me, I could experience the most difficult learning curve when learning music theory, I could make many mistakes, and fail many times. But, I'd still be positive and optimistic the whole way through, since there are positive thoughts making me feel positive emotions now. All those previous negative thoughts, and emotions, would be gone. So, I'd actually enjoy the whole learning process.

Other Person's Response: When your mother dies, you could still care about her by feeling a positive emotion. You could feel that she was a beautiful mother who lived the best she could, despite her poverty.

My Reply: Exactly. This is the better alternative than being in a miserable state of hell.

Other Person's Response: Spiritual believers are always talking about releasing inner negativity, and having the inner positivity in our lives. So, I think you're onto something when you say life's better off without negative emotions. Spiritual believers talk about how people don't need to grieve when their loved ones die, since that's nothing but a negative experience. There are also mediums who help miserable souls cross over into the light. So, negative emotions, such as misery, despair, and hate, only keep us in the dark. The goal should be to reside in the light.

My Reply: I agree.

Other Person's Response: You're saying that not feeling miserable over your mother's loss keeps your soul in the realm of the light, and closer to god?

My Reply: Yes. When I have negative thoughts and worries, causing me to feel miserable, that puts me in the dark. Thus, I'm cast out from the realm of beauty, love, and joy. That puts me in a place away from god's holy light.

Other Person's Response: If you miss someone (such as a loved one), would that be an emotion?

My Reply: Yes. That experience of missing someone would have to be an emotion. It could be a negative emotion (such as a feeling of sadness), or it could be a positive emotion if you felt happy about the idea of that loved one coming back, even though he/she is gone.

Other Person's Response: Couldn't holidays be something magical and beautiful, even without positive emotions?

My Reply: No. When a person says he's experiencing the magic and wonder of Christmas, that experience would be a positive emotion he's feeling. That's why, without positive emotions, holidays are stripped of their magical beauty.

Other Person's Response: I'm quite sure you will grow out of this philosophy as you get older. I'm not the same person as I was when I was a child. I no longer play with toys.

My Reply: I think I might have this philosophy my whole entire life. Even if I lived for millions of years, I don't think it would ever change. I'm quite sure you've heard the saying:

"Not in a million years!"

For example, if Jake detested Jon, and James came along, and asked Jake if he'd ever love Jon, then Jake would reply with that quoted saying.

Other Person's Response: You talk so much mindless, dumb **** in your packets! It's all drivel!

My Reply: I put much thought into writing this though. If it really is drivel, then I'm just no good with philosophy and logic. I can only articulate my personal experience and philosophical arguments the best I can.

Other Person's Response: Let's pretend you only had some level of positive emotions in your life. It's not much, and you'd have them on seldom occasions. Would you be fine living like that?

My Reply: I wouldn't. I need the sufficient amount of positive emotions in my life. Having the full amount of positive emotions would be much better though.

Other Person's Response: I don't believe you've never had an experience, besides your positive emotions, that's given your life beauty, worth, and joy.

My Reply: I've never had such an experience, and I think it would be like someone who's been an atheist his whole life. He's never had an experience that's convinced him god exists.

Other Person's Response: Even geniuses, such as Einstein, and famous artists, have said their lives were beautiful and worth living without their positive emotions. Why isn't that enough to inspire you, and convince you?

My Reply: Well, even geniuses can be wrong sometimes. I'm not saying I'm more of a genius. It's just that even the most simple things can be overlooked by brilliant minds. One might say positive emotions being the only source of beauty is too simple-minded. But, perhaps it's the truth, and people overlook it and deny it. I'm also very cynical of humanity. After all, there are many deluded people out there. Yes, even geniuses can be delusional sometimes.

Some people might say I'm delusional. But, we can argue about this back and forth all day long, and it will get nowhere. It's no different than a Christian, arguing with an atheist, or someone who's pro-vaccine, arguing against someone who's anti-vaccine. That being the case, why am I arguing in this packet, and sharing it? Well, it's because I wish to express my personal views, and share them to my family, therapists, etc. to give them insight about me.

Other Person's Response: If you're feeling negative emotions, such as misery, does your life really have to be horrible like this? Can't there be a shade of gray?

My Reply: There'd have to be some positive, mixed in with the negative, for there to be a shade of gray. That means some positive emotion would have to be mixed in my misery. Otherwise, if there's no positive emotion there at all, then it's all black, and no gray. It was all black for me during my miserable moments, since recovering was the only way to experience beauty and joy again.

As I drew closer to a state of fully recovery, that's when shades of gray started to come into my life, and, finally, it was all white for me from then on. When I'm fully recovered, it's all white for me because I'm always happy, having fun, and enjoying my life. Negative emotions would then be very difficult to trigger. Also, the only thing that would trigger a horrible, miserable state would be something, like an emotional trauma (which I've had in the past).

Other Person's Response: I see you have no evidence to support your claim that positive emotions are the only things that make life beautiful.

My Reply: I have no knowledge when it comes to life or any given subject. Therefore, even if there were evidence out there to support my claim, I wouldn't know how to go about finding that evidence. This means I'll leave it up to others to search for the evidence if they want to. But, haven't I already proven my claim with all the arguments I've made? In which case, I wouldn't need any scientific evidence. Also, I don't think other people have any real evidence to support their claim that intellectual based values are real. Again, just because people act as though they are real values doesn't make it so, since plenty of people live in denial.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, our intellect just allows us to control our emotions and make wise decisions that wouldn't be harmful to ourselves and others. But, it can only be our emotions that allow us to perceive decisions as good, bad, etc.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your miserable struggles, if god wanted you to continue suffering in misery, then you wouldn't have the ability to recover from it. God would've made sure your recovery ability was disabled, so that you'd remain trapped in misery your entire life.

My Reply: But, at the same time, it seems he didn't want me to be a completely happy, misery-free individual, since he didn't disable my ability to feel miserable.

Other Person's Response: Our emotions motivate us, which means they make things matter to us?

My Reply: Yes. When you're motivated in regards to something, that's the same thing as saying this thing matters to you.

Other Person's Response: Many people would say something, such as: "Even though I have a depressive illness that renders me with a complete absence of positive emotions, I did all that work anyway, and I'm proud of my efforts." This, too, is the wrong definition of pride, since a person can't be proud unless he feels proud (a positive emotion)?

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: Your philosophy says that positive emotions are perceptions of beauty and goodness, and that such a perception is divine and holy.

My Reply: Yes. Positive emotions are, therefore, like the eyes of an angel, since they allow us to see goodness, beauty, and worth in things. Without these eyes, then we've become blinded to all goodness, beauty, worth, magnificence, etc. In other words, we've become blinded to all positivity. Negative emotions, on the other hand, are like the eyes of a demon, or being of darkness, since they allow us to see negativity.

They allow us to see people, and things, as horrible, bad, disgusting, tragic, horrific, etc. The idea is to have a positive perspective, and not a negative one. So, we should avoid those dark eyes. When we're apathetic (emotionless), we just have our ordinary, human eyes, and we don't have the eyes of an angel, or being of darkness. So, we should avoid apathy as well.

Other Person's Response: You said you had an emotional crisis a while back, and I'm just wondering how you're doing.

My Reply: It's taking an extremely long time for me to fully recover from this emotional crisis, and my positive emotions haven't returned back to me this whole time. If I were to pursue my composing dream anyway, and not give up on it, that won't do anything to restore my positive emotions. So, what I have to do here is just give up composing for now, and instead turn my sights over to certain therapeutic methods that have been known to help people who've had tribulation in their lives.

These methods should help restore my positive emotions, which means they should help me reach that state of full recovery I need to be in. Even though I'd be doing something to help myself in the absence of my positive emotions, it's still no way to live without positive emotions, regardless of what I do for myself, or for others. Still, I'm getting that help anyway, and getting this help should allow me to enjoy my life and hobbies again. I absolutely refuse, and can't stand living my life, and doing my hobbies without my positive emotions. That's why I'm instead researching certain methods that have been known to help speed up the recovery process.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, all those depressed, genius artists, who believed their lives were rich in beauty and greatness, were believing a lie. It would be no different than a poor person believing he's rich when he's not. In order to be rich in beauty and greatness, then a person needs to be rich in positive emotions

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: You talk about how emotions are value judgments. But, what about intellectual value judgments (value judgments based upon thinking that certain things are good, bad, etc.)?

My Reply: There are the intellectual value judgments, and then there are the emotional value judgments. But, only one set exists, and I think emotions are the only value judgments. However, if it's the case that intellectual value judgments also exist, and that I haven’t obtained them yet, then if I were to be in the worst, miserable state of my life, that would make my life very horrible. But, at the same time, if I were to truly believe that my life is still beautiful intellectually, that would also make my life beautiful, since I'd be perceiving beauty through my intellect.

But, my life would be half horrible and half beautiful, which would only be giving me half beauty. Actually, it all comes down to the profoundness and intensity of the intellectual and emotional value judgments. For example, if I was in a very horrible, miserable state, then that would bring my life something like 80% horribleness. But, if I had the slight thought in my mind that my life is still beautiful, then that would only give me 20% beauty, since that thought was weak, and not as profound and intense as that miserable state.

Other Person's Response: I think your philosophy is false.

My Reply: If people keep telling me I'm wrong, and that emotions aren't perceptions of value, then I'll keep telling them I have much more insight into my own personal experience than they have into theirs, and that they're wrong. Since humanity is wrong about their emotions not being value judgments, how do you expect me to trust humanity when they claim their intellectual value judgments are real value judgments? Given that humanity is in denial of their own emotions, they could also be in denial when it comes to their intellect.

Other Person's Response: I think your philosophy is called "hedonism," and I disagree with hedonism.

My Reply: Hedonism is a very popular philosophy, which states that having fun and enjoying our lives, through our positive emotions, is the only good and beautiful way to live. Given all the arguments I've come up with to support this whole idea that positive emotions are the only good things in life, the hedonists could really be on to something then. So, hedonism might've been the correct worldview all along. Here is a link to hedonism:

http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_hedonism.html

Other Person's Response: To say that we have only one fleeting thing (our positive emotions) to make our lives good and beautiful is ridiculous.

My Reply: I agree that might sound absurd, false, and ridiculous. But, plenty of things that sound absurd are, in fact, true things. So, just because my worldview sounds cruel and unfair for those who struggle with depression, as well as other mental illnesses that take away their positive emotions, and just because my worldview sounds absurd and false, doesn't make it false. You see, I'm all about the truth here, regardless of how offensive said truth might be.

I'm not about sugar coating things and telling depressed people their lives can still be beautiful without their positive emotions, just because this is something they'd like to hear. I think I've arrived at the unpleasant truth through my own personal experience, and I'm going to share and express that truth. I'm tired of my own emotions being dismissed as trivial things, and I'll speak up for myself and explain to others that they really are value judgments that give our lives value.

Other Person's Response: When you say emotions are necessary to make something beautiful or disgusting to someone, I think you're saying it wrong. You should be saying that emotions are necessary to make something beautiful or disgusting for someone.

My Reply: I'm not sure. When I say "to someone," I mean "from that person's perspective." So, when I say something is beautiful to someone, I mean something is beautiful in the eyes of that individual (i.e. from that individual's perspective).

Other Person's Response: The fact you need positive emotions to see goodness, beauty, and worth in things is very selfish. You should be able to do things, such as helping others, with no need for your positive emotions.

My Reply: A person needs sight to see and hearing to hear. That doesn't make him selfish. The same idea applies to positive emotions. Positive emotions are how we see goodness, beauty, and worth in things. If they were to be taken away, then it would be like we've become blind. Becoming visually blind would render one not being able to see things. But, losing positive emotions would render one not being able to see anything positive in life.

Other Person's Response: I think that anime metaphor you gave is idiotic and ridiculous.

My Reply: People use metaphors all the time to describe themselves, certain experiences they have, certain things in life, etc. So, my metaphor should be of no surprise to you.

Other Person's Response: Well, when the characters in Dragon Ball Super become Super Saiyan Gods, they have enhanced speed, strength, and motivation. That would actually be like emotions, since emotions give us motivation, and they do enhance our speed and strength. For example, when a person feels very motivated, he might run faster, and have more strength than he normally would. So, I think your Super Saiyan God metaphor works well.

My Reply: Thank you. If negative emotions motivated us, that would be like becoming a Super Saiyan Dark, which is the opposite of a Super Saiyan God. I could also use a Sonic the Hedgehog metaphor. There's Super Sonic (Sonic in his divine, golden form) and Dark Sonic (Sonic in his black form). Feeling positive emotions would be like becoming Super Sonic, and feeling negative emotions would be like becoming Dark Sonic. If we had no emotions, that would be like becoming a dull, gray version of Sonic. Sonic, when he's in his base form, isn't a dull, gray hedgehog. He's a blue hedgehog. But, a dull, gray version of Sonic would accurately depict a life without emotions.

Other Person's Response: What about a feeling of peace? That's a positive emotion. Would that classify as Super Sonic, or a Super Saiyan God?

My Reply: Yes. It would just be a peaceful version of Super Sonic and a Super Saiyan God, as opposed to a hyped up version. Imagine a Buddhist in a peaceful, transcended, divine state, as opposed to Super Sonic in an intensely powered up divine state.

Other Person's Response: Seeing beauty in something is the same thing as valuing that thing as beautiful, which means positive emotions are how we value things as beautiful, since they're what allow us to see beauty in things.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: When a person has much negative thinking, spiritual believers say this person is at a lower, spiritual vibration, and needs to rise to a higher vibration by changing his negative mindset to a positive one. Rising to a higher vibration brings us closer to god, the divine, and holiness.

My Reply: Well, we should change over from a negative mindset to a positive one, so we can feel positive emotions, since it's the positive emotions which are holy and divine.

Other Person's Response: Spiritual believers would say that positive thinking is our divine self, negative thinking is our unholy self, and apathetic thinking is neither our divine self, nor our unholy self. But, you're saying it's our positive emotions which are the divine self?

My Reply: Yes. We need to rise above negativity, and that's why we need to be the divine self. So, we should avoid feeling negative emotions. That means we should try our best to not be devastated when we lose a loved one, feeling rage at the unfairness of life, etc. That means changing our thinking, so we can prevent feeling those negative emotions.

Other Person's Response: A life of negativity is an inferior existence compared to a life of positivity. So, our goal should be to live a life of positivity.

My Reply: Yes. Negativity is inferior to both neutrality and positivity, neutrality is superior to negativity, but inferior to positivity, and positivity is superior to both neutrality and negativity.

Other Person's Response: Yes, I do think emotions are what give us positive and negative perspectives. But, it doesn't matter if a person has a positive, negative, or apathetic perspective. What matters is his obligations, responsibilities, etc. to the world. If you learn to have more power and control over your emotions, then you should no longer give into your emotions. Thus, you should be able to live life as it is, without giving into the desire of having a positive perspective. You really don't need a positive perspective, which means you don't need to see beauty, goodness, worth, etc. in anything.

My Reply: I could have all the power and control in the world over my emotions. But, it would still be no way to live or be an artist without positive emotions.

Other Person's Response: All throughout this packet, you have an ongoing debate with people who hold different views than you. I think that makes you a bigot (someone who's intolerant of the views of others).

My Reply: People lack understanding and make many false assumptions about me. For example, when I blame god for him allowing all the misery I've been through, some people instead say it's my fault, and that god isn't to be put to blame. I don't think that's the case, and I explain why throughout this packet. Another example would be that people would call me childishly selfish, cowardly, and weak, given the philosophy I live by. Well, I have every reason to think a life without positive emotions is no way to live or be an artist, and I'm presenting all those reasons.

That way, people can gain an understanding, and, hopefully, stop making these assumptions about me. A third example would be some people would think that, if I'm not convinced of certain claims of self-healing, such as that we can heal our suffering through the power of our minds, that this means I'm happy to suffer, and prefer to suffer. That's false. I'd love to rid of my suffering, and there are no factors preventing me from wanting my suffering gone, such as an attachment to suffering. Some people are attached to suffering, since they like to suffer. But, I'm not one of those people.

Other Person's Response: Not only that, but you wish to share all your views. That way, people can gain full insight.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: I heard god offers up solutions for those who have illnesses, and it's up to these individuals if they're willing to commit themselves to the healing of their illnesses.

My Reply: Well, some people are unaware of these solutions, since they live in a poor, ignorant part of the world, and they can't discover or commit themselves to these solutions, since they don't have the money and resources.

Other Person's Response: In regards to god, many people blame him for allowing so much suffering. But, these people are just complaining like children.

My Reply: I don't think so. I think such complaints are justified. Imagine if a customer was getting a horrible service. Would that customer be childish for complaining about the service? No. His complaints would be justified. I think all human beings are like customers, and this Earthly existence is the service. God is clearly giving us a horrible service, since there's so much ongoing misery, unhappiness, and suffering. If life was a blissful, utopia world for us all, where all suffering was cured, that would be a wonderful service.

I think many people would rate such a life 5/5 stars, and such a rating would clearly indicate how wonderful such a life is. If there was a service, many people rated it, and it had an average rating of 5/5 stars, such a rating would clearly indicate how wonderful the service is. The same idea applies to products on Amazon that have an excellent rating. As life currently stands though, I bet, if all human beings were to rate this life, it would be given a very low, average rating, and such a rating would clearly indicate how awful of a life god has given us.

Other Person's Response: Life's a wonderful service for some people (such as those who are rich, happy, and very fortunate), while life is an awful service for others (such as those who are poor, miserable, and very unfortunate).

My Reply: Yes, and life should be a wonderful service for everyone. That means everyone should live a blissful life, where they always have their positive emotions intact.

Other Person's Response: I realize that people, who go on heavenly trips to the afterlife during their near death experience, report they've met god, and said he was truly an all-loving being.

My Reply: What if god is just pretending to be an all-loving being? I just don't think an all-loving being would allow all this suffering. Especially all the miserable struggles I've been through.

Other Person's Response: In regards to god, some people would argue he's an all-loving being, while others would argue he's not all-loving, since he allows so much suffering. So, if he does exist, then perhaps we don't know if he's all-loving or not, and people just think they know.

My Reply: I'm not sure.

Other Person's Response: Not only do you talk about god, but you talk about these heavenly beings. Would they be angels?

My Reply: I think so.

Other Person's Response: In regards to the heavenly and hellish trips that people go on during their near death experience, there are those who have heavenly trips, meet god, and god tells them he's not the judgmental type of god who condemns sinners to hell, as portrayed by fundamentalist Christianity. He says that such dogma is false, and to tell the world that he's a loving god who won't condemn people to hell. But, then there are people who have Christian-themed near death experiences, they meet god, and god tells them that the world is filled with sinners who need to change their ways, lest they be condemned to eternity in hell. God tells them to warn the world. So, I see a contradiction here.

My Reply: Yes. Given this contradiction, many people would say these trips are nothing more than hallucinations. Otherwise, there would be consistency.

Other Person's Response: I don't think you need positive emotions to see goodness and beauty in things. So, in your mind, imagine yourself detaching from your positive emotions, and taking a route around them to allow yourself to see goodness and beauty in things with no need for them.

My Reply: I tried that, and there's absolutely no way around this. My positive emotions are the only way I can see goodness, beauty, magnificence, etc. in things.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, if a person had no emotions, he could still see meaning in artwork, such as a moment, message, or scene being conveyed by said artwork. He could even listen to a song and still see meaning in the song, such as listening to a certain melody in the song, and it conveying a nature scene to him. But, he wouldn't be able to see any beauty, goodness, magnificence, tragedy, or horror in said artwork or song.

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: Even though negative emotions do make our lives worth living, and do make things worth doing, but in a negative way, do you still say, throughout your packets, that positive emotions are the only things that make our lives worth living, and things worth doing?

My Reply: Yes. I forgot to add "worth living for in a positive way" when I say positive emotions are the only things that make life worth living, and things worth doing. So, don't get all worked up about that.

Other Person's Response: Your philosophy is nothing more than a hindrance to your growth as an individual, and keeps you stuck where you are.

My Reply: Until I develop a better philosophy (if I ever do), this is the way it's going to be for now.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, if I wanted a nostalgic experience from playing the video games I used to play when I was a child, I'd need to have a nostalgic feeling?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, a spoiled child, who feels the desire to get everything he wants in life, would be experiencing a holy, divine desire, since his desire was a positive feeling.

My Reply: Yes. Like I said, positive emotions are holy and divine, no matter what.

Other Person's Response: If a guy felt that he was a beautiful, female character, you're saying that's the same thing as him seeing himself as a beautiful, female character?

My Reply: Yes. He wouldn't literally be hallucinating, and visually seeing himself as a female character. He'd just be experiencing himself as a new character, and it would be a beautiful experience for him, since he feels like he's a beautiful character.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your emotional crisis, when you become a being of darkness, due to an emotional crisis, I realize just how much you wish that dark being was destroyed. But, don't destroy that being by ending your life. Instead, destroy him by finding ways to help yourself return back to a being of light.

My Reply: I agree. I should find ways to help restore myself back to my happy, loving self again, rather than just ending my life.

Other Person's Response: If there are non-emotional positive and negative experiences, then they can be mixed in with the emotional ones.

My Reply: Yes. But, I don't think the non-emotional ones exist.

Other Person's Response: You say thoughts and beliefs can't be any real perception of value and worth, just as how thoughts and beliefs can't be real hunger, thirst, or emotions. I could also add in feeling sleepy because, if a person isn't feeling sleepy, then the thought or belief that he's sleepy won't make him sleepy.

My Reply: That's correct. If a thought or belief was enough to make a person sleepy, then people wouldn't need medication to help them sleep. People with insomnia wouldn't need sleep medication.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 06:37 pm
@MozartLink,
File #6: More On My Philosophy (Part 4/26)

Other Person's Response: Strange and bizarre are also value judgments, aren't they?

My Reply: Yes. Something can be strange and bizarre in a beautiful way (positive emotion), or a horrific way (negative emotion).

Other Person's Response: If a person was ugly in terms of his physical appearance, but very kind on the inside, and someone else couldn't help but feel disgust about him, are you saying that person couldn't help but see him as a disgusting person?

My Reply: Yes. Feeling disgust (a negative emotion) is how you see something, or someone, as disgusting.

Other Person's Response: If a person was born blind, and gained his sight for the first time, you're saying that moment could be nothing beautiful or awesome to him without his positive emotions?

My Reply: That's correct. He'd need the eyes of an angel to see his world as beautiful, awesome, or amazing. Just seeing the world through his human eyes won't do.

Other Person's Response: Given the philosophy you live by, you must be very childish.

My Reply: I behave very maturely, since I don't act out in public, or do other such inappropriate things. But, people would say, despite my mature, polite behavior, the philosophy I live by is childish.

Other Person's Response: I heard you feel a lot of negative emotions during an emotional crisis. Do you wish to fully recover from an emotional crisis, not only so you can regain your happiness, but so you can no longer feel enraged at the unfairness of living a miserable, unhappy existence?

My Reply: Yes. Also, there are people who say I don't need a positive perspective in life, and that I don't need to recover from an emotional crisis. That makes me feel much rage as well, since these people clearly don't understand. But, when I'm fully recovered from an emotional crisis, I no longer feel any rage.

Other Person's Response: Even if your philosophy was true, and everyone believed it, a mother would still think it's horrible for her child to do harmful things that would bring him great joy. That's just human nature. So, she'd still feel horrible about that.

My Reply: Yes. Even though positive emotions are the only good things in life, police would still feel that the acts of psychopaths are horrible, even though the psychopaths are feeling good from said acts. So, that means the police would still be motivated to arrest these psychopaths. If the police couldn't feel motivated to arrest them, then it just wouldn't matter to them. But, they can still arrest these psychopaths anyway.

Other Person's Response: Your philosophy is very dumb, and I can explain to you reasons why I think so. If positive emotions were the only good things in life, then we might as well say it's nothing bad to make decisions that would be harmful if we felt good about making these decisions.

My Reply: No amount of reasoning can change my philosophy one bit, and I don't care how dumb my philosophy sounds. The only thing that will change my philosophy is a new personal experience. Now, I'm going to give an analogy here, and I'm not sure if it's a poor analogy or not. But, I think it gets my point across.

When making this analogy, I'm not implying that I, myself, have hate and lack of forgiveness that's preventing me from loving and forgiving. I've never had that problem anyway. This is just an analogy that shows how I'd need a new personal experience to change my philosophy. So, here's the analogy.

Let's pretend Jake has had a personal experience that results in him hating someone else (Jon). No amount of reasoning can change Jake’s hateful perspective to a loving one. If you try to reason with Jake, and give him reasons why Jon is still deserving of Jake’s love, then Jake might respond:

"I'll never forgive Jon, and I don't think he's deserving of my love." But, if Jake has a new personal experience that results in him becoming a more loving, forgiving person, then that would change his views. Thus, he'll start to love Jon, and forgive him.

So, I'd also need a new personal experience that would change my views. Only then would I realize there's more positivity to life than positive emotions. Remember, I must have a new personal experience that allows me to love, experience happiness and joy, and see goodness, beauty, worth, etc. independently of my positive emotions.

Other Person's Response: Actually, during an emotional crisis, you do feel hate, and you lack forgiveness.

My Reply: Yes. Normally, I'm happy, enjoying my life, not a hateful person, and I forgive easily.

Other Person's Response: Positive and negative experiences, such as experiencing nature as beautiful and amazing, or experiencing the loss of someone as horrible and tragic, are completely natural. But, your philosophy treats them as holy and unholy things.

My Reply: Yes. Positive and negative experiences are more than just natural responses to life's events and situations. The example I gave earlier was with love. Many people say love is more than just a natural response. They say it's holy and divine. That's what you'll hear from spiritual believers. So, the same idea applies to all other positive experiences, such as experiencing nature as beautiful and amazing, experiencing profound joy from going on an adventure, etc. Those positive experiences are holy and divine as well. The same idea applies to negative experiences being unholy.

Other Person's Response: Actually, spiritual believers would say that certain types of love are holy and divine, such as love for god, and love for human beings. But, they'd say the love for a psychopath, since he harms living things, would be an unholy form of love. So, certain types of positive emotions can be holy, while other ones can be unholy.

My Reply: Again, I don't see it that way. A fruit is classified as a fruit because of its qualities, such as its appearance, taste, texture, etc. The same idea applies to vegetables. So, any given positive emotion will always be classified as holy, simply because of its positive, experiential quality (such as it being a beautiful, joyful, or loving experience), and any negative emotion will always be classified as unholy, simply because of its negative, experiential quality (such as it being a horrific, tragic, or disturbing experience).

Other Person's Response: Even though physical pain would be nothing good or bad without emotions, wouldn't you still think it's cruel and unjust for innocent people, and living things, to undergo physical torture?

My Reply: Yes. Even if these innocent people and living things felt no negative emotions, I'd still think that. But, if they enjoyed it, then that's their business.

Other Person's Response: I heard you really don't care about humanity, or the suffering they go through. So, even though you'd have the thought in your mind that it's cruel for innocent people to be inflicted with physical pain, that thought wouldn't devastate you, or make you miserable?

My Reply: Correct. I wouldn't want to feel devastated or miserable anyway, since that would be a negative experience for me, and my goal is to have as much positive experiences as I can.

Other Person's Response: I heard you had many devastating worries and thoughts in your life. Do you wish you could've had a positive outlook the whole time?

My Reply: Yes. That's why I wish I was never devastated and miserable in the first place, and was instead happy that whole time. I wish I was one of those people who aren't worried, and are happy. Fortunately, I think all those horrible moments have passed, and I'll soon be happy from now on. I don't think I'll ever have another emotional crisis.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, positive emotions allow us to see goodness and beauty in things, which means they make things good and beautiful in our eyes. But, does that really mean positive emotions are the only good and beautiful things in life?

My Reply: Actually, I'm not sure. But, I did say it's no way to live or be an artist without positive emotions. So, wouldn't that imply they're the only good and beautiful things in life? If so, then I'm sticking to my view that positive emotions are the only good and beautiful things in life, regardless of how immoral and offensive it may sound to others.

Other Person's Response: According to you, we need positive emotions everywhere we go, and everything we do.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: The worse of a thought a person has, the worse of an emotional experience he's going to get, once said thought makes him feel a negative emotion? Likewise, the more positive of a thought a person has, then the more positive of an emotional experience he's going to get, once said thought makes him feel a positive emotion?

My Reply: Yes. That's why the misery experienced from losing a loved one is much worse than the misery experienced from not being able to see your favorite movie. Actually, it all depends. If, for whatever reason, a person had the thought that it would be very devastating and tragic if he didn't get to see his favorite movie, then he'd be devastated if he doesn't see it, and that experience would be worse for him than losing his loved one, if he had the thought that losing his loved one wasn't that bad at all.

Other Person's Response: During your emotional crisis, did you feel panic and anxiety from this devastating worry?

My Reply: Not at all. I just felt other negative emotions, such as misery, agony, disgust, rage, tragedy, etc.

Other Person's Response: People who have a devastating moment in their lives, such as the loss of a loved one, are known to be chronically stuck in a horribly tragic, miserable state, where they feel all sorts of other negative emotions as well. That can go on for a few years. But, one day, that devastated person will enter back into the light again, where he'll have his joy back to him. That person will very slowly, and gradually, transition from an unhealthy, negative state of mind, to a healthy, positive state of mind.

My Reply: Yes, and it's that positive state we need to be in. How many times have you heard people say something like: "I know you're in a very horrible, negative state of mind right now. But, just do something with your life, make something of that horrible state, and that would be a beautiful, worthwhile, meaningful existence you would've lived!" Well, that would be no way to live or be an artist.

Other Person's Response: Since the positive state of mind is the holy realm of the light, then that must mean the negative state of mind is the unholy realm of darkness.

My Reply: Yes. But, apathy would just be The Void (an empty realm of neither light nor darkness). The Void is the intermediate realm.

Other Person's Response: Would you go to the carnival, or go on a wild adventure, when you're in that horrible, miserable state of mind?

My Reply: No. Those are things I'd need to enjoy. But, the type of things I'd do while in that horrible state would be basic things, such as brushing my teeth, taking a shower, writing packets to share to others, etc. These are the "low key things" I'd do while in that miserable state. But, big things, such as going on a trip to Disney World, going on a wild adventure, or pursuing my goals and dreams, are things I need to enjoy, which is why I'd give up on them when I can't enjoy them. Even playing video games is something I need to enjoy, and is the other hobby I live for.

Other Person's Response: Giving up like that when you're miserable shows a sign of character weakness. That's why you shouldn't give up.

My Reply: Having all the character strength in the world doesn't matter if it's no way to live or be an artist. Even if, let's pretend, I was the most powerful, brave warrior on this planet who persevered in the face of miserable hardships, I'd still have every reason to give up on my goals and dreams when I'm in that miserable state. As long as I can't enjoy my hobbies, and even my own character strength, I'd give up.

Other Person's Response: There are negative emotions that motivate someone to give up, and there are negative emotions that motivate someone to persevere. Since you've been giving up on your composing during your emotional crisis, I take it you haven't been feeling negative emotions that motivated you to persevere in your composing. If you felt misery, or any other negative emotions, that motivated you to create compositions, then I bet you wouldn't have given up on your composing.

My Reply: That's correct. I haven't ever felt any negative emotion that motivated me to persevere in my composing. Neither could I make myself feel such a negative emotion. So, during my emotional crisis, there was neither a positive emotion, nor a negative emotion, that motivated me to persevere in my composing.

Other Person's Response: I think you just needed some negative emotion to motivate you to persevere in your composing. It's such a shame you didn't feel such emotion!

My Reply: Even if I did feel such negative emotions, and persevered in my composing through their motivational power, it would still be no way to live or be an artist.

Other Person's Response: When you don't have an emotional crisis, you say you don't feel negative emotions. Now, let's pretend you had brain damage, or developed a mental illness, that took away your ability to feel positive emotions. The only means of motivation you'd have left would be negative emotions. But, those negative emotions would be gone, since you're no longer in the midst of an emotional crisis. So, that means you'd be rendered in an apathetic state, since you can't feel positive emotions, nor negative emotions.

My Reply: Correct. Also, when I'm fully recovered from an emotional crisis, I wouldn't be able to feel negative emotions, even if I tried my hardest. I wouldn't want to feel those negative emotions anyway, since they're negative experiences. So, I think it's a good thing they're gone. Like I said, it's better to be apathetic than to be in a state of misery, disgust, hate, etc. When I'm fully recovered from an emotional crisis, those negative emotions I've felt during the crisis never return to haunt me in nightmares, or in my daily life. So, once the crisis is over, it's officially over. If I had PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder), then perhaps those negative emotions would keep coming back from time to time. But, I don't have PTSD.

Other Person's Response: Some people might think you're an immoral psychopath, given the philosophy you live by. But, I think these people are mistaken. You're a very kind, polite person, and you conduct yourself in a moral fashion.

My Reply: Yes. My own happiness is just what makes my life good and beautiful, since that's my personal experience. It has nothing to do with me being some sort of criminal or psychopath.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, if a person had manic disorder, where he only felt euphoric highs, and his disorder didn't cause him to feel any negative emotions, then he lived a wonderful life.

My Reply: Yes. If he had euphoric, positive thoughts that caused him to feel euphoric, then he'd be having some amazing, positive experiences. As for the people who have to take care of him, they'd be living a horrible life if they felt horrible.

Other Person's Response: Is the only way to become more of a person (a better person) is through positive emotions?

My Reply: Yes. Better means more positive, and to become more of a positive person requires you to feel positive emotions that are more profound and intense. So, when a person feels the most profound, intense, positive emotions from going on a powerful drug trip, he'd become the best person he could be. During his powerful drug trip, it's like he has a powerful, intense, divine life force surging through him that transforms him into something much greater than what he could ever amount to not taking a drug.

It's always been assumed that the more profound, intense, positive thoughts you have (such as loving thoughts, for example), the better of a person you become. Well, actually, it's only once those thoughts make you feel profound, intense, positive emotions that you become a better person. Otherwise, without any emotions, you're just an empty vessel who amounts to nothing, regardless of what you do, how you live your life, or how you think. So, not only do our lives amount to nothing without emotions, but we as human beings amount to nothing.

Other Person's Response: So, not only is it no way to live or be an artist without positive emotions, but it's no way to be a human being?

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: Actually, it's always been assumed that you become a better person through your deeds. For example, if you lived your life, helping others, and contributing to the world, as opposed to just playing video games your whole life, then people would define that as becoming a better person. Actually, it's a combination of having profound, intense, positive thoughts, helping others, and contributing to the world that makes you the best person you can be.

My Reply: Again, I disagree with this definition. It's not about how we think, what we do in life, and how we behave that determines if we're better people or not. It's about what we experience, and positive emotions are the experiences that make us better people.

Other Person's Response: If that person's drug trip ended, and he reverted back to feeling positive emotions that are at an average level of profoundness and intensity, would that make him less of a person now?

My Reply: Yes. He'd be less of a person compared to his blissful self. So, not only do our lives become better the more profound and intense positive emotions we feel, but we become better people. That means going on the most amazingly blissful drug trips would be how we live the best lives, and how we become the best people.

Other Person's Response: Would a psychopath be a better person if he felt profound joy from torturing living things, and would he be a better person than someone who's miserable, but contributed to humanity?

My Reply: Yes. The psychopath has that holy, divine, life force flowing through him (his positive emotions), and that's what makes him the better person. Not only that, but his life would be than that miserable person's life, since he was happy, while that other person was miserable.

Other Person's Response: Would you ever harm living things, or people, to get pleasure?

My Reply: No. I'm not that type of person. I conduct myself in a moral fashion, and many people love me as an individual, since they think I'm very kind and polite.

Other Person's Response: In order to become a worse person, you must feel negative emotions?

My Reply: Yes, since worse means more negative. In order to become the worst possible person, you'd have to feel negative emotions that are the most profound and intense.

Other Person's Response: When we become divine beings of light through our positive emotions, that makes us better than beings of darkness or apathetic beings, even if we derived joy from torturing others?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: In order to be a moral person, you'd have to feel that certain things are right or wrong?

My Reply: Yes, and those feelings would be emotions.

Other Person's Response: Since our emotions give power to things, does that also mean they make us horrible, disgusting, or beautiful people?

My Reply: Yes. When you feel beautiful about yourself, you perceive yourself as beautiful, and that imbues you with beautiful power in your own mind. Thus, you become a beautiful person. You'd still be that beautiful person, regardless if you harmed innocent people or living things. One might disagree with this. But, I'm going to give you an example. If a person was literally a being of light, who had light surrounding him, then that person would still be a being of light, even if he harmed innocent people or living things.

If he somehow lost that light, and became an ordinary person, then him helping others and changing the world for the better could not make him a being of light again. He needs to have that glow around him, so he becomes that being of light again. So, he'd have to charge himself up again by whatever method he used in the first place to become that being of light.

My point is, positive emotions are like that charge, or life force of beauty, that transforms us into beautiful beings. When we lose our positive emotions, we can't become beautiful people by helping others, or contributing to the world. So, it's our emotional state that solely determines whether we become beautiful, horrible, or disgusting beings. When we have no emotions (apathy), we become nothing more than empty vessels.

Other Person's Response: How does your charge analogy work for objects, moments, works of art, and situations?

My Reply: Well, our positive emotions wouldn't literally charge those things up with beauty. But, they would in our minds. All mental stimuli become beautiful once we feel beauty from them. So, it's the mental stimuli that become charged up with beauty. Since we are conscious beings, then the moment we feel beauty is when our conscious being becomes something beautiful. That's why positive emotions make us beautiful beings, since that charges our conscious being with beauty. Even the idea of "you" is a mental stimulus, since it's an idea going through your mind. So, feeling beautiful about yourself (or "you") charges yourself up with beauty.

Other Person's Response: Do you treat emotions as different characters?

My Reply: Yes. When you feel disgust, you become a disgusted character. When you feel joy, you become a joyful character. During my miserable moments, I became a character who needed serious help. I became a disgusting, morbid person. I'm glad I'm no longer that character anymore.

Other Person's Response: So, you treat human beings as an empty canvas? Our emotions paint us as different characters?

My Reply: Yes. Also, if you felt that you were a certain character, that would be painting you as that character. Thus, you become that character on the inside. Once you feel (perceive) yourself as a beautiful or disgusting character, then you already are that character on the inside. If we had no emotions, then we'd just be an empty canvas (or an empty vessel) on the inside.

Other Person's Response: I don't think people, who feel negative emotions, are disgusting, horrible people. I don't think our emotions determine whether we're beautiful or disgusting people.

My Reply: I think they do. When you have all those negative thoughts and beliefs, causing you to feel negative emotions, that pollutes your mental being with negativity. Thus, you become a polluted being. When you feel positive emotions, such as joy and beauty, you become a beautiful, joyful character (being). Think of it this way. Imagine a sacred item in an anime. When the item is polluted and corrupt with negative energy, it becomes a disgusting, horrible item. It's tainted with malice. But, once the item is purified, it becomes something pure, beautiful, and innocent.

It shines with with the light of beauty, love, and joy. The item I could use, as a great example, would be the Sacred Jewel, from the anime Inuyasha. We as human beings are like the Sacred Jewel. So, if we want to become beautiful beings, then we must have beautiful thoughts and beliefs making us feel beautiful emotions. That will result in our conscious being filling up with pure beauty. When we feel other positive emotions, such as greatness and awesomeness, we become beings of greatness and awesomeness as well.

Other Person's Response: During your miserable struggles (which were triggered by negative thoughts and worries), you're saying it would be like you've become a corrupt, being of darkness? But, once you've fully recovered, and returned back to your state of joy, you're saying it's like your psyche, or soul, has been purified, and you've become a being of light again?

My Reply: Exactly. All that inner negativity would've been cleared away, all thanks to my brain (or soul's) natural ability to recover on its own.

Other Person's Response: Could you give an analogy for what emotions are like for you?

My Reply: It's as though my conscious being is plain water, and my emotions are the dye. If you put beautiful colors inside the water, then the whole water becomes something beautiful. If you were to pollute the water with disgusting colors, then the water becomes disgusting. Without any colors, then the water is just plain water.

Other Person's Response: In order to be a disgusting person, you'd need to feel disgusting emotions. But, if you felt other negative emotions, such as misery or sadness, that wouldn't make you a disgusting being. It would make you a morbid, sad being.

My Reply: Yes. Still, negative emotions are negative energy, and they should be rid of out of our lives.

Other Person's Response: Since you treat different emotions as alter egos, then does that mean you become the awesome, otherworldly, composing artist when you feel up to composing the bizarre style of music you wish to compose? When you feel excited to go on an adventure in a video game, does this mean you become a happy gamer?

My Reply: Yes. My thoughts would be the source of those emotions. When a person thinks certain ways, and that causes him to feel certain ways, he becomes certain alter egos.

Other Person's Response: If you had the choice to be a psychopath who feels beauty and joy all the time, or to be someone innocent and compassionate who feels miserable all the time, who would you choose to be?

My Reply: I'd have to choose to be the psychopath because my positive emotions are the only things that can make me a beautiful person, and my life beautiful.

Other Person's Response: What would you think if others saw you as a horrible, pitiful, or disgusting person, while you saw yourself as a beautiful, awesome person?

My Reply: Then, at least, my mind is in a beautiful, awesome place, while their minds are in a horrible, pitiful, or disgusting place. The important thing here is that my mind is in a beautiful place, and that's why I need my positive emotions.

Other Person's Response: Would you choose to put yourself through suffering for the sake of helping and giving to others?

My Reply: No. I would be lowering myself down to a horrible pit for the sake of others, and that would be taking away the positivity in my life.

Other Person's Response: So, you don't want anything to take away your beautiful, divine state of being and living (your positive emotions)?

My Reply: Correct. That's why I'm saying I wouldn't put myself through suffering, or choose to be the innocent person who feels miserable.

Other Person's Response: Could you explain more as to why positive emotions are the ultimate, divine state of being and living?

My Reply: If something's horrifying, disturbing, or tragic, these would be negative emotions. This is where something's "not right" or "horribly wrong." These negative emotions, along with others, such as hate, disgust, and despair, are what spiritual believers refer to as the "lower spiritual frequencies." Negative emotions are a lower state of being and living one's life. When we have positive emotions, this is the opposite of suffering, and this is where things are "right" or "holy."

They would be the higher spiritual frequencies, and that's what makes them the higher, or absolute state of being and living. That's why a psychopath, who derives pleasure from harming others, is at a superior state of being and living, while the suffering victims, who feel negative emotions, are at a lower state of being and living.

In short, all I'm basically saying is that we need the positive in our lives, and we should avoid the negative. It's better to be a psychopath who has much experienced beauty, joy, magnificence, etc. in his life than to be an innocent person who has much experienced torment, misery, despair, etc. in his life. I mean, would you rather live a **** life, and be an innocent person? Or, would you rather be a psychopath who lives an awesome, beautiful life?

Other Person's Response: When you refer to negative emotions as being a lower state of being, and positive emotions being a higher state of being, do you mean negative emotions are an inferior state of being, and positive emotions are a superior state of being?

My Reply: Yes. Having negative emotions makes you inferior compared to having positive emotions, and having positive emotions makes you superior compared to having negative emotions. Negative emotions are unholy, which makes them inferior states of being, while positive emotions are holy, which makes them superior states of being. The same idea applies to negative emotions being an inferior state of living (living an inferior existence), and positive emotions being a superior existence.

Other Person's Response: So, when you're going through a miserable struggle, and you fully recover from it, that's more than just a recovery? You'd be reaching a higher, beautiful state of being?

My Reply: Yes. Positive emotions are a higher, beautiful state of being and living. When I fully recover from an emotional crisis, I'd be rising above all that negativity I had in my life. That's how I become a greater person.

Other Person's Response: If your mother suffered from negative emotions, such as misery, then you're saying you'd be a better person than her, if you were happy?

My Reply: Yes. Likewise, she'd be a better person than me if she was happy, and I was miserable.

Other Person's Response: What about apathy? Where does that rank?

My Reply: Apathy is superior to negative emotions, but inferior to positive emotions. So, apathy would make me superior to feeling negative emotions, but inferior compared to feeling positive emotions.

Other Person's Response: If one person was apathetic, while another felt positive emotions, but said positive emotions weren't experiences of love, beauty, magnificence, etc., since they were induced by means other than thoughts and beliefs, then would that happy person still be a divine being who's superior to the apathetic person?

My Reply: No. He'd be of equal status to the apathetic person. So, in order to become a divine, superior being, you must have a positive experience. You must experience love, beauty, magnificence, etc. The same thing applies to becoming an inferior, unholy being. You must have a negative experience to become that being.

Other Person's Response: Since positivity is the higher vibration, while negativity is the lower vibration in spirituality, then what is apathy?

My Reply: It might be the middle vibration.

Other Person's Response: Since positive emotions are the only things that make us good or beautiful people, then we wouldn't refer to the innocent victims, who felt negative emotions, as being innocent, since the term "innocent" means "good, beautiful, right, etc."

My Reply: Maybe you're right then. Perhaps we should describe the psychopaths, who derive pleasure, as innocent people. But, again, in order for someone to perceive the psychopath as beautiful and innocent, he'd have to feel that way about the psychopath. But, no normal person would feel that way.

Other Person's Response: Well, in order for that psychopath to become a beautiful, innocent person, he'd have to experience beauty and innocence. So, his feeling of pleasure must become this experience for him.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: You really don't mean what you say when you say that a psychopath would be a beautiful person if he felt beauty from torturing others, do you?

My Reply: I'm just trying to figure out how my philosophy would work out. Would that psychopath be a beautiful person, according to my philosophy? I know that, in his own mind, he'd be a beautiful person, if he felt that way about himself. But, I'm wondering if he'd actually be a beautiful person in general, whether it be through feeling beautiful about himself, or feeling beauty about something else.

Other Person's Response: Do you hate compassionate people, living things, and see them as deserving of torture?

My Reply: No. As a matter of fact, I think people, who are caring and giving, are beautiful people. That thought would make me feel a positive emotion, which would allow me to see them as beautiful people. It's just that I'd rather be a happy psychopath than a miserable, compassionate person. Lastly, I know I said earlier that compassionate people, who feel disgust, would be disgusting beings, since they have disgusting, spiritual energy flowing through them. But, I'd personally think they're beautiful people anyway, and that would make me feel beauty.

Other Person's Response: You say that people, who feels negative emotions, would be corrupt beings, since they have negative, spiritual energy flowing through them. But, in a purely naturalistic universe, where spiritual things don't exist, such as souls and the afterlife, we wouldn't say these people have negative, spiritual energy flowing through them. Rather, we'd say they're just corrupt beings who need to feel happy again.

My Reply: Yes. That happy state would make them beautiful, joyful beings again.

Other Person's Response: It seems your happiness is #1, and you have no regard for the lives of others. Do you plan on harming others for your own personal pleasure?

My Reply: No. All I'm saying is that me living a life without my positive emotions is unacceptable. That's why I'd be willing to go to the extreme, and become a happy psychopath, as opposed to someone who feels miserable all the time. I'd try to regain my joy if I was the miserable person. If that fails, then I'd become the psychopath.

Other Person's Response: Let's pretend you did harm people and living things right now. Wouldn't you regret that?

My Reply: I'd have the thought of regretting that. But, that thought has to make me feel regret in order for me to regret it. If it can't make me feel regret (due to a mental illness or other factor), then I wouldn't regret it. Also, in order for me to see it as a wrongdoing, I must feel that it was wrong.

Other Person's Response: If you were in the midst of an emotional crisis, and you harmed someone, but you later became a being of light when you fully recovered from said crisis, you'd still be a horrible person for having harmed that individual.

My Reply: No, I wouldn't. I'd now be a beautiful being of light. If that harmed individual treated me as though I'm a horrible or disgusting person, when I'm now a being of light, then he'd actually be referring to that being of darkness I was in the past. But, since I'd no longer be that horrible, disgusting being of darkness, then it's as though that harmed person is speaking to someone who's not there anymore. So, again, I don't think it's our actions, words, or deeds that determine if we're horrible, disgusting, or beautiful people. What determines this would be if you're a being of light, or a being of darkness (i.e. your emotional state).

Other Person's Response: Since you treat emotions as alter egos, then if you were an enraged person one moment who harmed kind people, and then you were a happy person another moment who was polite towards kind people, that wouldn't make you a horrible person overall. It was only during that moment of rage that you were a horrible being of darkness, and it was during that moment of happiness that you were a beautiful being of light. So, if someone were to treat you (the beautiful being of light) as a horrible monster for having harmed those kind people, then their attitude should no longer apply because you're no longer that horrible, enraged monster.

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: If you see yourself as a beautiful or disgusting person, that doesn't make you a beautiful or disgusting person. There are kind, struggling people who see themselves as disgusting people, due to all the stress in their lives. But, they're still beautiful people, since they help others, and contribute to the world. Likewise, just because a psychopath sees himself as a beautiful person doesn't make him a beautiful person. He's still a disgusting person for torturing people and living things.

My Reply: If you see yourself as a beautiful or disgusting person in your own mind, then that makes you a beautiful or disgusting person because you are your mind. Whatever state of mind you're in is who you become. So, if your state of mind is that you see yourself as a beautiful person, then you become a beautiful person, regardless of your actions, words, or deeds.

Given this, you can become anybody in your own mental universe. You can even role play as different characters. By feeling (perceiving) yourself as different characters, you take on many different forms of beauty, horror, or disgust, depending on which character you become. If you felt that you were a disgusting version of the character Sponge Bob, then you become that disgusting character on the inside.

Think of our mental universe as a movie, where we can become any character, whether it be a beautiful female, or a disgusting male character. You can even become a beautiful female character on the inside if you're a male. Females can also become awesome, male characters on the inside if they felt that way about themselves.

Sometimes, how we feel about ourselves isn't always under our control. That means we can't help but become certain beautiful or disgusting characters. During my emotional crisis, I couldn't help but become a disgusting, and pitiful version of myself. I had to play out as this repulsive character until, eventually, I fully recovered from the crisis, and returned back to my beautiful self.

Other Person's Response: If I experienced a certain anime or cartoon character's sexual joy, it would be like I'm a whole new character, having his/her experiences, and going beyond my ordinary sexual experiences?

My Reply: Yes. It would be like you've become the sexually erotic version of that character. You imagine yourself as that character, and, if that thought makes you feel like that character, then you become that character on the inside.

Other Person's Response: So, in order to feel another character's emotions, you'd imagine yourself as being that character? That will allow you to feel emotions that are different than the emotions you'd normally feel?

My Reply: Yes. For example, if you're a male, then you could feel a beautiful, feminine, anime-themed emotion if you witnessed a female, anime character, and you imagined yourself as being her. You could even experience her sexual feelings, which would be different than the sexual feelings that you'd normally have as a guy. I think this is just role playing. When you role play as different characters, you get to have new experiences of joy, beauty, and love (i.e. you get to feel new emotions). You could role play as whatever character that brings you the most profoundly beautiful, joyful experiences. By doing that, you become a whole new entity/character on the inside who's profoundly beautiful and joyful.

Other Person's Response: When you become a different character on the inside, is it like you're seeing the world through the eyes of that character?

My Reply: Yes. It would be like the character's beautiful spirit has taken possession of you. If it was a horrific character that gave you a horrific experience, then it would be like the character's horrific spirit has taken possession of you.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 06:38 pm
@MozartLink,
File #6: More On My Philosophy (Part 5/26)

Other Person's Response: I think it's a little weird to internally role play as different characters.

My Reply: Well, if we are souls, we do reincarnate into other male and female bodies. That means we already do become different characters/people. So, becoming different characters internally doesn't seem all that strange.

Other Person's Response: I'm a kind brother, and, if I experienced myself as a loving, kind brother, then that would be the character I become on the inside. It would be the self image I'm experiencing. So, you're saying, since I can experience myself as one particular character (a loving, kind brother), I can experience myself as any character I want?

My Reply: Yes. Only providing you feel like those characters, since you can't experience yourself as a beautiful, joyful, disgusting, etc. character without your emotions.

Other Person's Response: When you, yourself, feel like different characters, do you act like those characters?

My Reply: No. I act like my usual self. If I acted like these characters, I'd give the impression that I'm a crazy person.

Other Person's Response: In regards to role playing as different characters, you could experience yourself as any character you want. If you're in the mood to be a beautiful, female character, then you could imagine yourself as her, or do something that makes you feel like her, and you'd perceive yourself as being that beautiful character. If you're in the mood to experience yourself as an awesome, male character, then you'd perform the same method.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: I think it's all up to the individual how he wishes to perceive/experience himself. If he wishes to experience himself as a certain beautiful character, then I say let him.

My Reply: Yes. It's all up to the individual how he wishes to perceive life, as well as himself. He needs his emotions though in order to perceive beauty, tragedy, etc. I, myself, feel like many different people and characters all the time. For example, if I performed a certain gesture that reminded me of a certain person or character, then I'd feel like that person or character.

Other Person's Response: When you experience the beautiful presence of a certain character, it's like that character is a part of you.

My Reply: Yes. As long as you think of that character, and that thought continues to make you experience that character's beautiful presence, then that presence will continue to remain with you. That presence can become you. In other words, you could become the character. Or, the presence can be experienced as its own character. In other words, the character becomes a part of you, but doesn't become you.

Other Person's Response: I think our physical bodies are nothing more than shells, while our inner self is an entire universe, where we can become beautiful characters on the inside, even if you have an ugly, physical appearance.

My Reply: Yes. It's what's on the inside that counts.

Other Person's Response: Since emotions are like different characters, then, if I was unable to feel one particular emotion (which would be sexual arousal), then it would be like a part of me is missing, since I couldn't become a sexually erotic character.

My Reply: Correct. Also, since emotions aren't everlasting, then that means we're missing a part of us much of the time, and we have to wait for said emotions to return in order to regain that part of us.

Other Person's Response: If I internally role played as a certain character, that doesn't make me that character on the inside. For example, if I was a dumb person, and I role played as an intelligent character, that wouldn't make me intelligent.

My Reply: But, you'd become the beauty and greatness of that character by experiencing the character's beauty and greatness as a part of yourself.

Other Person's Response: If you're internally role playing as a certain character, where you perceive yourself as a whole new, beautiful person, then would it be like other people are talking to someone who's no longer there? For example, if a friend treats you as your usual self, then would it be like that usual self is no longer there?

My Reply: Correct. When you become a whole new character on the inside, it's like you're a whole new person from your perspective. Thus, it's like the original you is no longer there.

Other Person's Response: When you internally role play as a certain character, you could speak certain things within your mind, using that character's voice. You could say certain things in your mind that the character would say, and you'll get to hear it in his/her voice.

My Reply: Yes. You'd be internally expressing yourself as a certain character.

Other Person's Response: In regards to characters, you could either perceive yourself as being that character, or you could perceive the character as being separate from yourself. The character becomes a part of you when you see yourself as that character. Thus, you'd be internally role playing as that character, going about your daily tasks. You could act like your usual self. But, on the inside, you'd be a whole new character. When you see any given character as being separate from yourself, then the character becomes his/her own independent individual.

My Reply: Technically, the character is already a part of you, but in different ways. Since the character is in your mind (a visual stimulus), then that makes the character a part of you, regardless if you perceive yourself as being the character, or if you perceive the character as being an independent individual.

Other Person's Response: According to your view, I must keep on feeling positive emotions all the time to keep the beauty, love, joy, and worth generating in my life.

My Reply: Yes. Positive emotions sustain positive values in our lives, such as beauty, greatness, etc. If you lose your positive emotions, then it's like losing the electricity in your home. You'd be out of power, just as how you'd be out of positive values.

Other Person's Response: I see you as an evil monster for choosing to be a happy psychopath, rather than a miserable person.

My Reply: You could look at me that way. Or, you could just look at me as a suffering human being in need of help. You could also look at me as someone potentially dangerous, but not an evil person. For example, a nuclear bomb would be dangerous. But, would we say that the bomb is evil?

Other Person's Response: In order for me to see you as an evil person, I'd have to feel that you're evil?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: You lack empathy, since you believe positive emotions are all there is to life.

My Reply: If I am lacking empathy, as you say, is it my lack of empathy that leads me to believe positive emotions are the only things that make life beautiful and worth living? Or, is it me having this belief in the first place that renders me lacking empathy?

Other Person's Response: Emotions are necessary in order for empathy to exist in the first place, since empathy is the capacity to feel good or bad about another person's predicament. You can have emotions without empathy because you could still feel happy about getting the things you want, and not feel any emotion about other people. But, you can't have empathy without emotions, since you wouldn't be able to feel sorry or happy for someone.

My Reply: In which case, it would be false to say I'm lacking empathy for thinking emotions are necessary to love, or care about someone. That's because emotions really are necessary. So, the only way I'd lack empathy would be if I felt less emotions in regards to others, and their predicaments. I do lack empathy, since I don't care about the suffering of others in this world. But, I do have some empathy because I'd feel bad if I personally harmed someone, or hurt someone's feelings. Other than that, I just don't care about the world in general, and I let the world go about its own business.

Other Person's Response: Would you feel happy for your mother if she won the lottery, and would you feel happy about someone being helped?

My Reply: Yes, actually. Also, my mother was upset one time, broke down in tears, and I felt bad for her.

Other Person's Response: There are many intelligent people in this world who have a vast amount of knowledge in regards to math, science, etc. But, if these people are living by the wrong definition of happiness, love, etc., then this would be the one thing these intelligent people are ignorant of, and it's, by far, the most important thing.

My Reply: Exactly. Having a positive experience in life is the #1, most important thing that comes above intelligence. So, if an intelligent genius is living by the wrong definition of a positive experience, then he's leaving out the most important thing in life.

Other Person's Response: A person can be highly intelligent in one area, but completely dumb in another area. Perhaps you're intelligent in the area of positivity, since you know what people need to have a positive experience (which would be their positive emotions). But, you're dumb in the area of math, science, etc. Then, there are people who are highly intelligent in math, science, etc., but are dumb in the area of positivity, since they think they can be happy, experience love, and have a positive perspective with no need for their positive emotions.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Do you realize how offensive it is to say intelligent people are dumb when it comes to their own experiences of love, happiness, etc.?

My Reply: I don't care how offensive it is! I've had enough of people telling me I can be happy by making certain choices in my life, when I'm in the midst of a horrible, emotional crisis, where I'm completely miserable and unhappy. These people don't realize I need my feelings of happiness to be happy. I've also had enough of people telling me I'm wrong when I say being in such a miserable state is no way to live or be an artist.

Other Person's Response: Are there intelligent people out there who live by your definition of happiness, love, and a positive experience? If so, then these are the people who'll truly understand you and your predicament.

My Reply: Yes, and I think they're called the emotion theorists. They have much knowledge when it comes to emotions, and how they allow us to experience happiness, beauty, hate, etc. They realize that emotions are value judgments that color our world in perceived beauty, disgust, etc.

Other Person's Response: How people become intelligent is when they study up on things. I see you have much knowledge to share when it comes to emotions, given all the material you've written. So, did you learn all this by studying up on a lot of material?

My Reply: No. I've learned all this through my own personal experience. Now, when it comes to emotions, I don't know anything about the brain, and how all that works. I don't have this knowledge because I never studied up on it. But, I do have experiential knowledge to share, since my personal experience has given me knowledge about emotions being the only way to experience love, happiness, etc.

Other Person's Response: When viewing the world through your own personal experience, you just limit yourself. You must take into consideration new experiences.

My Reply: Yes. But, like I said, I'd need a new personal experience to convince me that positive emotions aren't the only way to be happy, and have a positive perspective.

Other Person's Response: Emotions are considered taboo by many people. That means they're dismissed, not discussed often, and are deemed as trivial. But, they're how we experience love and happiness, perhaps people deny this, and instead live by the wrong definition of love and happiness.

My Reply: I agree.

Other Person's Response: There's so much you don't understand. A person has two halves: a feeling half, and a reason half. One should always lead with the reason half. Why? If you lead with the feeling half, you could get lost in a sea of emotions. It's never fun being lost. Isn't being lost much of what you've been experiencing? When you pretend that a person, helping others with a negative state of mind, isn't happy, you simply don't understand. This person might start out unhappy. But, will not stay unhappy.

Why? The goodness he gives to others will return to bring that happiness to him. There's a waitress who makes a fortune in tips. She does this by always being happy and joyful around others. People are empathic. They feel her joy, and soon, it rubs off on them. They come in grumpy, but leave laughing. I asked her how she can be so happy and bubbly all the time. She said, when she's down, she just starts acting happily and bubbly, whether she feels that way or not. She says it's not long before she actually becomes happy and bubbly in reality.

Do you understand? When some people get hurt, they embrace the pain. They choose to make that pain more important than anything. This just leads to more hurt and more pain. They need to change, but can be very stubborn. Do you know what happens to a person who needs to change, but refuses? They hurt and hurt until they hurt so badly, that they realize it's easier to change. Is this going to be you? What happens to a person who does the opposite?

When this person hurts, he might hurt. But, he doesn't give it any importance. Just like the waitress, he walks away from the hurt, and gives importance to the light, the happiness, and the goodness. He even pretends until he reaches there. Which path is the best? You keep waiting for outside forces to make you happy, when it has always been in your hands. It's always been up to you. Is any of this reaching you? Or, maybe, you're choosing to be stubborn. It has always been in your hands. Choose!

My Reply: Since I was in a very horrible, miserable state during that emotional crisis, nothing I did, or thought, could bring me feelings of happiness. I just had to be very patient for my positive feelings to return on their own.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your nightmares, which were triggered by devastating worries and negative thoughts, I bet they weren't as horrific as mine.

My Reply: It was the horror I experienced in my nightmares that made them so horrific. It was a horrific experience that goes much deeper than normal, horrific experiences, such as witnessing the death of an animal, being horrified while watching a horror movie, etc. So, if I were to compare the imagery of my nightmares to the imagery of yours, then my images might not be as gruesome as yours. But, if I were to compare the horrific experience I've had from my nightmares to your horrific experience, then I could've had the more horrifying experience than you.

In other words, the horrific emotion I felt could've been worse than the horrific emotion you felt. I might've had a much deeper horrifying experience than you. As you can see, it's what I've experienced that made my nightmares so horrific. It's not about just comparing the imagery and sounds of mine to yours. In other words, don't judge things based upon what they appear on the outside.

You must also take into account the individual's inner experience as well. I don't like it when people judge things based upon what they appear on the outside. Say, for instance, I lived my life the best I could, and achieved my goals and dreams without my positive emotions. People would say I've lived a beautiful, worthwhile life. But, I didn't. Since I didn't have that inner experience of beauty and joy, my life really amounted to nothing beautiful and worthwhile.

Other Person's Response: What you're basically saying is that we shouldn't jump to conclusions based upon your actions, gestures, and tones of voice.

My Reply: Correct. Like I said earlier, people need to consider my inner experience, rather than judging based upon how things appear.

Other Person's Response: I heard that the miserable struggles you've had in the past weren't as horrible as the ones you've recently had. If, let's pretend, you acted in a devastated manner from your past miserable struggles, but not your recent ones, then people shouldn't jump to the conclusion that your past struggles were the worse ones.

My Reply: Exactly. It's not about how I act. It's about what I experience on the inside. My recent struggles were the worse ones, since they were more horrible experiences.

Other Person's Response: Another example would be that Jon can be disgusting to Jake, but Jake can still act like Jon is still beautiful to him, just to be polite, and not tell Jon the real truth.

My Reply: Correct. That's why you can't jump to conclusions based upon a person's actions, words, gestures, or deeds. After all, that's why people get killed by strangers. When a serial killer acts nice and fools someone (such as a child) into believing he's a nice person, then the child gets slaughtered or molested when he rides with the killer in the car.

Other Person's Response: A robot could act like he loves someone, or that something is beautiful and worthwhile to him. But, that robot wouldn't be loving anybody. Neither would anything be beautiful and worthwhile to him. That's because the robot is just a machine with no inner experience.

My Reply: Correct. Since robots can act like they love, and that things are beautiful and worthwhile to them, then humans can also act the same way, even when they aren't loving anybody or anything, or when nothing is beautiful and worthwhile to them.

Other Person's Response: What I don't understand is how a person can still do something, but said thing not having value to that person. The very fact the person does it must mean it had value to him/her.

My Reply: A robot can still do things, even though said things don't have value to that robot. Robots can't value things anyway because, when you value something as beautiful or good, that is the inner experience of beauty and goodness. It's like a divine state, or an inner, holy light.

Like I said, robots can't have that experience, since they don't have consciousness. They don't have emotions. Therefore, even if a robot did a certain task, spoke, and said this task was something the robot valued, that robot wouldn't be valuing that task. The same idea applies to how nothing can matter to robots.

Other Person's Response: What if a person felt a positive emotion, but acted like it was a horrible or disgusting feeling for him?

My Reply: If he wasn't feeling a horrible or disgusting emotion, then he'd be acting like that positive emotion is horrible or disgusting to him, when it's really not.

Other Person's Response: It's nonsense to call positive and negative emotions divine and unholy states. They're just biochemical things.

My Reply: If we live in a universe where god, the afterlife, and paranormal exist (i.e. a mystical universe), then positive and negative experiences would be divine and unholy mental states. That would make positive and negative emotions divine and unholy mental states, since they're positive and negative experiences.

But, if emotions are just biochemical in nature, and we live in a universe where the divine light and unholy darkness don't exist (which are mystical things), then emotions would just be the biochemical equivalent of the holy light and unholy darkness.

In other words, even though emotions wouldn't literally be the holy light or unholy darkness experienced within us, they'd be the biochemical equivalent of that, which means they could metaphorically, and not literally, be described as the holy light and unholy darkness. In a mystical universe, they'd literally be the holy light and unholy darkness.

Other Person's Response: If a couple were in love, and they wish to experience the most profound, powerful, beautiful moment with one another, then they must feel the most profound, powerful, beautiful emotion?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If someone perceived her (the psychopath) as a beautiful person, that doesn't mean it was a beautiful experience for him. He could still feel horrified that he perceived the psychopath as beautiful. So, that perception of beauty would be a horrific experience for him.

My Reply: If someone experienced pain, then he had a painful experience. If someone experienced pleasure, then he had a pleasurable experience. Many people would say a painful experience can be a pleasurable experience, and vice versa. But, that wouldn't be so. For example, if someone experienced pleasure from his pain, then his pleasure was the pleasurable experience, and his pain was still a painful experience. You can't say a painful experience can be a pleasurable experience, and vice versa, since pain and pleasure are 2, separate things.

It would be like saying the experience of hunger can be the experience of thirst, and vice versa. So, if someone experienced horror from an experience of beauty he had, then his experience of horror was the horrific experience, and his experience of beauty was still the beautiful experience. You can't say that, just because this person experienced horror in regards to an experience of beauty he had, that this experience of beauty was a horrific experience, since it would be like saying the experience of pain was a pleasurable experience, and vice versa.

Other Person's Response: So, when people derive pleasure from their pain, it's not the pain itself they desire. It's the pleasure they get from their pain that they desire. In which case, they're just seeking pleasure. That means there are other methods of experiencing pleasure, and one doesn't have to be inflicted with pain. As a matter of fact, there are methods that can offer someone a much greater level of pleasure than the pleasure they'd get from being inflicted with pain.

My Reply: Yes. I could say the same thing about experiencing joy and beauty from having horrific experiences (such as from watching a horror movie). It's the experience of beauty and joy these people seek. If people just had horrific experiences from watching horror movies, and no beautiful, awesome, entertaining, joyful, etc. experience, then people would shy away from watching these movies. Given this, it would be better for people to only experience beauty, joy, etc. in regards to these horror movies, and have no horrific experience.

Other Person's Response: You're saying you'd rather have the thought that doing something that would harm yourself (such as doing drugs) is a beautiful thing, and for that thought to make you feel beauty in regards to doing drugs?

My Reply: Yes. But, regardless of that thought and feeling, I could still choose to not do drugs, just from knowing the harm and consequences.

Other Person's Response: Do you feel good about the idea of doing drugs, even though you'd never take drugs?

My Reply: No. There are plenty of things in life that I just don't feel anything about, and the idea of doing drugs would be one of those things. But, even though there are plenty of things I don't care about, I can still make choices. That means I'd never choose to do drugs.

Other Person's Response: You can sit there and think to yourself that the harm and consequences of doing drugs is horrible, and that would be a thought you'd be having. But, why would that thought not make you feel horrible?

My Reply: It's because it would just be a thought going through my mind, and nothing more. It's not the type of thought that would devastate me, or make me feel horrible emotions. In other words, I'm not genuinely (truly) thinking that the harm and consequences are horrible. If I did, then that genuine thought would be making me feel horrible.

Other Person's Response: You say you don't care about much. I think you should, since you wouldn't be apathetic in regards to so many things, and you'd be able to have more beautiful experiences in life.

My Reply: I have many beautiful experiences in my life as it is (providing I have my ability to feel positive emotions). So, I see no need for me to have thoughts of concern about things I normally don't care about in order to give myself more beautiful experiences.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your philosophy, I realize there are articles on the internet that go against your philosophy, since they talk about how happiness (positive emotions) shouldn't be the goal in life, and that our goal should instead be things, such as contributing to the world, or doing our best to make it through life, regardless of how unhappy or miserable we are. You're saying you disagree with such articles?

My Reply: Yes. I think life's all about the happiness. That means it's all about being happy contributing to the world, doing the hobbies we love, etc.

Other Person's Response: I find your philosophy very depressing.

My Reply: It's actually supposed to be rage-provoking, since it's supposed to make people angry at the unfairness of life, given that life is an unhappy place to be, where positive emotions are fleeting things. If god, and these heavenly beings, do exist, then people are supposed to be angry at them, since they allow so much unhappiness.

Other Person's Response: I thought negative emotions, such as feelings of rage, would make our lives bad though.

My Reply: Yes. So, perhaps I should've said people should feel good about trying to do something about this unfairness, and living the happiest lives they can live.

Other Person's Response: If you were to lose your positive emotions, would you feel enraged?

My Reply: I only feel enraged when I'm having an emotional crisis, such as during a devastating moment in my life, and I can't help but feel this way. So, just losing my positive emotions doesn't cause me to feel rage.

Other Person's Response: Would you be alright if you could only feel positive emotions on certain occasions?

My Reply: I need my positive emotions throughout the day each day. So, I need my life, and hobbies, experienced as beautiful, good, worth living for, etc. throughout the day. If I have many moments where I don't have my positive emotions, then these moments are just gaps in my life.

Other Person's Response: Some feelings of love are greater than others. For example, if a criminal felt love towards someone one moment, hated that person another moment, and threatened to kill him, then that feeling of love wouldn't be as profound and everlasting as someone who's very kind and compassionate.

My Reply: Yes. A criminal might only experience a shallow form of love, such as loving someone only when he gets what he wants, while a very compassionate person would experience a profound love towards someone. But, like I said, positive emotions are fleeting, which means love isn't an everlasting experience, no matter if you're a criminal, or a very compassionate person. Compassion isn't an everlasting experience either, since it, too, is a fleeting emotion.

Still, a criminal would experience less love and compassion than a kind, giving person. However, if that kind individual struggled with a mental illness that rendered him with a chronic absence of emotions (apathy) throughout his life, then he'd experience less love and compassion than a criminal. This would, unfortunately, make that person less loving and compassionate than a criminal, regardless of his kind acts and deeds.

Other Person's Response: If you define love and compassion as emotions, then that would make a chronically apathetic person less loving and compassionate than a criminal who's able to feel those emotions on certain occasions.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: What about someone who feels lots of love and compassion towards others, but doesn't help anyone, and lets people suffer?

My Reply: Then he'd still be loving and compassionate. He just wouldn't be performing any loving, compassionate deeds. If a person felt much hunger and thirst, but didn't act out on those feelings by getting something to eat or drink, then he'd still be hungry and thirsty. He just wouldn't be performing any acts of hunger and thirst. So, how we feel determines whether we're loving, compassionate, hateful, happy, sad, etc. Not our actions, gestures, or deeds.

Other Person's Response: There's another thing that can take away our ability to feel emotions besides having a mental illness, and that would be being born with a mental defect.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If someone without his positive emotions decided to give up on life, and cause grief to his family by committing suicide, then that would be a very unloving person.

My Reply: Well, without his positive emotions, he couldn't be a loving person anyway, since he's unable to feel any love.

Other Person's Response: You're telling me you've never loved, experienced happiness, or perceived something as ugly, disgusting, or beautiful independently of your emotions?

My Reply: That's correct. That's why I don't agree with the non-emotional definition of love, happiness, etc. By the way, I looked up the definition of happiness, and it says:

"Happiness is used in the context of mental or emotional states, including positive or pleasant emotions ranging from contentment to intense joy. It is also used in the context of life satisfaction, subjective well-being, eudaimonia, flourishing and well-being."

Well, I don't think happiness can be anything else other than a positive emotion. Neither can happiness be both a positive emotion, and some other state of mind. Happiness is a positive experience, and positive emotions are the only positive experiences. If someone is apathetic (emotionless), how could you say this person is happy? It makes no sense. Being happy is caring about something, or someone, in a positive way, and being apathetic is a state of mind where you don't care about anything. Can a robot be happy? No.

That's because it doesn't care about anything in a positive way, and you need positive emotions to care about people and things in a positive way. Robots are emotionless machines. So, it would make no sense to say they can experience love, happiness, sadness, anger, etc. It would also make no sense to say robots can value things as good or beautiful, since that experience would be a positive emotion, which robots don't have.

Other Person's Response: I wouldn't imagine beautiful and worthwhile experiences in life being so fleeting.

My Reply: I think such experiences are like rare, sacred items that only comes around once in a while. If you're lucky, then you can have them all throughout the day each day. That is, if positive emotions aren't fleeting for you.

Other Person's Response: You said thoughts take on an emotional form when they make us feel emotions. I don't think this makes sense.

My Reply: If you were to have a certain thought in your mind (such as the speech of a president or your favorite song), then that thought would send the signal to the audio cortex of your brain, which would allow you to hear that president's speech in your mind or your favorite song. This shows that thought information does get transferred over to other areas of our brain. The same idea applies to thoughts and emotions. Thoughts of beauty, love, and joy send the signal to make us feel beauty, love, and joy.

Other Person's Response: If a customer experienced nothing but misery and frustration, then, sure, he did have much drive and desire within him. He might've had the drive and desire to punch someone, or to just throw something on the ground out of misery and despair. But, that would've been nothing but a negative experience for that customer, since the customer had nothing but a negative perspective/outlook.

My Reply: Yes. Even though negative emotions do drive us, they only ruin the party, so to speak. The goal is to have positive experiences in life.

Other Person's Response: A person could still have a positive experience, such as getting a good service, regardless if that person had nothing but a negative perspective the whole time.

My Reply: The type of experience a person has all comes down to that person's state of mind. So, that person wouldn't be having a positive experience, since he had nothing but a negative perspective. Thus, he had nothing but a negative experience.

Other Person's Response: Do you even care about the negative experiences? You just burn them in fire and hope they never existed.

My Reply: You're having a positive attitude about negative experiences, and having a positive attitude implies a positive experience. But, negative experiences, in of themselves, can't be positive experiences, just as how a sad experience can't be a happy experience, since sadness and happiness are 2, separate things.

Other Person's Response: What if negative experiences have allowed me to have much more positive experiences in my life than I ever could otherwise?

My Reply: Then those negative experiences were beneficial. But, don't act as though those negative experiences were positive experiences, since they're 2, separate things. If you wish to experience a negative experience as something positive, then you'd need to have a positive experience mixed in with that negative experience. So, you'd need to feel a positive emotion mixed in with that negative emotion.

Other Person's Response: Negative experiences, in of themselves, are nothing but negative experiences. That means they, alone, are no way to live or be an artist. But, if they can be used to acquire much more positive experiences in your life than you could've obtained otherwise, then those negative experiences were, at least, beneficial.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If feeling negative emotions is going to result in much more joy in a person's life than he could've had otherwise, then he should consider having those negative emotions? Other than that, negative emotions should be avoided?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: I think you need psychological help if your emotions are so ruling of your life and perception.

My Reply: I don't think so. I think emotions are the only way we can perceive things as good, bad, etc.

Other Person's Response: Thinking of negative emotions as unholy is wrong. To think of them as bad is one thing. Unholy is quite another. Unholy means it's sinful and wicked to feel such things, which implies we should think harshly of ourselves whenever we inevitably do. Regarding negative emotions as unholy is to regard such emotions less as natural things we experience in life, and more as unnatural things to be avoided.

My attitude they're something to be learned from, and give meaning to life, may be out there. But, this idea that they are sin is so, so wrong. First of all, such wrongheaded thinking is harmful. If you feel bad emotions and think of them in such a way, you condemn yourself and make things worse. You think of life as terrible for having felt bad things. But, that perception is nonsense. Your life is awful for having felt a negative emotion? Nonsense!

That you feel emotions like this only goes to show you're human. Not corrupt or bad in some way. Why would you be corrupt, exactly? Secondly, this notion goes against holy teachings. It's not the happy who inherit the earth. God doesn't regard negative emotions as sinful. Sadness in the bible is not a sin unto itself, and not something God condemns. If he did, Jesus would be quite the sinner. Also, positive mental states aren't necessarily holy in the eyes of the Bible. Gluttony, lust, and greed are regarded as sinful. Not holy.

"When we're empty vessels or beings of darkness, it's no way to live or be an artist."

Some of the most celebrated artists have had hardships and suffering in their lifetime. Who are you to deny them meaning?

My Reply: I have my personal views and you have yours.

Other Person's Response:
Quote:
A life without positive emotions is no way to live or be an artist


A few great works of art have been created out of negative emotions. The works of Francisco Goya immediately spring to mind. Specifically, his Black Paintings, which are works of art that provide an insight to the dark side of man. Picasso's Guernica is also a painting I think of when it comes to darkness. Van Gogh had dark times in his life. But, you wouldn't describe his work as worthless, or without merit.

Quote:
if I had the choice, I'd choose to be in an apathetic state than to feel negative emotions


Apathy is worse than negative experiences. Apathy robs people of the means to better themselves, and makes people a victim of their circumstances. They don't move on, they remain stuck where they are, lifeless, and unable to improve their lives. Negative emotions, when viewed as damaging, instead of as experiences to learn from, can lead to apathy, and apathy is something we should avoid. People have an unhealthy relationship with negativity. They view it in a way where it has power over them, when it should be the other way around--they have power over it.

The bad things in life overcome people, and they become victims of circumstance. That's not how things should be. What happens in life, and how you react to that, are two, different things, and you can either put yourself down and let the bad things in life ruin you, or you can use those things to make yourself a better person (someone people look up to, and are proud of). It's not a case of your views being offensive to people. Rather, it's a case of, what I believe is, genuinely a better way to look at life than the views you currently hold, and to get more out of life.

My Reply: When we feel negative emotions, we're far away from the divine and holiness (the beauty, magnificence, goodness, etc.). But, apathy is closer to that realm of positivity.

Other Person's Response: So, divine is superior to an empty void, and to unholy, which means positive emotions are superior to apathy, and to negative experiences? From there, apathy is inferior to divine, but superior to negativity, and negativity is both inferior to divine, and to apathy?

My Reply: Yes. Divine is the ultimate status our souls/minds need to obtain, and we obtain that status through positive emotions. If you're in an apathetic state, you're far away from that divine, heavenly status/experience. But, being in a negative state is furthest away from the divine state.

Other Person's Response: You talk about how we need to have positive experiences. I think the goal in life should be to just live life as it is without expecting such experiences. So, we shouldn't be concerned about such experiences, we shouldn't be concerned about good, bad, beauty, right, wrong, etc., and we shouldn't have thoughts and beliefs that certain things are good, bad, etc. Such a concern stems from the ego, and the goal is to transcend the ego. That is our divine purpose as human beings.

My Reply: Positive experiences are divine states, which means seeking them is our divine purpose as human beings. So, seeking positive emotions is our divine purpose. By the way, divine means positive (good, beautiful, etc.). So, the purpose you described can't be divine, since it's a purpose of giving up positivity.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 06:49 pm
@MozartLink,
File #6: More On My Philosophy (Part 6/26)

Other Person's Response: There are dark, gothic people out there who create wonderful works of art through their negative emotions.

My Reply: I realize this. But, their lives wouldn't have that positivity if they didn't feel positive emotions. So, these gothic people shouldn't be embracing negative emotions, since there's no reason to. They should embrace positive emotions, since they're the only things that make our lives and artistic endeavors good and beautiful. Actually, positive emotions can possess a dark, gothic quality to them that these gothic people can embrace.

As I said before, how you think is how you will feel. So, if someone has a dark, gothic thought, and it makes him feel a positive emotion, then he'll have a positive form of a dark, gothic experience in his life. That means there are 2 forms of darkness: 1.) The negative form of darkness (negative emotions), such as feelings of despair, anguish, disgust, and hate. 2.) The positive form of darkness (positive emotions), such as feeling awesome from listening to a dark, gothic, heavy metal song.

That means we can become beings of darkness, and our very being and lives still being awesome and beautiful. Again, only #2 can make that happen. I'd actually refer to #1 as being the unholy darkness, and #2 as being the divine darkness. #2 would be like a black light, since it's the power of the Divine Light taking on a dark, gothic form. Positivity can take on many forms, whether it be a childish form (such as a happy child), it can take on the form of fun and adventure, or it can take on a dark, gothic form.

You can become any one of these on the inside. Negativity can also take on many different forms as well. Negativity can even take on the form of light. Now, you'd have the opposite of divine darkness. You'd now have the evil or unholy light. I'll give an example of this one. It could be a horrific, disturbing, or creepy emotion from witnessing a scene that has sunshine, rainbows, and naturalistic landscapes. Maybe it could be the Teletubbies. So, if someone felt a negative emotion from that, then that would be an example of the unholy light.

Other Person's Response: Spiritual believers would say we create our own heaven or hell through our way of thinking. Thoughts are very powerful things, and I think they do create our heaven or hell here on Earth.

My Reply: No. It's the emotions that create our heaven or hell here on Earth. Positive thinking allows your brain to tap into divine consciousness, and to receive it.

Other Person's Response: Spiritual believers would say there's the realm of the light, and the realm of the dark. So, you're saying it's what emotion we feel that determines which of these mental realms we reside in?

My Reply: That's correct. Many people would assume that thinking positive is what puts us in the realm of the light, and thinking negative puts us in the dark. For example, if someone has nothing but thoughts of hate, disgust, etc., then that's said to be the realm of the dark for the individual. Actually, thoughts and beliefs are merely the gateway to experiencing these realms.

They, in of themselves, can't put us in these realms, since they're just concepts or ideas. If the gate is closed (that is, if your thoughts and beliefs can't make you feel emotions, due to a mental illness or some other factor), then you cannot enter these realms. You would, therefore, have forbidden access to a paradise on Earth, or a hell on Earth (providing you can't feel negative emotions either).

Other Person's Response: Spiritual believers also say we become divine beings (or beings of light) when we have positive thoughts, and we become beings of darkness when we have negative thoughts. You're saying it's instead our emotional state that determines whether we're beings of light or darkness?

My Reply: Correct. When you watch anime, you hear positive spiritual energy, and negative spiritual energy being said all the time. Negative energy corrupts and poisons, while positive energy is beauty, love, and joy.

Other Person's Response: I heard you're undecided on the existence of the afterlife. But, living an eternally blissful afterlife would be the greatest life you could live, since such a life would offer you an eternal, positive experience. Thus, you'd be getting an eternal amount of positivity.

My Reply: Yes. The more positive experiences I get out of life, the better. That's because I'm getting more out of life. But, if this Earthly existence is the only life I have, then that would be disappointing because I'd only be getting a limited amount of positive experiences in my life. Especially since positive emotions are fleeting in this Earthly existence.

Other Person's Response: If this Earthly existence is all there is, and there's no god, then seeking positive emotions wouldn't be a divine purpose for humanity, since the word "divine" implies the existence of god. Rather, it would simply be the ultimate purpose for humanity.

My Reply: Yes. Naturalistic skeptics, who are convinced this natural, Earthly existence is the only life we have, always talk about how to live the best life we can, since it's the only life we have. Well, in my opinion, I think it can only be through living the happiest life we can.

Other Person's Response: Do you think god might be dumb, and not understand that having positive experiences in life is the reason for living?

My Reply: Why would he be dumb? Isn't god all-knowing? I'll admit though, it sure seems like it, since he sends people here to Earth, where there's much suffering, and positive emotions are fleeting. Not only that, he doesn't heal the minds of those suffering. An example would be how he didn't heal me of this misery-inducing worry I've had, which lingered on for about 3 years.

So, he might be dumb, which renders him in a position where he treats positive experiences as very trivial things. That's why those who are having a lot of negative experiences in life are left to suffer, and god does nothing to heal their minds to restore their positive experiences. It really gets to me when others, including god and these heavenly beings, don't understand that I really need my positive emotions, and that they're far from trivial things.

Other Person's Response: So, do you think god, and these heavenly beings, have a plan and purpose for humanity that's dumb, absurd, pointless, and unnecessary?

My Reply: Yes. God's plan and purpose lacks compassion and understanding.

Other Person's Response: Love is a positive experience that many people seek, and spiritual believers always talk about how it's a very precious thing. If people are going to seek love, then there are many other positive experiences to seek as well, such as the experience of beauty, joy, etc.

My Reply: Yes. Love is far from a trivial experience, and that would even include all other positive experiences.

Other Person's Response: People, who have near death experiences, go on heavenly trips to the afterlife, and meet god, report that the most important life lesson they learn is love. So, I think god understands just how important positive experiences are, including love.

My Reply: Maybe he doesn't understand that all positive experiences, including love, can only be positive emotions. Perhaps that's the reason why god doesn't care that positive emotions are very fleeting in this Earthly existence.

Other Person's Response: Perhaps god is a liar, and he really doesn't care about love, or humanity.

My Reply: Or, maybe, god doesn't exist, and those heavenly trips people go on are nothing more than hallucinations. That means these people aren't learning any life lesson from a real god, or real heavenly beings.

Other Person's Response: There's a form of love that's not transient, and it's unconditional love.

My Reply: Are you sure this form of love you speak of exists? Personally, I think love can only be a fleeting emotion, and people deny this, since they don't want it to be true. They wish to believe in some greater, everlasting love, which doesn't exist.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I've felt it. So, I know that this everlasting, unconditional love exists. It's only fleeting, or impermanent, to those who deny the everlasting nature of it, which is also like a catch 22. To be honest, it's only my depression which stops me from experiencing it more than just a fleeting sensation. If my depression wasn't getting in the way, I'd be blissed out 24/7 on this love.

The ego will create anything to preserve the individual identity for its own survival, and depression is usually caused by feelings of not being loved, appreciated, heard, acknowledged, or losing that which was once loved in a physical way. There are many expressions of love...Eros, Filial, Agape... The only love that lasts forever is Agape (Divine Love).

All other forms of love come with conditioned attachment, and you're correct. Once the attachment goes, so does the love, and the forms of love we're both talking about are two different varieties. I've felt God's love, and my rejection of it is causing my depression because my ego wants to stay in control. So, I really bring all of my suffering on myself, as harsh as that may sound.

My Reply: Now, I've been known to enjoy my life and hobbies all throughout the day each day. That was before I had devastating moments in my life, which caused me to be miserable. But, the very fact I was able to continually enjoy my life and hobbies doesn't mean my enjoyment wasn't an emotion. It was still an emotion, which means something else could've taken it away from me, such as brain damage.

So, when you say you'd able to experience this greater, everlasting, unconditional love if it weren't for your depression, that love would still be an emotion you're feeling. If you had brain damage, or developed some sort of mental illness that's known to take away positive emotions, then you wouldn't be able to love. So, love is still an emotion, which means there's no such thing as a form of love that still stands, even in the face of brain damage, mental illness, etc.

Other Person's Response: What about people who are still able to feel love, despite having brain damage, or a mental illness?

My Reply: It all depends on the severity of the brain damage, mental illness, and what brain regions have been affected. If it's severe, and has greatly affected those regions of the brain responsible for feelings of love, then your ability to feel love would be completely absent and chronic. But, if it's not that severe, and hasn't affected those brain regions that much, then you may have some moments where you feel love, and moments where you don't.

Other Person's Response: In regards to depression, it's not always caused by a person's negative thinking. There's clinical depression, which is a form of depression that's a mental illness.

My Reply: Yes. Now, I've had many moments where I was depressed. But, that form of depression was caused by my negative thoughts. Those negative thoughts then made me feel hopelessness, which was a very negative experience for me.

Other Person's Response: In my experience, there's a big difference between the love of the Divine, and the emotional love felt by humans. It's a difference which is much more than just conditional love and unconditional love. The love of human beings often begins with infatuation, and infatuation has often been described as a state of insanity. The love of God, or the Divine, transforms your entire being; it's not merely emotional. You merge with it, and it absorbs you. The love of God is very intoxicating and overwhelming to the point that you lose yourself in it.

There are no individuals in God's love. There is just God's love, and that's the only thing that exists. When you feel it, you instantly know that this is the source of all joy, and all love. God's love makes the word "love" seem puny. People have to transform themselves to experience the fineness of that unconditional love. But, we don't have to transform ourselves to experience human, emotional love. Most of the time, what we call human love is but lust, and, in my opinion, there's nothing wrong with that. But, human, emotional love comes and goes, while the love of God is permanent and steadfast. This is my experience.

My Reply: You say we must feel the Divine love to experience it, and that it's a feeling unlike the human, emotional love. You say the Divine love isn't transient. But, feelings are already transient things. For example, a feeling of hunger, thirst, pain, pleasure, etc. isn't everlasting. But, you're saying the Divine love is a feeling unlike all those other feelings, since it's an everlasting feeling that can't be taken away by brain damage, mental illnesses, etc.?

Other Person's Response: I also said that we have to first go through a transformation process to feel divine love. But, we don't have to go through a transformation process to feel emotional love. We're here for self-development, and the process of spiritual development brings us closer to God's love.

My Reply: Well, even if I did acquire this Divine love, in order to love someone, I'd need to have a loving thought to make me feel love. But, thoughts and feelings can't be the same thing, and the Divine love is a feeling. So, a loving thought still has to make me feel love in order for me to love someone. That means the loving thought must send a signal to some other region of my brain to make me feel love. But, like I said, there are things that can prevent thoughts from sending the signal, such as brain damage, mental illnesses, etc.

That would just leave me with a loving thought, without a loving feeling. So, the way I see it, it's the same situation as before. This Divine love would have to be fleeting, just like the human, emotional love. Unless, somehow, there's a way the Divine love can be everlasting, even in the face of brain damage, mental illness, etc. But, I just don't understand how it can be everlasting, which means I don't understand how that would work. How would that work scientifically?

Other Person's Response: Why don't you first start by loving yourself before you get into all of these so-called loving thoughts for others? If you don't have love in your own heart, then how are you going to give love to others? The love that we have in our thoughts is conditional love. But, the love of God has nothing to do with our thoughts. If you have love in your heart, then you can love others without saying a word, or having a thought. First, learn how to truly love yourself, and be conscious of the presence of love in your own heart.

My Reply: Well, like I said, I don't know if this form of love even exists. The only love I've ever had was emotional.

Other Person's Response: I've felt Divine love before, and it's more than just a fleeting emotion, which is unlike the notion that many other people are convinced of, which would be that love is just an emotion, created by the brain. I've, at least, heard others say love isn't something in the heart, but is something the brain creates. I don't fully believe this is the case because the heart was the first thing to develop in the body before the brain. The brain was one of the last things, if I'm remembering that correctly.

It's also important for one to love themselves, and work on that, even if it may feel impossible to some. Like, for people who have depression, it isn't an impossible task. But, they may feel numb about things that would normally cause them to feel love. But, they can love, if they allow it, and that's a good mindset for them. This mindset will create a space that will allow them to let go of the things, thoughts, and beliefs that may cause them to feel numb to where they think they can only feel love for a fleeting moment.

I believe love is something that doesn't ever leave one. But, if we have the belief that love is fleeting, its power fades off into the background. So, I believe one's belief and perspective of love also has its effects on how they see love, experience love, how it affects them, and manifests for them. I believe love (and by love, I mean divine/unconditional love) to be one of the biggest lessons because you can learn so many things from it.

My Reply: But, the heart doesn't experience love, joy, hate, sorrow, etc. It's just an organ. The brain is where we have all our experiences, whether they be sight, smell, hearing, taste, emotions, etc.

Other Person's Response:
Quote:
But, the heart doesn't experience love, joy, hate, sorrow, etc. It's just an organ. The brain is where we have all our experiences, whether they be sight, smell, hearing, taste, emotions, etc.


If you've never felt Divine Love, then it's something nobody would ever be able to explain to you "scientifically." Want to know something? It's our love for the "scientific" which keeps us in our head-space, and causes all of that misery and depression. I speak from first hand experience. To learn more about the functions of the heart beyond it being a "physical organ that pumps blood," I refer you to the works of Gregg Braden. You see, the experience of Divine Love through the heart, which others refer to as Grace, is a very deeply profound, spiritual experience, which is both a feeling and, yet, much more than just a feeling.

Anyway, as long as you concentrate on just the physicality, and on the material and scientific, you'll NEVER experience this love. NEVER! The thing is, too many people are attached to their intellect, theories, philosophies, to science and proof, to Duality, to black and white mindsets, etc. I know my friend...I KNOW, and do you know how I know? Because I'm one of them myself! Has this really done anything for me in my spiritual quest to walk with God? No! Not in the slightest. In fact, it has had the opposite effect of turning my attention and awareness away from God, causing suffering and misery. Fortunately, I know what it is I'm missing. Unfortunately, you do not, which may actually be fortunate because if you did, your depression would increase a hundredfold.

My Reply: Since people are so attached to their views, which prevents them from feeling Divine love, and since Divine love is so important, then why doesn't god, or the heavenly beings, enlighten these people, so they can obtain Divine love? Why do they allow humanity to remain unenlightened? They have to power to instantly bestow divine knowledge upon humanity, and they allow humanity to remain ignorant.

Other Person's Response:
Quote:
Unfortunately, you do not, which may actually be fortunate because if you did, your depression would increase a hundredfold.


Would this actually make you feel depressed if you knew what you were missing?

My Reply: No. It's only those negative thoughts and worries I had that caused me misery, and devastated me.

Other Person's Response: People have already been trying to enlighten you by presenting to you information on Divine love.

My Reply: Just presenting to me information isn't enough to convince me Divine love exists. So, I could read all the information I want to read about it, and I still wouldn't be convinced. I'm undecided on controversial/debatable topics anyway, since people just argue back and forth all day long, and it gets nowhere. Even the existence of Divine love is controversial. If me being enlightened to the existence of Divine love is necessary for me to obtain it, then why doesn't god, or these heavenly beings, just enlighten me?

Also, there are people who are attached to a scientific materialistic view, and attached to others views, and that's something they can't help. It's not like they can just choose to let go of said attachment. So, it would be best for god, and these heavenly beings, to enlighten these people as well. Otherwise, they'd just be stuck, and would never obtain Divine love. I realize some scientific materialists convert over to spirituality, and claim they've obtained Divine love. But, not too many do.

Other Person's Response: What would it take to convince you then? What if I were to tell you that the fact you need "convincing" prevents you from just accepting? What if I were to tell you that any notion of "blind faith" is just a contrivance to keep skeptics stuck where they are? However, you've already made up your mind, due to the free will God has given you. He can't force you to receive His Grace. He probably realizes that you're just not ready yet. Maybe in the next lifetime you'll be ready. Peace and good luck on your journey.

My Reply: If someone were to come up with any given claim, such as that vaccines are harmful, that there's an afterlife, etc., such claims obviously can't be accepted at face value because you might as well be convinced of anything at face value. Also, I have read through the debates regarding certain topics, and there's no way I can discover the truth in regards to these topics, since it's just an argument that goes back and forth all day long.

Other Person's Response: You didn't answer my question. What would it take to convince you? Or, don't you want to be convinced? You'd have to know what Divine Love is to know what it's not.

My Reply: The only thing that would convince me would be experiencing this Divine love for myself, and I've never experienced it.

Other Person's Response: I can help you with that. But, first, I have a few questions. Why do you want to experience Divine Love? Is it just to satisfy your intellectual curiosity? Or, is there something deep inside yourself that you feel is missing/lacking? Would you be willing to suspend your beliefs, and just let go of your concepts for about two seconds? You can have them all back after the fact, if you still want them.

Or, are you scared? What's your concept of God/Divine? How does the notion of this present itself to you? You don't have to become a Christian, adopt any religion or methodology, and you don't even have to believe anything I say. In fact, I can experience Divine Love at the drop of a hat IF I just forgo my stubborn will and attachment to my anal, retentive, control issues for just a few seconds. It could work for you, too.

My Reply: It's out of curiosity, as well as the desire to have everlasting positive experiences in my life, and no longer have to rely on my fleeting, positive emotions as a sole source of positive experiences. Also, I don't believe that positive emotions are the only way to have those experiences. So, I've already suspended that belief.

As I said before, I'm undecided when it comes to controversial topics, and the idea that positive emotions are the only way to have those experiences is controversial, which means I'm undecided on that. But, I suspect positive emotions could be the only way to have those experiences. I'm not exactly sure though. Lastly, my view of divine would be the positive emotions, since they give us positive experiences, such as love, joy, etc.

Other Person's Response: Alright, so I see you wish to obtain Divine Love. Here's the exercise you need to perform to obtain it. Where I'm going with this, hear me out. In a moment of quiet, reflective solitude, when you're not too preoccupied with your own thoughts, just put all your questions and concerns to the universe. Don't expect any outcome, and don't wait for a reply. Just look within, let go of all expectations, all critical thought or judgments, and just allow yourself to be, just as you are, sitting there, in that moment.

Ask God to show you His Divine Love. But, don't process what comes through mentally. Allow it to bypass your scientific mind. Don't fight it. Surrender. That is the key word here...surrender. You may notice a slight feeling deep within. Don't rationalize it away, and try not to get caught up in the sensation. Allow yourself to flow with it, and go with it. The sensation will intensify. But, keep calm and focused on your intent (and your breath).

If you feel a pressure in your chest, or even the urge to cry, let it go. Let it out. It may take a few times. But, don't get impatient or disheartened. Let your body do whatever it needs to do. Let those emotions surface, and just observe them. After a while, you won't be able to hold it back anymore. You'll feel totally empty, raw, and ready. Then, you'll experience the Divine Love. You'll be so filled up, you won't know what to do with yourself. What you think of as "you" won't be there anymore anyway. Good luck with it.

My Reply: I've tried it, and it doesn't work for me. Perhaps I have to keep on trying. Throughout this packet, I still go by the assumption that the only real positive experiences, including love, are the positive emotions.

Other Person's Response: Since this exercise isn't working for you, then why didn't god just give you Divine Love before your soul arrived here on Earth? That way, you would've had it upon your very birth into this world.

My Reply: Exactly. The same thing applies to other people who are skeptical about the existence of divine love, or unaware of its existence. Why didn't god, or these heavenly beings, just grant them divine love?

Other Person's Response: I don't believe in god, the afterlife, or the paranormal. So, even if you kept on doing that exercise, and managed to obtain this Divine Love, it might just be some everlasting, more profound love you obtained that has nothing to do with god.

My Reply: You could be right.

Other Person's Response: Divine Love is real. Once your heart really opens, you can't turn love off. Even if it would make life easier. In regards to depression, and not feeling love, I was deeply depressed and suicidal for several years. But, I still loved very deeply, which is why I stayed for the sake of others.

It sounds like you have some wound that has made you close your heart in fear. Fear can masquerade as anger, or just disinterest or intellectual belittling of love. It is a great protection mechanism of the ego when one is suffering. But, it ends up cutting the person off from what humans thrive on: connection/intimacy/unity.

Often, if the wound is enough, the heart closes up, and it takes healing the wound to open it again, or finding someone that you love enough that it cracks you open. But, still, you're left working on the wound, or you'll close your heart again.

I'd say 99% of the world's population exists in this sate of the wounded heart. So, love seems transient and fleeting. Truth is, we all need to heal, and, instead, we keep injuring each other and reinforcing each others wounds. The open heart is the natural state, and the wound needs to heal.

My Reply: I don't have any mental wounds that need to be healed. I grew up with a loving mother, have never been abused, and have always been happy. But, for whatever reason, I've never experienced Divine Love. As of now, I'm not happy, since I've had a devastating worry. But, I'm almost fully recovered from it. When I'm all better and happy again, I'll try performing that exercise again to see if I can obtain Divine Love.

Other Person's Response: I believe in Divine Love, as well as all other positive experiences that are divine. All the positive experiences you currently have are the human, emotional ones, since they're all based upon fleeting, positive emotions. But, they're not the everlasting, divine ones.

My Reply: It would be wonderful if I could have these everlasting, divine, positive experiences that are not only more profound and intense than my emotional ones, but are everlasting. But, I've yet to be convinced they actually exist. Also, even if I did obtain them, it's still possible for me to have them mixed in with the emotional ones. They can even be mixed in with negative emotions, which would give me some degree of positive experience, and some degree of negative experience.

Other Person's Response: Maybe you just need to develop as an individual to obtain Divine Love, as well as all other Divine, positive experiences.

My Reply: I'm not sure.

Other Person's Response: If all your miserable struggles were to help you develop as a person, so you could obtain these divine, positive experiences, then I think those struggles were unnecessary, given that there are happy, healthy alternatives to personal growth, learning, and development.

My Reply: Yes. My miserable struggles have never resulted in me obtaining these divine, positive experiences anyway.

Other Person's Response: One person mentioned earlier that there are factors that can prevent you from obtaining Divine Love, as well as all other Divine, positive experiences, such as being too narrow-minded, closed-minded, focusing too much on materialistic science, etc.

My Reply: I can only do my best to obtain them, and I can't promise I'll ever obtain them. That is, providing they even exist. The same idea applies to other people. They can only do their best to improve themselves, and their life's experience. If there are any factors preventing them from obtaining these Divine experiences, then that's just the way it is. They did their best, and that's all they can do.

Other Person's Response: Aren't there scientific materialists out there who claim they've acquired a form of love that's everlasting, and more profound than their emotional love? If so, then they've obtained Divine Love, which means their fixation on materialistic science didn't prevent them from obtaining it.

My Reply: I'm not sure if there are such people.

Other Person's Response: I heard one person say earlier that Divine Love is a form of love that has nothing to do with our thoughts. So, if a person claimed he's able to experience everlasting love with no need for his emotions, and said experience of love was triggered by his loving thoughts, then it wouldn't have been Divine Love.

My Reply: That's right.

Other Person's Response: If you ever do obtain Divine Love, and all other Divine, positive experiences, I think you'll look back, and realize your positive emotions never were the experience of love, or any other positive experience.

My Reply: If you were to have a thought that something is beautiful, and that thought makes you feel beauty, then that's still a beautiful experience. So, that's still a positive experience. That's why I think positive emotions are still positive experiences, and experiences of love. It's just that Divine Love, and the Divine, positive experiences, would be more profound experiences, and they'd be everlasting.

Other Person's Response: If god, the paranormal, and the afterlife do exist, then I wouldn't think that all positive experiences, including love, can only be emotional. There must be an everlasting, divine form of these experiences.

My Reply: Perhaps you're right. But, then again, positive emotions might still be the only way to have positive experiences.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I think it would suck having the Divine, positive experiences because it was mentioned earlier that these experiences have nothing to do with our way of thinking (which is conditional). That means a person can't give himself whatever type of Divine, positive experience he wants through his way of thinking.

My Reply: But, at least they're more profound positive experiences that are everlasting.

Other Person's Response: When it comes to our positive feelings, we're the ones who decide what type of positive feeling we wish to give ourselves through our way of thinking. If we, for example, wish to feel beauty in regards to nature, then we'd have the thought that nature is beautiful. But, when it comes to the divine, positive feelings/experiences, these ones are different because it's instead up to god what positive feeling he gives us.

But, god is perfect, which means he knows what positive feelings we're better off feeling. So, if you lost your ability to experience positive feelings, and you needed the divine, positive feelings, then god might not make you feel the drive/motivation to pursue your composing. He might instead make you feel a different positive feeling, since he knows that's what's best for you.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If the most profound feeling of Divine Love is much more profound than the most profound feeling of emotional love, then that says even the most profound, loving thought wouldn't give you the most profound feeling of love. It can only be God's love which can be the most profound feeling of love.

My Reply: Yes. Also, I wonder if there's more profound negative experiences than the ones that come about through our negative emotions. For example, I wonder if the opposite of Divine Love exists, which would be Unholy Hate. This form of hate isn't emotional, is more profound than the emotional form of hate, and is everlasting.

Other Person's Response: If people claim there's an everlasting form of love and hate that's more profound than the emotional form of love and hate, then these people might as well claim there's a form of sexual arousal that's everlasting, and more profound than the emotional version. I think this is unrealistic, and untrue.

My Reply: Perhaps you're right. These people also might as well say there's a form of panic that's everlasting, and more profound than the emotional form of panic. I just don't think that's true. Feelings of panic, sexual arousal, love, joy, hate, etc. have always been known to be fleeting things.

Other Person's Response: It's typical how god gets dragged into the picture when people can't handle their own life, and then blame him. Life is about taking responsibility for your own life. Not about blaming an external circumstance, person, or god. Love is difficult to experience if your vibration is low. Love is a high vibration. Most people are on a low vibration. So, there's a mismatch. Disillusioned, angry, bitter, disappointed, etc. people are on a very low vibration. So, they are very far away from love. You can't demand to feel love because, as long as your vibration is that low, you won't be able to feel it.

You can't demand an external force, person, or situation to make you feel love, since YOU have to do the work to get to a higher vibration. If god were to come down to your low level, he'd have to lower his vibration as well, which means he wouldn't/couldn't be god anymore. It's not the idea we descend further in misery. It's the idea we ascend to a higher vibration. The higher you get, the more love you'll experience. What it means is you have to take responsibility for your life, stop blaming and victimizing, and work on issues. If you're not feeling love, you do have issues. Everyone has issues.

It's just that some aren't bothered by them because they're too positive by nature, or they work on their ****. The same story goes for illnesses. All illnesses are manifested by the person himself, which has been scientifically proven, and it has to do with the Law of Attraction, which has also been scientifically proven. Watch Dr. Bruce Lipton. It, again, has to do with vibration/energy being low. In the end, this manifests in physical illness, and then the weakest part is affected.

As good as all cures are obtained by the power of the mind, by believing something will work, whether it's surgery, medication, or something else, we can cure ourselves. But, that, again, means we have to take responsibility for our lives, and our ailments. Again, watch Bruce Lipton. He explains it beautifully. Or, read his book Biology of Belief. There's no such thing as hereditary diseases either. We've been misinformed. Science is beginning to find out how, Bruce Lipton, a cell biologist, found out decades ago. It's all about energy. So is love, and, if your vibration is low, for whatever reason, you can't feel it.

My Reply: Well, you must remember I'm leaning towards the possibility that love can only be an emotion, and emotions are fleeting things that can be taken away from us. Also, I'm not even sure your claims are true or not in regards to higher, spiritual vibrations existing, and our minds having the ability to heal ourselves. I could read all the material I want to on these topics. But, I'll still remain undecided. I realize I have my own religion, which makes certain mystical claims.

But, I have to remain undecided on said claims. Lastly, I've had many miserable struggles, which I think was pointless suffering that wasted my life away. So, if god, or these heavenly beings, couldn't heal my mind of such suffering, since they'd have to lower their vibrations, which would no longer make them divine entities, then sending me to Earth was a mistake, since Earth is a place where humans are at a low vibration. That means I was allowed to go through all that suffering.

Not only that, but Earth isn't the place to be anyway, since positive emotions are fleeting things. When our souls are in the heavenly realm, where we meet god, and these heavenly beings, we're at a higher vibration, and I think heaven is where we should be anyway. Our souls can enter heaven through drug trips, or when our physical bodies die. But, like I said, I'm undecided on the existence of the soul and afterlife, and whether heavenly and hellish trips people go on are hallucinations or not.

Other Person's Response:
Quote:
Everyone has issues. It's just that some aren't bothered by them because they're too positive by nature, or they work on their ****.


If god wants us to suffer because he wants us to work on our issues, then what about all those suffering animals that are being abused? They can't work on their issues, and they have no choice but to suffer.

My Reply: Right. Many people say that we shouldn't have a victim mentality (i.e. that we shouldn't have the mindset of being a victim of our circumstances). But, those suffering animals really are a victim of their circumstances.

Other Person's Response: God, and these heavenly beings, are all-knowing and all-powerful. So, I'm quite sure they'd find a way to heal people of their suffering. Yet, they still allow people to suffer. Isn't it said that god already intervenes in the human world? If so, then why doesn't he also heal those in need of suffering?

My Reply: You're right. So, why have they allowed me to suffer (if they even exist)? Also, if our minds do have the ability to heal ourselves, then many people are unaware of this, which means people are allowed to suffer. So, it would've been best if god just healed these people himself. Or, he could've, at least, informed people about the healing ability their minds have, and told them how to utilize the healing power of their minds.

I was ignorant of the mind's healing ability during my miserable struggles, and it would've been wonderful if my mind could've instantly healed itself of all those miserable struggles I've had (especially my recent one, which took the longest to recover from). But, even if I was aware of the mind's healing ability, and I did perform the steps necessary to utilize the healing power of my mind, it might not have worked for me anyway. Like I said, I'm not even sure this healing ability exists in the first place.

Other Person's Response: According to spiritual believers, the mind can heal the body of all illnesses, including aging, and that you just need to have the feeling, and belief, that any illness you have will be healed by your mind, and your mind will heal it. Many skeptics just refuse to accept this idea.

My Reply: I don't know about this. Wouldn't spiritual believers, who believe in this, be immortal? Clearly, they're not immortal, since they grew old, and died like everyone else. They also died from diseases. So, it might really be the case that the skeptics are right. If the skeptics are right, then perhaps they're right about other things, such as that there's no afterlife, we're biological machines with no free will, etc.

Also, there's a popular spiritual believer named "Sadhguru," and another one named "Deepak Chopra." They're convinced of this idea that the mind can heal the body. But, if their minds can heal their bodies of all illnesses, including aging, then why do they look old? If they have illnesses, then why do they have them?

Other Person's Response: I heard that not only does the mind have the ability to heal our bodies, but it can destroy our bodies. Aging is a destructive process of the body, and the only reason why people die from aging is because they believe their bodies age. That belief causes them to age and die.

My Reply: Doesn't it require the person to be spiritually developed (mature) in order for such power of his mind to take effect? If so, then a spiritually undeveloped person, who has a low vibration, wouldn't be able to heal his body through the power of his mind. Likewise, he couldn't destroy his body either through the power of his mind. But, this would imply spiritually undeveloped people never age.

Other Person's Response: If people could never age by believing they won't age, then people, who believe in this power of the mind nonsense, would always look young.

My Reply: You're right.

Other Person's Response: I'll quote something you said earlier, and respond to it:

Quote:
There are people who struggle with ongoing, clinical depression, which renders them without the ability to love, and these people must live their lives like this. Some depressed people are resistant to treatment. I realize that depressed people do feel positive emotions, including love, on certain occasions. But, it's not much. If the most important thing here on Earth is to love one another, then why is god allowing people to struggle with mental illnesses that take away their ability to love?

Why isn't he using his divine healing powers to make sure that feelings of love remain intact, and can never be taken away? If love is so important to him, then it makes no sense why he isn't doing this. Perhaps god is a liar, and he really doesn't care about love, or all the suffering humanity goes through. Or, maybe, god doesn't exist, and these heavenly trips people go on are nothing more than hallucinations. This would mean these people aren't learning any life lessons from a real god, or real heavenly beings.


The majority of spiritual believers would probably come up with the lame old answer that it's all about karma, and life lessons regarding depression. But, truth be told. Either God isn't real, or he's a ruthless, psychopathic, sadist who takes great delight in the suffering of depressed people who are totally isolated, and disconnected from the world. Ordering such people to love is like telling a blind person to see. Yet, he sits there on his throne, doing what exactly? Watching everything going on from a crystal ball, while crying crocodile tears?

My Reply: I see what you mean.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 07:05 pm
@MozartLink,
File #6: More On My Philosophy (Part 7/26)

Other Person's Response: In regards to love, I heard our purpose here on Earth is to grow in love. But, if a person becomes completely devoid of love, due to hardships in his life, such as people mistreating him, then his soul will just vanish after the death of his physical body. That's because some love is needed for the soul to live on. So, if a person has no love at all, he won't reincarnate to further learn and grow, since his soul won't live on to reincarnate into a new body.

My Reply: God, and these heavenly beings, would've already been aware of this since the very beginning, given they're all-knowing beings who can see into the future. That means they would've prevented such a terrible fate by not having those souls, who'd become completely devoid of love on Earth, to be sent to Earth. These souls would've instead remained in heaven, where they can experience all the love and joy they desire. It would be cruel, unloving, and unfair to just have these souls thrown into such a terrible fate.

Other Person's Response: If god, and these heavenly beings, were cruel and unloving, then they wouldn't be alive in the first place because some love would be needed to keep their souls alive.

My Reply: I'm not sure. I don't even know if this claim that unloving souls vanish is a true claim or not.

Other Person's Response: If unloving souls do vanish, then people who lose their ability to love, due to brain damage, mental illnesses, etc., would just die, and their souls wouldn't live on.

My Reply: I hope that's not the case.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your philosophy, when you have the thought that something is beautiful, worthwhile, or disgusting to you, that's the same thing as saying you have the thought that something matters to you?

My Reply: Yes. Once that thought makes you feel an emotion, that's the moment said thing is beautiful, worthwhile, or disgusting to you (matters to you).

Other Person's Response: You say apathy is no way to live or be an artist. But, if you told an apathetic person that, it wouldn't matter to him anyway.

My Reply: Correct. Still, an apathetic existence is a life devoid of any positive experience.

Other Person's Response: As long as you rely on your emotions to motivate you (to make things matter to you), then you'll always find yourself giving up when you don't feel up to doing anything.

My Reply: That's just the way it's going to be because I have no motivation of my own, and neither am I convinced that we can have a motivation of our own. I think we have to rely on our emotions to motivate us. There was one time I felt very motivated to work out at the gym. I was working out like crazy, since I was having such a good time. But, that feeling of motivation soon wore out, and I was rendered into a completely relaxed mood. I couldn't work out anymore, since I was so relaxed. Physically, I could keep going. But, mentally, I couldn't.

If I had motivation of my own, then I could keep going, regardless of my mood state. People who do keep going, regardless of their mood state, might not be having any motivation of their own, and are doing nothing more than just dragging themselves along. It would be no different than a person forcing himself to get out of bed when he's apathetic, and nothing matters to him. Just because he forced himself out of bed, and did things with his life, doesn't mean he was motivated through his intellect/character. Regardless of how much people claim they have motivation of their own, I can't trust them.

Other Person's Response: You say you have no motivation of your own, and that you must rely on your emotions to motivate you. Actually, you already do have your own motivation, and it would be your emotions. When you have motivational thoughts, and those thoughts make you feel emotions, you experience that motivation. So, you've created your own motivation through your thoughts and emotions, and that's what makes it your own motivation.

My Reply: Yes. But, I'm saying that my mindset alone can't allow me to experience motivation. My mindset has to make me feel emotions in order for me to be motivated.

Other Person's Response: When you say you're in a good or bad mood, is that the same thing as feeling positive or negative emotions?

My Reply: Yes. When I'm in a relaxed mood, I feel a relaxing positive emotion. When I'm in a miserable mood, I feel the negative emotion known as "misery." You get the idea.

Other Person's Response: You said that a person would be having a negative perspective if he had suicidal tendencies, and that this negative perspective would be a negative emotion the person is feeling. But, there are apathetic, and even happy people, who have suicidal tendencies. So, wouldn't they be having a negative perspective as well? I'd personally call that a negative perspective because it's simply not a good tendency to have.

My Reply: As for the happy people with suicidal tendencies, they'd have the thought that their act of suicide is good or beautiful, that thought would make them feel that way about it, and they'd experience it that way. So, the very fact it's a good or beautiful experience for them still means it's a positive experience for them. Thus, they're still having a positive perspective regarding their act of suicide.

For someone like you, you might be having a negative perspective regarding their suicide. Also, it would make no sense to say these happy, suicidal people are having a negative perspective regarding their suicide, when they're really having a positive perspective. It's like calling a person's feeling of hunger thirst, when it's not. You'd be putting the wrong label on that person's experience. It would also be like calling the chemical compound H20 some other type of chemical compound, such as CH4.

Other Person's Response: I agree. When something is a beautiful experience for someone, it would make no sense to say that thing is a horrible experience for that person. You'd be putting the wrong label on that person's experience.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: When apathetic people have suicidal tendencies, you're saying they wouldn't have the motivation to commit suicide, and that they'd be having an apathetic perspective regarding their suicide?

My Reply: Yes. But, they can still choose to commit suicide anyway because, like I said, you can still perform certain acts, gestures, and expressions, regardless of what type of experience you're having. For example, a completely apathetic person can still drag himself out of bed, regardless if it has no value or worth to him.

Other Person's Response: There are people who are happy about other things in their lives, have suicidal tendencies, but said thoughts of suicide don't cause them to feel any emotion at the moment, since they're feeling happy or excited about something else.

My Reply: Yes. So, that means they'd be experiencing something else in their lives as amazing or beautiful, since they feel happy about that particular thing or situation, while they'd be apathetic regarding their suicide, since they don't feel anything about it at the moment. So, you can be happy or sad in regards to one thing, and be apathetic towards another thing.

Other Person's Response: Your philosophy justifies the acts of criminals, since your philosophy says it would be a good thing for a criminal to commit a crime if he felt good about doing it.

My Reply: I don't have any sinister intentions when writing and sharing my philosophy. This has just been my personal experience, and my personal experience says positive emotions are the only things that make life good and beautiful.

Other Person's Response: Your philosophy is just switching things from thoughts and beliefs over to emotions. It's assumed that, if a person has the thought, or belief, that something is beautiful or disgusting, that this thought, or belief, is all that's needed to make said thing beautiful or disgusting from that person's perspective. But, your philosophy says it can only be the emotions these thoughts, or beliefs, make a person feel that allow things to be beautiful or disgusting from that person's perspective.

So, I don't think your philosophy changes things all that much, and I don't see how it's an immoral philosophy. I mean, if a psychopath harmed living things, then other people, who have thoughts of disgust about that deed, would just need to feel disgust in order for that deed to be disgusting to them. So, your philosophy just slightly changes things, and that's all it really does. Your philosophy isn't like the types of immoral philosophies that exist, such as Hitler's philosophy.

My Reply: Exactly. It's not like my philosophy says something, such as that certain innocent people are inferior, and need to be eradicated.

Other Person's Response: If any ordinary person just had a random, unwanted thought that came to him, such as that harming living things would be a beautiful thing, wouldn't that thought make him feel beauty about that?

My Reply: I think it has to be a genuine thought, and not just some random thought. So, genuine thoughts are what make us feel emotions (providing there's no factor, preventing genuine thoughts from making us feel emotions, such as certain mental illnesses). So, someone like a psychopath would have the genuine thought that it's a beautiful thing to harm living things, and that's why he'd feel beauty about that. But, ordinary people wouldn't have such genuine thoughts, which is why they wouldn't feel that way.

Other Person's Response: If the thought that harming living things was an unwanted thought in a person's mind, then he had the genuine thought that this harmful thought was unwanted, which would cause him to feel that it's unwanted.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If I was apathetic (emotionless), then I could still have an enlightened perspective, such as realizing a certain truth. That enlightened perspective would be an enlightening experience for me. But, it wouldn't be an emotion. Given this, why couldn't I also have a positive perspective/experience without my emotions?

My Reply: Well, that's a difference scenario because we can have certain experiences without our emotions, such as realizing certain truths, experiencing the delusions of a madman, having the intellectual experience of solving puzzles, etc. But, to have a positive perspective/experience, that can only be a positive emotion.

Other Person's Response: Is having a positive perspective the same thing as saying you're caring about someone or something in a positive way, a negative perspective being caring about someone or something in a negative way, and apathy being not caring about anything or anyone at all?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If a person had no motivation, he'd be apathetic, and I agree you can't have a positive or negative perspective when you're apathetic. So, a positive or negative perspective has to be a form of motivation, and that form of motivation would be our emotions.

My Reply: Correct. Emotions are a form of motivation, and you can't experience motivation when you don't feel motivated. So, feeling a positive or negative emotion=experiencing a positive or negative motivation=caring about someone or something in a positive or negative way=experiencing a positive or negative perspective.

Other Person's Response: You say having a positive perspective on life is important, since it's a vital and precious experience to have. I agree. But, positive perspectives don't always tell us the truth. For example, you could hear a pet make a certain noise, which reminds you of a certain Pokemon, and you perceive that pet as a beautiful Pokemon. Well, that pet wouldn't be a Pokemon. Neither on the outside, nor on the inside, since the pet doesn't look like a Pokemon, and neither does it have the personality of a Pokemon. Another example would be that you could see a certain situation as beautiful and worth pursuing, when it's really a horrible, dangerous situation that should be avoided. As you can see, our perspectives can sometimes be irrational, regardless if they're positive, negative, or apathetic.

My Reply: But, the whole point of life is to have positive perspectives to color our world in beauty, love, joy, and worth. However, I do agree that having a positive perspective that would benefit yourself, others, and keep yourself and others out of danger, should be preferred over ones that put yourself and others at risk.

Other Person's Response: If a person felt mentally fatigue, then he'd be experiencing mental fatigue. Thus, he'd perceive his world from a fatigue perspective.

My Reply: Yes. The same idea applies to emotions. When a person feels beauty, he's experiencing beauty, which means he perceives something as beautiful.

Other Person's Response: If emotions weren't triggered by thoughts of value or worth, and were triggered by other means, you're saying these emotions wouldn't be perceptions of value or worth?

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: You say that, since emotions make things matter to us, then they're how we love and how things have value and worth to us. But, then you say there are situations where emotions aren't the source of love and value. I'm confused. If emotions make things matter to us, then wouldn't they always be the source of value and love?

My Reply: Not always. In order to love someone, and in order for that person to have value and worth to you, then that person must matter to you. But, someone or something can matter to you, but not have any value and worth to you. Someone or something can also matter to you, but you don't love that said person or thing.

Other Person's Response: Are there other negative emotions you felt that didn't make anything in your life bad or horrible?

My Reply: Yes, and it would be a feeling of anxiety. The reason why the feeling of anxiety was nothing more than just a feeling was because the thought information that got converted into emotional form was nothing more than just an anxious thought. But, if I had the thought of something horrible, and that made me feel anxious, then I'm quite sure that feeling of anxiety would now be a horrible experience in my life.

Other Person's Response: Was there ever a positive emotion you felt that was a bad or horrible experience for you?

My Reply: No. Only my negative emotions can give me such an experience.

Other Person's Response: I see you're a hedonist who lives for happiness and joy. Different brains are wired differently. Some people love pain, some love pleasure, some love spicy foods, and some hate those mentioned things.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Since you said earlier that thoughts of beauty, horror, etc. take on an emotional form when they make us feel emotions, that means I could have a certain thought in regards to something, such as a flashlight. I could think to myself that this flashlight is artificial and beautiful. Once that thought triggers a positive emotion, I'd experience an artificial form of beauty in regards to that flashlight. Thus, the flashlight becomes artificially beautiful from my perspective. But, if another person believed the flashlight was mystical, rather than artificial, then that would cause him to experience a mystical form of beauty in regards to the flashlight, once that belief triggers a positive emotion.

My Reply: Correct. You can only experience those forms of beauty through positive emotions, and an artificial form of beauty is like a mechanical form of beauty, such as a beautiful battery, or robot, while a mystical form of beauty would be something, such as a beautiful fairy, or magical item.

Other Person's Response: Even if your philosophy was true, and nothing could have any value and worth to me without my positive emotions, I'd still live life anyway, just for the sake of living. I'd be there for my family, and wouldn't give up on my goals and dreams.

My Reply: Well, that would be no way to live, and such a way of life would be unacceptable. So, I think positive emotions are absolutely necessary.

Other Person's Response: While I'm on the topic of your packets, you've written all of these packets during your miserable struggles, which were triggered by negative thoughts and worries. If you could do all of that without your positive emotions, then you could have learned to compose, too. So, you shouldn't have given up composing, just because you didn't feel joy in doing it.

My Reply: When I do my favorite hobbies, such as playing video games, or learning to compose, I can't stand not having my positive emotions. I'll wait patiently for my positive emotions to return though. But, I'm not fine living most or my entire life without my positive emotions. In other words, my positive emotions have to return back to me within a reasonable time frame.

That, or my life must change for the better within a reasonable time frame, such as 1-2 years. I was willing to wait about 3 years to fully recover from this recent emotional crisis, as well as all my other miserable moments. This is because I knew I was recovering from them. But, in the event I lose my positive emotions, and notice I'm not recovering, that's when something needs to change within a reasonable time frame.

Other Person's Response: Imagine if someone said: "I acted like she was beautiful, and I had the thought in my mind she was beautiful to me. But, in reality, she wasn't beautiful to me." Another person might reply: "Well, you just need to change your mindset. Only then will she be beautiful to you." But, you're saying that his change of mindset wouldn't allow her to be beautiful to him, and that it can only be his feeling of beauty (a positive emotion) that can allow her to be beautiful to him?

My Reply: Yes. As long as he doesn't feel beautiful about her, due to a mental illness or other factor preventing him from feeling that way, then it's like he's still in the same scenario as before, regardless of his mindset.

Other Person's Response: You're wrong. Positive emotions are such trivial things. There are far more important things in life.

My Reply: I don't agree. Our emotions create our whole entire mental atmosphere, whether that atmosphere be something beautiful, joyful, hell, horrible, loving, or disgusting. During my worst miserable moments, I was there physically with my family. But, mentally, I was not. I was in complete darkness, completely separated from all beauty and joy. But, the moment I fully recovered from these miserable moments is the moment all the beauty and joy returned. So, mentally, it was like I was brought back home with my family again. That's how powerful and profound emotions are. They can either make your life a living hell, or a living paradise.

Other Person's Response: My emotions don't make me suffer, or make my life a living hell. It's what I think that does.

My Reply: How we suffer is when we experience horror, tragedy, misery, or despair. Since negative emotions are that experience, then negative emotions are how we suffer. Buddhists talk about suffering, how it's no good, and how it should be avoided. Since negative emotions are suffering, then they're no good and should be avoided.

Other Person's Response: Our emotions do not create our atmosphere. We create our own atmosphere.

My Reply: I don't think we do. We as human beings are like the paintbrush, and our emotions are the colors. Without the colors (emotions), then just using a paintbrush alone will not color our lives. We paint our lives through our ways of thinking. But, we need the colors to do so. In addition, our emotions not only color our world, but they also color our very being. They make us beautiful, horrible, morbid, tragic, or disgusting people.

Other Person's Response: I see what you're saying when you say people need to focus more on their inner experience. So many people focus on the outside, and not the inside. You already gave an example of this earlier when you said people would be judging by your actions, gestures, and tones that your life is still beautiful and worthwhile without your positive emotions. But, they wouldn't be realizing your inner experience. I think these people are doing the same thing to themselves. They're judging by their actions, gestures, and tones that their lives are still beautiful and worthwhile without their positive emotions. But, they wouldn't be realizing their inner experience.

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: When a depressed person tells you he's not happy, regardless of his actions, tones, and gestures, he already realizes his own inner experience. So, if he tells you things are still beautiful, good, and worthwhile to him without his positive emotions, he'd still be realizing his inner experience, which means what he's saying is true. So, there must be more beauty, goodness, and worth to life than positive emotions.

My Reply: I just can't be too sure yet if there is more beauty and worth to life than positive emotions. Even though that depressed person realizes he's not happy, he could still be in denial when it comes to beauty, goodness, and worth. People would say things, such as that love, beauty, goodness, and worth are far more important than happiness. Since they're so important, then maybe people are in denial, and refuse to accept that positive emotions are the only real source of those things.

Other Person's Response: People, without their positive emotions, don't need to look within to know if they're experiencing beauty, love, or joy. If they claim their lives are beautiful, or that they're experiencing love and joy in the absence of their positive emotions, then they already are experiencing love, joy, and a beautiful life.

My Reply: It doesn't matter. These people could still be in denial of their experience when they claim that there's more beauty, love, and joy than positive emotions.

Other Person's Response: I have a mental illness that renders me with the inability to feel emotions. I just go through my day, feeling apathetic. Even though I display a flat expression, I can assure you that being there for my family, and contributing to the world, matters to me. It's something truly experienced as beautiful in my life.

My Reply: The very fact that you display a flat expression is enough, right there, to say none of it matters to you because, if it truly mattered to you, you'd display a motivated expression. Remember what I said before. I said, when you are motivated, that's the same thing as something mattering to you. So, you're delusional and in denial. You believe your mindset is enough to make things matter to you, and give you beautiful experiences.

At this point, you might change your expression to a motivated one, and claim things matter to you now. But, your expression wouldn't match your mental state. You'd still be flat on the inside, which means nothing matters to you, and you'd be doing nothing more than forcing expressions that don't express your inner apathy.

Other Person's Response: So, you're basically saying that people, without their positive emotions, are doing positive things with their lives, and are convinced they're having an inner positive experience, when they're really not?

My Reply: Correct. People might claim they've honed into their inner self, and that they're having a true, inner, positive experience, with no need for their positive emotions. But, I think they're just deluding themselves.

Other Person's Response: I personally think depressed, miserable people, who display positive tones and expressions, are truly expressing their mental state. There are famous, genius artists who struggled with depression, and contributed works of art to the world. I think it's naive to say they were just dragging themselves through life, or "just getting things done."

My Reply: Well, I don't agree. I think these tones and expressions have become so natural to them that they're falsely convinced they express their mental state. If a miserable, unhappy person smiled much of his life, he might be convinced he's happy, when he's really not. So, I think people just get so used to their misery, depression, or apathy, that they eventually delude themselves into thinking they're having a positive experience in life, when they're not.

Another example would be Buddhists. They claim another form of happiness exists besides positive emotions. Through their practice and meditation, they will claim they've acquired this form of happiness. But, I don't think such happiness exists. I think positive emotions are the only way to be happy, and other people are just deluding themselves.

Other Person's Response: Since you've had very horrible experiences through your struggles, I agree people shouldn't judge by your behavior, and conclude your experiences aren't all that bad.

My Reply: Yes. A person can act normal, but have much inner suffering and turmoil. Also, if I told other people I've had emotional traumas and miserable moments, some people would treat it in a casual manner and say something, such as:

"Well, that's completely normal. It's a normal, human experience, and we all have horrible moments."

But, what these people don't realize is just how abnormal of an experience this was for me. They are judging it as normal, when it wasn't. For example, those crippled nightmares I talk about were far from normal experiences. People will never know just how horrible these experiences were, since people have their experiences, and I have my own. Thus, only I know just how horrible they were.

Other Person's Response: You describe those horrible states in your nightmares as crippled states. What do you mean by that?

My Reply: They were very horrible, unhealthy states. Thus, I'd describe them as ill, or crippled states. If a person was very sick, then he'd be in a very ill, or crippled, physical condition. The mind can also get ill. So, during my miserable struggles, I wasn't well mentally. Thus, my life's experience became very horrible and ill/unhealthy.

Other Person's Response: Were those crippled states in your nightmares powerful experiences for you?

My Reply: Yes. They were powerful, altered states, completely different than the crippled states of my waking life. They were far more horrible experiences than the ones in my waking life.

Other Person's Response: What do you mean when you say the crippled states in your nightmares were completely different than the ones in your waking life?

My Reply: I mean they were whole new experiences.

Other Person's Response: Were the crippled states of your waking life normal, healthy experiences compared to the ones in your nightmares?

My Reply: Yes. Even though the crippled states of my waking life weren't normal, healthy experiences, if you were to compare them to the ones I've had in my nightmares, then they'd be normal, healthy experiences in comparison.

Other Person's Response: Just how horrible and abnormal were these crippled nightmare states for you?

My Reply: There's a normal feeling of physical ailment, such as feeling ill from the flu. The miserable, crippled states of my waking life would be akin to feeling very ill from the flu. But, if you felt deathly ill, then that's something much worse, and not normal. The crippled states in my nightmares would be akin to feeling deathly ill.

Other Person's Response: Those crippled nightmare states wouldn't have made you deathly ill though.

My Reply: You're right. But, they were still very horrible experiences.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy though, feeling physically ill is just a feeling, and doesn't give us any horrible, tragic, or disturbing experience. It can only be negative emotions that give us those experiences.

My Reply: Yes. Those crippled states I've had were literally horrible experiences, while feeling physically ill wouldn't be a horrible experience.

Other Person's Response: Can those crippled nightmare states be described as horrible feelings, or horrible moods?

My Reply: That just doesn't describe them because they were profound, powerful, altered states.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your miserable struggles, which you say were horribly unnatural experiences for you, it would've been thoughts of certain situations being horribly unnatural that gave you horribly unnatural experiences.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: I heard you've had some powerful, profound experiences in your nightmares (which were those horrible, crippled, mental states). If you ever obtained a Divine, positive experience (such as Divine Love, which was discussed earlier), do you think it can be a positive experience that's just as powerful and profound as those horrible, crippled states?

My Reply: It's impossible to imagine acquiring such a powerful, profound, positive experience in my normal, daily life. But, if I had a very powerful drug trip, where I had the most amazing, heavenly experience of my life, then it could be possible for me to have a positive experience that's just as powerful and profound as those crippled states.

Other Person's Response: There were horrible thoughts and worries that caused your misery, and that's why your misery was literally a horrible experience for you. That even includes the crippled states in your nightmares, since there were horrible subconscious thoughts and worries triggering them.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: You could depict how horrible those crippled nightmare states were through a work of art. Some people depict horrible forms of suffering through artwork.

My Reply: I don't think any anime or work of art can depict how horrible they were for me. This was a whole new experience, and something on a whole new level. No dungeons, dragons, or pits of hell can depict it. Besides, I wouldn't want to create such artwork if I was an artist. I'd want to create things that convey awesome emotions. I don't want to express negative emotions, such as misery and agony.

Other Person's Response: You say you don't want to express negative emotions through art. But, what if doing so made you feel happy?

My Reply: Then I'd do it.

Other Person's Response: You say that your melodies are awesome, which means you'd have to perceive them as awesome, and you've been saying your melodies are awesome, even without your positive emotions. So, I disagree with your philosophy, which says that positive emotions are the only way to perceive moments, things, and situations as awesome.

My Reply: I realized I said there were positive emotions I felt during my miserable struggles that I could detect, and that there were many moments during these struggles where I didn't feel any positive emotion. But, perhaps there were positive emotions I've felt during those latter moments, and they were just so small in intensity that I couldn't detect them. This would've allowed me to perceive my melodies as awesome at an extremely low intensity. But, feeling positive emotions at this intensity level would only allow me to have positive experiences so small that I can't detect them. It's nowhere near the sufficient level I need.

Other Person's Response: So, perceiving beauty and greatness, at a higher intensity than what you'd have during your miserable struggles, would give you the great and beautiful experiences you need?

My Reply: Yes. When my misery is gone, and my full capacity to feel positive emotions is restored, I'm able to have the awesome, beautiful, good, worthwhile experiences I need in my life.

Other Person's Response: Perhaps your mindset alone can allow you to perceive beauty, horror, etc. in the absence of your emotions. For example, if you still think that something is beautiful in the absence of your positive emotions, you'd still be able to perceive said thing as beautiful. But, it would be a perception that's at an intensity level so small that you can't detect it. It's only once your thought of beauty makes you feel beauty that you'd be perceiving beauty at a much higher intensity level, since that feeling of beauty is an intense perception of beauty. So, emotions give us the intense perception of beauty, horror, etc. we need, while our mindset alone can only give us an extremely small level of that perception.

My Reply: You could be right, and drugs would certainly enhance this, since they allow you to feel positive emotions at an extreme intensity, far greater than what you could achieve normally. The more intense of a beautiful experience you have, the better your life is. That's why I say taking drugs would bring your life the best experiences you could have. That is, if you don't have any bad trips from taking drugs. If you have bad trips, then any negative thought you have during the trip would make you feel negative emotions at an extreme intensity, which would give you an extreme experience of horror, tragedy, etc.

Other Person's Response: I can see why your mindset alone wouldn't give you a sufficient experience of beauty, love, or worth in your life, since it can only give you an extremely small level of that experience. You'd need your positive emotions to have the sufficient level of that experience.

My Reply: Yes. In order to have a sufficient positive experience, I'd need my positive emotions. Not only do I need my positive emotions, but they must also be at a sufficient intensity level because, if I'm only feeling positive emotions at a low intensity, then that's still not giving me the sufficient positive experiences I need.

Other Person's Response: Given that you're able to still determine whether certain things are good, bad, beautiful, or disgusting in the absence of your emotions, this must mean you can perceive things as good, bad, beautiful, or disgusting in the absence of your emotions because, without that perception, then you wouldn't be able to make such assessments/determinations.

My Reply: If this is really the case, then, like I said, our mindset alone can only give us an extremely small level of that perception. It's the emotions which give us a much more intense level of that perception.

Other Person's Response: If your mindset alone can give you a beautiful experience, and said experience is just so small in intensity, that you can't detect it, then perhaps there's a way to increase that intensity. That way, you'll no longer require positive emotions to give you an intense experience of beauty, when you can have this intense experience through your mindset alone. Perhaps developing yourself as an individual would achieve this, since it's giving you, the individual, a more intense, beautiful experience.

My Reply: I'm not sure if that's possible.

Other Person's Response: You say that, during your miserable struggles (which were induced by negative thoughts and worries), works of art were dead and meaningless to you. That means you perceived them as dead and meaningless. But, if a feeling of misery wore off for a moment, then that would allow you to perceive them as beautiful through your mindset alone (providing that your mindset alone can give you a perception of beauty). From there, if that thought/mindset made you feel beauty, then that would give you a greater perception of beauty during a brief moment of your miserable struggles.

My Reply: Yes. During my miserable struggles, I had few, brief moments of feeling positive emotions, which were actually mixed in with my misery. So, it was a mixed emotional experience for me. But, during this recent miserable struggle, my positive emotions were completely shut off, since this was the absolute worst of all my miserable struggles.

Other Person's Response: I think your perception of great and beautiful works of art being morbidly meaningless during your miserable struggles is an irrational perception, since these works of art meet the technical qualifications to be meaningful, great, and beautiful. Yet, you'd be perceiving them as nothing great, beautiful, or meaningful.

My Reply: I couldn't help but have these morbid thoughts and feelings during my miserable struggles. It was something I couldn't control.

Other Person's Response: Buddhism is all about giving up our selfish desires, and Buddhists say the self doesn't exist. It's an illusion. Therefore, there's no reason for you to be concerned about your own happiness, or whether your life is beautiful and worth living, since that's focusing on your self, which doesn't exist.

My Reply: I would address my own self as "I," such as if I said: "I want to drink something." If I addressed the self of another person, then I'd say: "Did you want to drink something?" But, if I am to treat myself as though I don't exist, then I might as well treat other human beings as though they don't exist. I might as well not even address them. It's absurd to regard my own self as though it doesn't exist, just as how it's absurd to regard other people as though they don't exist. So, I still have every reason to have selfish desires.

Other Person's Response: Speaking of selfishness, have you ever felt happy about giving to others, rather than just from getting the things you want?

My Reply: Yes, which means I had thoughts that giving to others was something good and worthwhile. That thought made me feel happy, which allowed me to experience that moment as good and worthwhile.

Other Person's Response: I heard, from spiritual believers, that we are eternal, spiritual beings who are connected, and that we have a higher self that transcends the ego.

My Reply: I'm undecided on controversial topics, and what you just said is controversial. So, I'm undecided on that.

Other Person's Response: I think negative emotions do make our lives worthwhile, since they do motivate us.

My Reply: Negative emotions only make our lives worth living for in a negative way. Let me give an example. If you were in a dangerous situation, where you felt the negative emotion known as fear, that panic would allow you to perceive that situation as being bad. We'd also say this feeling of panic allows you to perceive it as being worthwhile to escape.

But, we wouldn't say that, just because the panic allows you to perceive it as worthwhile to escape, that it allows you to perceive it as being a good thing to escape. In order to perceive it as being a good or beautiful thing to escape, then you'd need to feel a positive emotion. Let me give one last example here. If someone felt angry, and said in a violent (negative) tone of voice:

"It's worth it to punch that guy's face!"

Then this would be an example of a negative form of worth. That angry person's life wouldn't be anything beautiful, or good, during his moment of unhappiness. But, he still perceives it as being worthwhile to punch that guy's face in. For anyone else to display a positive tone of voice, and tell that angry person:

"Hey, at least your life was something worthwhile because punching that guy's face was something worth doing!"

Then that would be the wrong attitude to have, since such an attitude implies that this was something positive (good/beautiful) in that angry person's life, when it wasn't. Now, if this person felt happy to punch that guy's face in, then this would be an example of a positive form of worth. Therefore, the quote above, expressed in a positive attitude, would apply.

Other Person's Response: So, even though negative emotions do make things worthwhile for us, since they do motivate us to do certain things, it's still no way to live or be an artist without positive emotions?

My Reply: Correct. That all goes back to my example with the angry, miserable customer. Sure, it might've been worthwhile in his eyes to throw something on the floor out of misery and rage. But, that customer was having nothing but a negative experience, which is why a life without positive emotions is no way to live or be an artist.

Life's like a party, which means we need to have the positive experiences. If you were at a party, and it was nothing but a miserable, unhappy moment for you, then that was no party for you, since the party has been spoiled and ruined for you. Likewise, if you live a miserable, unhappy life, then that's no life either, since your life has been spoiled and ruined for you.

Other Person's Response: In order for a feeling of panic to be a perception of a certain thing or situation being bad, that feeling of panic would have to be triggered by a thought of a certain thing or situation being bad, wouldn't it?

My Reply: Yes.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 07:06 pm
@MozartLink,
File #6: More On My Philosophy (Part 8/26)

Other Person's Response: A miserable, or unhappy composer, who composes, is the truly great composer who's living the truly beautiful life. You're wrong about this whole idea that positive emotions are the only beautiful way to be a composer.

My Reply: I think it's a joke to somehow think that would be a beautiful way of life and being an artist.

Other Person's Response: To me, it's a joke for someone to believe that positive emotions are the only beautiful things in life, and that this is the only thing an artist has to rely on to make his artistic endeavors something positive.

My Reply: You have your way of seeing things, and I have my way of seeing things. Let's just leave it at that.

Other Person's Response: What icon would you use to symbolize your worldview?

My Reply: It would be a wild, mystical animal with mystical energy surrounding it. This is because positive emotions are wild and free. They're also mystical because they're the Divine Light within us. Since I love anime and cartoons, then I could use a Pokemon as the icon. I'm also going to use another icon.

I'd be a fruit in a tropical paradise, since that symbolizes something beautiful, joyful, natural, wild, and free of misery and unhappiness. I'm not the image of the intellect, fighter, or warrior who just carries on in a life of misery and unhappiness. For example, I wouldn't be the image of a miserable, unhappy composer still carrying on, and accomplishing his musical dream.

Other Person's Response: If positive emotions were the only things that could make life beautiful, that would be a meaningless existence.

My Reply: If positive emotions are what make life beautiful, then they're what make life meaningful. It's a contradiction to say that one's life is beautiful and meaningless.

Other Person's Response: If positive emotions were the only things that could make things good and beautiful, then we wouldn't have a functioning society.

My Reply: Now, we do have a functioning society, despite the fact that positive emotions are the only things that make life good and beautiful. This is because of their ignorance and denial of the real truth. For example, if a loved one was going to die of cancer, but the parents of this terminal patient were in denial of this truth, then that denial would keep the parents functioning and living their lives to the fullest. But, knowing the real truth might be devastating, and have other negative impacts. It might cause the parents to become dysfunctional in life.

Other Person's Response: If positive emotions were the only things that make life good and beautiful, then it might as well be a good thing to get drunk and fall off a building if we felt a positive emotion from that.

My Reply: It would be good from the perspective of whoever felt good about that.

Other Person's Response: Surely, there must be more to life than positive emotions.

My Reply: Unlike the commonly held notion of finding value in our lives through intellect and strength of character, I think life was all about basking and bathing in a sea of peaceful, beautiful, joyful emotions. So, instead of looking at something and thinking to yourself that it's beautiful, despite your feelings of misery or unhappiness, it was all about feeling positive emotions about that thing, and just losing yourself in that emotional state. You just let that emotion take you away on a beautiful journey, so to speak.

Other Person's Response: Without the bad, there could be no good, and, without suffering, there can be no joy.

My Reply: If that's the case, then only a little bit of bad and suffering would be needed for good and joy to exist. That means only a little bit of suffering in my life would be needed, and not all those horrible, miserable moments I've been through.

Other Person's Response: Without unhappiness, there can be no happiness.

My Reply: Well, can a person still have the experience of sight, never having experienced blindness, and can a person still hear, never having been deaf? Of course. That means the experience of happiness can still exist, even if no unhappiness has ever been experienced. The same idea applies to love, beauty, goodness, and worth. Those things can still exist, even if the opposite never existed. That means there's no need for bad, disgust, hate, etc.

Other Person's Response: But, if you've suffered much misery throughout your life, then that should give you a more profound joy, once said misery is all gone. That's because you'd no longer take joy for granted, and, thus, it becomes a more profound experience for you now.

My Reply: Actually, I don't think I've gained a more profound joy, having been through all those miserable struggles. I just find myself back to my usual, casual, happy self.

Other Person's Response: Let's pretend a baby was born without any physical pain or negative emotions. That baby would still be able to feel physical pleasure, and he'd still be able to feel positive emotions, such as love and joy. That shows love, joy, and physical pleasure can exist, even when no hate, unhappiness, or physical pain has ever been experienced. So, the experience of peace and happiness can exist, even when no suffering has ever been experienced.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Since sight can exist without blindness, and since hearing can exist without deafness, then you're saying positive experiences can exist without negative ones, or apathy?

My Reply: Yes. One can know positivity without negativity, just as how one can know sight and hearing without blindness and deafness.

Other Person's Response: In regards to emotions, if I felt sad, and acted out on that emotion, I'd display acts of sadness. If I felt rage, and acted out on that emotion, I'd display acts of rage. If I felt like I was a certain awesome character (such as Superman), and I acted out on that emotion, then I'd act like Superman.

My Reply: Yes. Emotions are like alter egos. That means, if you were a guy, and you felt like you were a certain female character, you'd act like her, if you acted out on that emotion.

Other Person's Response: If you had the choice, would you choose to feel rage or fear?

My Reply: I'd choose fear because rage puts me at risk of harming myself or someone else. Having a fear of someone would simply render me backing away from that person, while feeling rage towards that person would put me at risk of harming that person. That would get me in trouble. But, fear wouldn't get me in such trouble.

Other Person's Response: You say in this packet that, during an emotional crisis, the slightest things make you feel negative emotions, and it's these negative emotions which make things bother you. So, if someone name called you during your emotional crisis, such as him saying you're a disgusting piece of ****, would you automatically feel that way about yourself?

My Reply: Yes, and I can't help but feel that way during an emotional crisis. But, when I fully recover from an emotional crisis, I rise above their name calling and mistreatment, since it can no longer get to me, or define me.

Other Person's Response: But, you say you still feel fear, even when you're fully recovered from an emotional crisis. So, if someone displayed a potentially threatening attitude towards you, that would cause you to feel fear.

My Reply: Yes. But, I wouldn't feel angry, disgust, misery, etc. Those are emotions I only have during an emotional crisis, such as during this devastating worry I've had, which I talk about throughout this packet.

Other Person's Response: There are dangerous, badass characters in movies who feel negative emotions much of the time, such as feelings of fear and rage. Even Rocky Balboa felt fear during his boxing matches.

My Reply: If you're going to be a dangerous, badass character, then it's best to feel positive emotions, such as feeling awesome and magnificent. Like I said, it's best to have positive experiences, and not negative ones.

Other Person's Response: You always talk about how we just need positive emotions. I think we need both our intellect, and our positive emotions.

My Reply: Yes. After all, it's thinking positive that gives you positive experiences (positive emotions). Also, when making a decision, you'd need to use your intellect. But, at the same time, you'd need to feel positive emotions when making this decision, since it would allow you to experience the decision making process as something positive.

Other Person's Response: When you say that an apathetic person's life has no beauty or goodness without his positive emotions, is that the same thing as saying nothing can be important to him?

My Reply: Correct. He'd just have the idea that things are important to him, when they're really not. Negative emotions do make things important to us. But, in a negative way. Positive emotions make things important to us in positive ways. Apathy is where nothing is important to us one way or the other.

Other Person's Response: Sad, morbid, annoying, tragic, superb, and wonderful are value judgments, aren't they?

My Reply: Yes. That means emotions are the only real source of those things, too.

Other Person's Response: Perceiving value isn't the same thing as valuing something.

My Reply: When you judge something as beautiful, that's no different than valuing that thing as beautiful, and vice versa. Now, judging something as beautiful is the same thing as perceiving that thing as beautiful. This means judging something as beautiful, perceiving something as beautiful, and valuing something as beautiful is all the same thing. I should also add in experiencing something as beautiful.

Other Person's Response: I'm still not convinced that perceiving value is the same thing as valuing something.

My Reply: Let me put it this way for you then. When you value something as beautiful, that is a mental state, and mental states are experiences. Therefore, when you value something as beautiful, that's the same thing as experiencing beauty. Experiencing beauty is then the same thing as perceiving beauty which, in turn, is the same thing as judging something as beautiful.

Other Person's Response: Nope. Still not convincing me!

My Reply: When a person says he sees no value in life, that's the same thing as saying he doesn't value life. Personally, it makes no sense to me how someone could think that a person, who sees no value in anything, can value something. You need to see (perceive) value in regards to something in order to value that thing. Since emotions are perceptions of value, then emotions are how we value things.

Other Person's Response: So, when a person sees no beauty in life, that's the same thing as saying life isn't beautiful to him?

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: You said that the only way a person's life can be beautiful and worth living to him is if he experiences it as beautiful and worth living. Since perception and experience are the same thing, then perceiving one's life as beautiful and worth living is the only way to make it beautiful and worth living to him/her.

My Reply: Correct. A person's perception (experience) is everything. It determines whether one's life is a horrible hell or a beautiful paradise. That's why positive emotions are everything, since they're how we perceive things in our lives as beautiful and worth living for.

Other Person's Response: You're saying thoughts and beliefs must impact us in beautiful or horrific ways to give us the experience of beauty and horror. You're saying emotions are how thoughts and beliefs impact our lives, and not the thoughts and beliefs themselves.

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: Some people would say that thoughts and beliefs themselves allow us to perceive, but not experience things, like beauty, good, bad, horror, disgust, etc. It can only be our emotions which allow us to experience those things.

My Reply: Since perception and experience are the same thing, and since thoughts and beliefs themselves do not allow us to experience any of those things you've mentioned, that means they also don't allow us to perceive any of those things.

Other Person's Response: If you think a certain smell (such as the smell of a skunk) is unpleasant, then the smell literally becomes an unpleasant smell for you. If you think it's pleasant, then it literally becomes pleasant for you. Those thoughts literally transform the scent into a pleasant or unpleasant scent for you. The same idea applies to your emotions. By thinking your emotions are literally beautiful or horrible experiences, you transform them into beautiful or horrible experiences for yourself.

My Reply: I think emotions really are beautiful and horrible experiences. I don't think it's just our thoughts creating our personal experience here.

Other Person's Response: If the only way to like something is to feel a positive emotion about it, then is the only way to dislike something would be to feel a negative emotion about it?

My Reply: Yes. But, having no emotions would render you in a position where you could neither like nor dislike.

Other Person's Response: Telling depressed people their lives are nothing beautiful without their positive emotions might drive them to suicide.

My Reply: My intention isn't to drive depressed or miserable people to suicide though. I wish to express and share my personal views. But, at the same time, I don't want to be driving people to suicide in doing so. Even if I was happy and enjoying my life, I'd still feel bad if I drove someone to suicide. Maybe it's best if I just share my views to mental health professionals and therapists, rather than struggling, depressed people. If there are struggling people who can handle my views, then I'll share them to these people.

Other Person's Response: I want you to destroy this idea that depressed or miserable people's lives aren't beautiful without their positive emotions. Their lives are still beautiful because they're precious human beings.

My Reply: Like I said before. Nothing will destroy this idea except a new personal experience that convinces me.

Other Person's Response: Clinical depression is not an emotional state or a bad mood.

My Reply: Even if it's not, it still takes away our ability to feel positive emotions.

Other Person's Response: I know you've shared your philosophy with other struggling people, and you were glad you shared it. Are you some sort of sadist who wants people to be driven to suicide?

My Reply: No. I'm glad because people would finally understand me and my whole predicament. I just want people to understand is all. If I give a compelling argument that supports my philosophy, then I'd be glad, since it really makes people understand why positive emotions are all we have to make our lives good and beautiful.

If other people were convinced of my philosophy, that would likely make them angry at the absurdity of life. After all, it would be an absurd, cruel joke of an existence if positive emotions really were the only things that make life beautiful. I'm angry at the absurdity of life as well. So, if other people are angry at something, and I'm angry at that same thing, that puts us in the same boat.

Other Person's Response: If you were glad, does that mean you felt glad?

My Reply: Yes. But, I can't feel glad now, since I don't have my positive emotions, due to a worry.

Other Person's Response: What if someone had to live most or his entire life without his positive emotions?

My Reply: Life is meant to be a happy party for us. So, it would be like he's coming to a miserable, unhappy party. I think that person should just leave the door, since there's nothing beautiful, joyful, and worthwhile about the party. The point I'm trying to make with this party analogy is that he should just leave this life if he had to live like that. He should commit suicide.

He shouldn't care how much grief it causes his family, since his own happiness is the only thing that makes his life good and beautiful. Other people should understand his predicament, rather than frowning upon him and name calling him. I'm not saying I'm going to end my life if I lose my positive emotions. I'll do my best to give my life that beauty, goodness, and worth back again.

Other Person's Response: I could also give a different analogy besides your party analogy. I could say life is like a store, and we came here to get something (the positive emotions). That's the only item we need, since it's the only one that can give beauty and goodness to our lives. So, if that item's out of stock, we just leave the store. We wait for the item to return first. If it doesn't, then we leave.

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: So, even though your life wouldn't be beautiful without your positive emotions, that doesn't mean you're going to end your life? Often times, when people say their lives aren't worth living, they commit suicide.

My Reply: I'm not going to end my life. I'd still stick around and get the help I need, even though my life is stripped of any beauty and goodness.

Other Person's Response: If you lived your life without your positive emotions, then it would be like you're just waiting patiently for your positive emotions to return, rather than living a life that's actually beautiful?

My Reply: Correct. It would be like I'm trapped and waiting patiently to be set free one day.

Other Person's Response: According to you, experiencing beauty is how things become beautiful to us. That experience of beauty would be a positive emotion, and it would be like having a surge of a divine life force flowing through your mental being. You don't feel it through your physical body. You just feel it in your mind. But, when that surge wears off for an individual, you're saying nothing can be beautiful to that individual?

My Reply: Correct. That surge must be kept going if you want things to be beautiful to you. It would be like your soul is set ablaze and, once the fire wears off, the beauty is gone.

Other Person's Response: If you were happy all the time, you'd be someone who's out of reality. You'd be like a Disney character!

My Reply: Well, the happiest life is the only greatest life one can live.

Other Person's Response: If life was a utopia, where people were happy all the time, I wouldn't want to live that life. It would be like a fluffy, lofty, Disney world.

My Reply: It's either that, or a life filled with nothing but negativity. Or, a an apathetic existence. Also, positive emotions not only allow us to have one, particular positive experience in our lives (such as the experience of a beautiful, Disney paradise), but they give us all other positive experiences as well. For example, if you felt great from being at a heavy metal concert, then that positive emotion would be giving you the experience of hardcore, awesome beauty or joy. So, if life were a utopia, where people were happy all the time, you might see one group of people who are living a beautiful, Disney paradise, since that's their form of joy. Or, you could see another group living out an awesome, beautiful, heavy metal lifestyle, since that would be their joyful experience.

Other Person's Response: Apathy, for me, is a hellish experience.

My Reply: Negative emotions are the hellish experience, positive emotions are the heavenly experience, and apathy is neither a hellish nor heavenly experience.

Other Person's Response: Your philosophy also says that emotions are the only way things can be significant and important to us?

My Reply: Yes. In order for something to be beautiful or disgusting to you, it must be important to you, significant to you, or matter to you. Actually, I think if something's important to you, that's the same thing as it being significant to you, and mattering to you. But, I think it's possible for something to be significant to you, but not beautiful or disgusting to you. Either way, emotions are still the only way things can be significant/important/matter to us.

Other Person's Response: So, does that mean it's possible to have the thought that something is significant, but nothing good or beautiful, and that thought makes you feel a positive emotion that doesn't possess the quality of beauty or goodness, but possesses the quality of significance?

My Reply: Yes. If the thought made you feel a positive emotion, then that positive emotion wouldn't make that thing in your life experienced as good or beautiful. But, it would allow you to experience that thing as significant. In which case, I wouldn't describe it as a positive emotion, since I define a positive experience as the experience of beauty, goodness, magnificence, etc. So, it would just be an emotion you're feeling. The same thing applies if negative emotions you felt weren't horrible experiences, and weren't experiences of horror, disgust, tragedy, etc. They'd simply be emotions.

Other Person's Response: Is it possible to just have a thought, that thought isn't a thought of beauty, disgust, horror, goodness, worth, etc., or a thought that something is significant, but that thought makes you feel an emotion?

My Reply: I don't think so.

Other Person's Response: Is the only way something can have worth to you is if it's important/significant to you?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: I know you said earlier that thoughts and beliefs aren't the real things, and that they're just ideas of things. So, that would have to mean they're not the real divine state either. Rather, they're just the idea of the divine state. So, you're right. Learning and growth, in of itself, can't be any real divine state for our souls. It's that heavenly bliss, which is the divine state for our souls.

My Reply: Correct. Heavenly bliss would even include feelings of love, since love is a positive emotion, and heavenly bliss is positive emotions.

Other Person's Response: What do you mean by "divine state?"

My Reply: It would be a mental state that allows us to experience love, beauty, goodness, magnificence, etc. in our lives. That mental state would be our positive emotions. That means positive emotions are divine states.

Other Person's Response: During your miserable moments, you said nothing could be beautiful and worthwhile to you. Is it because you didn't have your divine state (positive emotions)?

My Reply: Correct. During my miserable moments, it would be like having muck all over my very being, preventing me from experiencing beauty, love, and joy. Once all that negativity has been cleared away out of my life--that is, once I've fully recovered from these miserable moments, that's when I regained my positive emotions. Thus, I regained that experience of love, joy, and beauty in my life again.

Other Person's Response: I don't think positive emotions are divine. They're such trivial things.

My Reply: What you see as trivial I see as divine and absolutely necessary. In this case, it would be the positive emotions because I think they're divine and absolutely necessary to our existence.

Other Person's Response: Your entire philosophy is one, big lie!

My Reply: I'm just speaking purely from my own personal experience. Whether other people think it's the truth or not is up to them.

Other Person's Response: Just as how a person can still determine he'd be more hungry for one food than another food, even though he's not hungry, a person can still determine that something is more beautiful to him than something else without his positive emotions, even though nothing is beautiful to him. They're just ideas these people would be having in their minds. But, they're not the actual experiences that make the person hungry or make a particular thing beautiful to the individual.

My Reply: Correct. Thoughts and beliefs alone can't give us hunger and thirst, just how they can't make things, moments, and situations beautiful, good, horrible, better, worse, or disgusting to us.

Other Person's Response: If someone struggled with a life of unhappiness, but obtained something out of his struggle that made him happy, then wasn't his struggle worthwhile and beautiful?

My Reply: If a person has struggled with unhappiness much of his life, then much of his life has been wasted, regardless if he obtained something out of his struggle that made him happy.

Other Person's Response: I know you've learned a life lesson from all these miserable struggles you've had. You've learned to stop worrying, and to keep your thoughts healthy. You've also learned just how vital and precious positive emotions are. But, do you think it was worth all that suffering, just to learn these life lessons?

My Reply: No. It would be like earning a crumb after having gone through years of torment that stripped your life of all beauty, goodness, joy, and worth. I would've expected to earn something grand after all the suffering I've been through, which would be an everlasting experience of beauty, goodness, etc. that's profound and intense beyond anything imaginable.

Other Person's Response: What if, let's pretend, you did acquire this grand, magnificent, everlasting experience through your whole struggle, would all that suffering be pointless if there was another way to obtain that grand experience?

My Reply: Yes. All that suffering would be pointless, since there would've been a happy, fun way of acquiring that grand, beautiful experience. As long as there is a happy, fun alternative to things, then the other alternative of suffering and misery is just pointless agony.

Other Person's Response: If you gained some compassion towards others through your struggles, then I think it was worth all that suffering.

My Reply: Even if I did gain some compassion through my struggles, I could've gained that compassion a happy, healthy way. Or, I could've gained it through a struggle that wasn't as horrible as the miserable struggles I've been through, and said level of compassion gained could've been greater than what I would've obtained through my miserable struggles.

Other Person's Response: I heard heaven grants our every wish. So, you could've wished for the most powerful, profound compassion you could possibly experience in heaven, which means you wouldn't have to suffer to obtain any greater level of compassion.

My Reply: That's right. That means I wouldn't have to go through these miserable struggles that wasted my life.

Other Person's Response: God allowing all your suffering did make you more self-dependent, since you had to find ways to help yourself, rather than relying on god to heal you.

My Reply: Yes. But, that, alone, wasn't worthy of all that suffering.

Other Person's Response: I completely understand. When you've suffered from all these miserable struggles, they were very negative experiences for you, and you could no longer see anything as good, beautiful, or worth living for. It would be like if someone was miserable, due to the loss of a loved one, and he no longer sees beauty in life. Now that you've been through all that suffering, you wish you would've obtained the reward of seeing goodness, beauty, and worth in things on a whole new level that's everlasting, and powerful and profound beyond your wildest dreams.

My Reply: Yes. It would've been wonderful if I acquired all positive experiences, including the experience of love, that are powerful and profound beyond anything imaginable.

Other Person's Response: Since you expect god to just heal your misery, you must be like a spoiled child who wants everything done for him. It's your responsibility to find ways to help yourself. God's not going to heal your misery because that will help you become a more mature adult who takes responsibility for himself.

My Reply: I'm already a person who looks out for himself anyway, which means I'm already a self-dependent person. I'm not a spoiled person either, and I behave very maturely. Many people like me as an individual, they think I'm mature, and very polite. In regards to helping myself, if I was in a situation where there's no cure for my problems, and I'd have to find ways to help myself, then that's fine. I'd have no issue with this, wouldn't complain, and I'd find ways to help myself.

But, god has the power to instantly heal my suffering, which is why I take issue with him not healing my misery, and that's why I complain. Just because he'd heal my misery doesn't mean I'd turn out to be a childish person who complains because people aren't doing things for me all the time. Besides, my positive emotions are what are important here. Not me becoming the most mature person I can be, or learning any life lessons.

Other Person's Response: Well, according to you, emotions are the only way to become a childish or mature person.

My Reply: Yes. But, again, I just went outside my personal definition of childish and mature for the sake of convenience.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I think positive thoughts themselves can give us a positive perspective. I don't think a person needs positive emotions to have a positive perspective. So, the goal in life should be to have as much positive thoughts as possible. The more profound and intense they are, the better. So, it's the positive thoughts that are important here, and not any life lessons, or becoming the most mature person one can be. Any struggle a person has, where he has a lot of negative thoughts, is nothing more than a hindrance to the goal of achieving as much positivity in life as possible. So, god should've healed that person's mind of all that negativity, rather than allowing him to go through it. After all, he has the power to heal him.

My Reply: Personally, I think positive emotions are how we have a positive perspective. But, going by your scenario, that person shouldn't be allowed to endure through all those negative thoughts. Especially if those negative thoughts weren't something he had power and control over, and was something he needed to work on.

Other Person's Response: I think god allowed you to go through all that misery because he wanted you to work on your own problems.

My Reply: Like I said, it's not about improving myself, growing as an individual, and taking responsibility for myself by working on my own problems. It's about my positive emotions, and that's why god should've just instantly healed my misery.

Other Person's Response: Perhaps you being allowed to go through all these miserable struggles has taught you just how important happiness is. That way, you'll avoid making reckless decisions that would be life threatening or detrimental to your happiness and well-being.

My Reply: I'm already the type of person to not make such decisions though. I've always been the type of person to not do drugs, smoke, eat unhealthy, etc.

Other Person's Response: God allowing you to suffer, so you could become a more mature adult who looks after himself, would be akin to god allowing someone to suffer horribly from some illness, so that person could become more mature, and look after himself more. That's an unnecessary method, when there's a better way.

My Reply: I agree. So, a better way of me becoming more mature would be if some very kind people entered into my life, inspired me to become more mature, and more responsible for himself.

Other Person's Response: I think you'll look back at your struggles someday and realize that they really were necessary.

My Reply: I don't think so. Even many years later, I'll still think they're pointless and unnecessary.

Other Person's Response: You say your goal is to live the happiest life you can. Does that mean you're going to take drugs to induce profound and powerful states of bliss?

My Reply: No. Drugs would shorten my life span, which would limit the amount of happiness I can get out of life.

Other Person's Response: I heard you say, in your previous packet, that learning and growing through suffering and misery is pointless. I disagree. I think our souls are meant for learning and growing.

My Reply: For me, those miserable struggles were pointless. Another reason why it was all pointless is because it would've been much better off if such struggles never existed in the first place. Would it be better for a person to smoke, and suffer through all the health consequences, just to learn in the end how bad smoking is, and to avoid it? Or, would it be better off if that person was never put into a position where he smoked in the first place? Sure, he wouldn't get to learn his life lesson.

But, it would be better off if he never smoked to begin with. After all, since smoking is to be avoided in the first place, why suffer the health consequences, just to learn smoking needs to be avoided? Likewise, why did god create a world of suffering, so that we can suffer, just to learn in the end that suffering is this horrible thing that needs to be avoided? It would be much better if god created a world without suffering, just as how it would be much better if a person never smoked.

Other Person's Response: You're saying that learning your life lesson of keeping your thoughts healthy wasn't worth all that suffering you've been through, and all those years wasted of your life. It would be like a smoker, who destroyed his body through smoking, just to learn the life lesson that he shouldn't smoke. It simply wasn't worth all that suffering to learn this life lesson. It would've, therefore, been better if that smoker never smoked to begin with, just as how it would've been better if you never had those struggles to begin with.

My Reply: Correct. As for the other life lesson I've learned through my miserable struggles, which would be just how vital and precious positive emotions are, I could've learned that life lesson another way. For example, I could've had a mental illness that took away my positive emotions, and rendered me apathetic. Being apathetic would've taught me just how important it is to enjoy life. So, I could've learned this life lesson through being apathetic, rather than through all the hell I've experienced. That means there was no reason for me to go through all that hell.

Other Person's Response: If a person had many illnesses, much pain, and it brings him greater, more profound positive experiences throughout his life that he wouldn't have had if it weren't for said illnesses and pain, then it's better for him to have pain and illnesses.

My Reply: Yes, because, the greater and more profound positive experiences you have throughout your life, the better your life is.

Other Person's Response: Maybe you're just a very stagnant person who needs to do something new with his life in order to change.

My Reply: That could be. I really don't know if anything would work to change my philosophy.

Other Person's Response: You're also very stagnant in terms of your knowledge and life experience. You don't learn new things, or experience more.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Wouldn't you want to learn how to, for example, clean your computer of dust when it needs cleaning?

My Reply: Yes, because that's necessary to keep my computer in good condition. I hope it's a simple, basic, easy task because I'm no good at following and understanding complicated, technical instructions. I've been opening up the case, and cleaning the dust out, just like how any normal, dumb person would. But, there might be things I'm missing in order for my computer to be completely cleaned.

If that's the case, then I just wish computers had the ability to completely clean themselves. That way, I wouldn't have to go through all the trouble of making sure I've followed all the steps necessary to completely clean my computer. Besides, I might not understand, or properly follow these steps, as I mentioned earlier. I'm lacking in many abilities, don't understand much, and I make many mistakes. That's why it would be better if computers could just clean themselves.

Other Person's Response: So, you wish things could be done for you, since you're lacking in knowledge and abilities? Sometimes in life, we have to do things, and figure things out on our own.

My Reply: I wish things could be done for me to make my life easier. In the future, self-cleaning computers might be invented to make our lives easier. There'd also be a lot of technology invented to make our lives easier.

Other Person's Response: Does your computer have issues? If so, then perhaps there were more steps you needed to follow in order to completely clean your computer.

My Reply: My computer does overheat often. Especially during the summer. As a result, tasks I do on my computer slow down. So, it could be the case that I haven't cleaned all the dust out. Or, maybe, something is wrong with the computer itself, and it has nothing to do with dust still being inside.

Other Person's Response: I heard your younger brother has more knowledge and life experience than you. So, maybe, you can have him clean your computer.

My Reply: I did, and my computer is still having the same issue.

Other Person's Response: Perhaps your brother isn't cleaning your computer right either. So, maybe, you need to get it cleaned by a professional.

My Reply: I'm not sure how much that costs. Anyway, my mother does plan on buying me a new computer, if she gets this Home Equity Loan. If she doesn't, then I hope grandma buys me a new computer. I've had this computer for a few years anyway, and I think it's time I got a new computer. This new computer I'm getting is one meant for music production, since I wish to be a composer.

Other Person's Response: Has the overheating issue with your computer been subsided a little, after the dust has been cleaned from inside the computer?

My Reply: Yes. That overheating issue is still there a bit. So, maybe, a professional needs to completely clean my computer in order for the issue to completely subside.

Other Person's Response: I think you're limiting yourself to the hedonistic values you live by because you don't care about anything else, other than living for your own happiness. That's all you want out of life, and you don't care about living by other values.

My Reply: I'd want to have greater, everlasting values I could live by, since my hedonistic philosophy is very limiting, and only serves to render me in a position where I give up on my hobbies, goals, and dreams without my positive emotions. So, I don't think I have this hedonistic philosophy because happiness is the only thing I care about. Rather, it's because my personal experience leads me to the conclusion that positive emotions are the only things that make life positive.

Other Person's Response: If you do become a famous composer, whose music is admired by many people, are you going to share your philosophy to these people?

My Reply: Yes. I'd upload all my packets online, and give these people the links, so they can read all about my philosophy. It's important that others know about my personal views. Especially if I'm famous. But, I think only few people become famous.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 07:07 pm
@MozartLink,
File #6: More On My Philosophy (Part 9/26)

Other Person's Response: It's also important for you to upload your packets because that will back them up online, in case your computer dies, and those packets on your desktop are gone.

My Reply: Yes. I also burn these packets on a cd.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your philosophy, there are forms of suffering so horrible that it makes me wonder what good purpose it could possibly serve for the individual and/or humanity.

My Reply: Yes. My miserable struggles would be a great example.

Other Person's Response: If there was a person who could live millions of years, due to advanced technology, and that person was hidden from humanity, where he's hooked up to a machine that gives him nightmares for his entire existence, then I bet he'd be left to suffer all alone. He'd just suffer from nightmares over and over again for millions of years, and no angel would come down to rescue him. Neither would god do anything about it. That just shows how cruel and unloving it is for god, and these heavenly, angelic beings, to allow suffering.

My Reply: I agree. If people think it's cruel enough for god to allow suffering upon humans, who have very limited lifespans on Earth, then imagine how cruel it would be to allow someone to suffer, non stop, for millions of years. If there was somehow a way a person could live and suffer, all alone, for millions of years on Earth, then I bet he'd be allowed to suffer all that time. Now, I can't say for certain if god, and these heavenly beings, would allow that person to suffer for that long. But, it's quite possible.

Other Person's Response: Suffering comes from ignorance, and not from God. God does not allow suffering. Rather, human beings allow suffering, and God gives us the free will to do as we please with the human state of being that we have. Our lack of health care for everyone allows suffering, our economic and political systems allows suffering, our cultural and societal tenets allows suffering, the way we think allows us to suffer, etc., etc., etc., etc. These are things created by man. Not by God.

Joy and complete fulfillment is inside of every human being. But, most people pursue material wealth and sensory stimulation for their fulfillment. Happiness is an inside job, and often, it takes many decades for people to find it, if they find it at all. If a person is having nightmares, that is their subconscious trying to tell them something. Nightmares just don't come out of nowhere. People have to get to know their own mind, their own emotions, etc. if they truly want to be happy. Of course, this is just my opinion.

My Reply: Let me make myself more clear. If there was a way a person could literally be trapped in a state of agonizing, physical torture, and/or mental torture, that would last for millions of years, then he'd be allowed to suffer all that time, and god, or these heavenly beings, would do nothing about it. You say human beings have the free will to get themselves out of scenarios where they suffer. But, that isn't always the case. The example I have given would be a situation where a person literally remains trapped in a state of suffering for millions of years, with no way out. Lastly, as for nightmares, there might be a way to artificially induce them through future technology.

Other Person's Response: I don't understand the point of this. You put forward a hypothetical situation, which has no basis in reality, and then come to some conclusion about what god would, or would not do, in this hypothetical situation. This is not an example that shows how cruel it is for God to allow suffering because it has nothing to do with the real world. If you want to make a point about the nature of suffering, and the actions/inactions of God/heavenly beings, why not focus on the real world?

My Reply: It just makes one wonder if god really would be cruel and unloving enough to allow that person to suffer for millions of years.

Other Person's Response: I still don't understand the point because it is all an imaginary situation.

My Reply: Well, imagine if you met god yourself when your soul enters heaven, you presented him the hypothetical situation I gave, and you asked him if he'd really be that cruel and unloving to allow that person to suffer millions of years. I'm quite sure asking such a question isn't pointless, since it would put god to the test to determine if he's really an all-loving being or not. It would be a very good question to ask anyone, including the heavenly beings who are with god. It would put these beings to the test as well to see if they are all-loving or not.

Other Person's Response: Again, it's still an imaginary scenario, which makes it a pointless question.

My Reply: There are many such questions we ask that aren't pointless. For example, one question could be: "What would life be like if robots did all our jobs?" Even though this is an imaginary scenario, it's a very popular question that many people think is worth answering.

Other Person's Response: No, I still don't get the point of this exercise. Why do you feel the urge to put God, and any heavenly beings, to the test? What does such a question about an imaginary situation prove?

My Reply: It's because I'd want to know if all the miserable struggles I've been through were allowed by an all-loving god, or a cruel, unloving god. I think all my miserable struggles were pointless, unnecessary suffering. But, if an all-loving god allowed my suffering, then it wouldn't have been pointless, unnecessary suffering, since only a cruel, unloving god would allow a person to needlessly suffer.

Thus, if he's an all-loving god, then all my miserable struggles were for a good purpose, and it would've been worth all that suffering. But, I don't think that's the case. So, it's quite possible that, if god exists, then he's just a cruel, unloving god who allowed me to go through pointless suffering. If I meet god in heaven, after my physical body dies, then I'd find out if he's all-loving or not by putting him to the test with that hypothetical example. The same thing applies to those heavenly beings.

Other Person's Response: You are talking about an extreme hypothetical situation. Don't you think that, if a person can live for millions of years, the human race would've also conquered suffering? I mean, if medicine could keep a person alive for millions of years, I'm sure such an advanced medical technology would've also put an end to human suffering.

No one can make us suffer, or allow us to suffer. During World War II, there were people, put in Nazi concentration camps, who were determined to keep a good attitude. Have you ever heard of Pollyanna or Anne Frank? They were such people who were determined to see the bright side of things, regardless how much hardship they were put through.

I worked in the health care field for more than 40 years, and have seen lots of suffering. But, not everybody with the same condition suffers. Some refuse to suffer. Your hypothesis is neither sound nor valid. Your major premise is that God is allowing people to suffer, like people have no control over their own emotions. Suffering is an emotional state of being. It's a state of being that we do not have to embark on, regardless of our situation.

The point of self control is not on the outside of us. Rather, our locust of control is eternal. It is within us. The GOD I have come to know is absolutely pure, unconditional love. The very fabric of God's presence is unfathomable, overwhelming, intoxicating, bliss. This has been my experience of that which I call God for many decades now. But, we are all entitled to our opinions.

My Reply: Physical pain is also a form of suffering. So, if someone has been allowed to go through immense physical pain for millions of years, then that person would be allowed to suffer. If someone has been put in a pretend situation where he gets sawed into pieces, experiences that agonizing pain, regenerates, gets sawed into pieces again, then god would allow that to go on for millions of years, if such a thing was possible. If it could only go on for hundreds or thousands of years, rather than millions of years, then god would allow it.

Also, you're right when you say there's an emotional form of suffering. But, we don't always have power and control over how we feel (our emotional state). Thus, we don't always have power and control when it comes to our suffering. That means we have no choice but to suffer sometimes. For example, there was a worry that brought much misery upon me. I was in a very horrible state of mind, and I couldn't just rid of this misery-inducing worry out of my psyche. Nothing I thought, or did, eased the worry one bit. So, I had no choice but to suffer until I fully recovered from the worry, and that was a long term goal.

Other Person's Response: Mental and emotional work hand in hand. Quiet meditation helps me control my own mind. But, it didn't happen overnight. I've been doing quiet meditation for many decades, and it's a God-send. Often times, the answers we need are right in front of us. But, in order to see them, we have to open our heart, and let go of only seeing things one way.

You seem set in your way of viewing God, and maybe that's stopping you from seeing other things that may help you. I'd suggest you search out a spiritual counselor, a minister, a priest, or whatever you're comfortable with because you seem dead set on seeing things one way, and one way only, which means that you're stuck. If you don't learn how to control your thoughts, your thoughts will control you.

My Reply: Thank you. But, god, and these heavenly beings, have still allowed me to suffer through all that misery, even if meditation was the answer that could've helped me all along. Also, you said it takes a long commitment to meditation in order to see significant results. If god, or these heavenly beings, had the power to instantly heal me of that misery-inducing worry, then they should've done so, rather than allowing me to go through a long, tedious process of easing the worry myself through meditation, and/or other methods.

Other Person's Response: Even if suffering is the fault of humanity and not god, an all-loving god would still be healing suffering people.

My Reply: I agree. There are people who have to live with cancer on a hospital bed, and it's not their choice of free will to cure themselves of it. They have to live with it, and it would be best if god just healed them.

Other Person's Response: I think god allows suffering because suffering serves a form of personal character growth.

My Reply: There are forms of suffering where people don't benefit from it. They don't grow at all from it, it's nothing but agonizing torment for them, and it would be best if god healed them of it.

Other Person's Response: Some people really have no choice but to suffer. For example, if someone was devastated, due to the loss of his loved one, then he'd have no choice but to suffer through all that grief. He'd just have to wait patiently for his psyche to fully recover on its own, while also trying therapeutic methods that could help him reach that state of full recovery faster.

My Reply: Yes. But, in the meantime, he's just going to have to wait in a pit of darkness, where his life is devoid of any positive experiences. In this pit of darkness, there might be brief moments of light (positive experiences). But, these moments of light are dim, and don't last very long at all. So, it's best if we just wait until all the light comes back to us again before pursuing any goal or dream.

Other Person's Response: Some people aren't devastated by the loss of their loved ones, since they have a different mindset, which prevents them from becoming devastated. That says you have a choice whether you're devastated by something or not.

My Reply: Unfortunately, I couldn't help but have this devastating worry, and I can't change my mindset by sheer will. Perhaps with a lot of work, I could somehow change my mindset, so I'm no longer worried. But, like I said, in the meantime, I'm just going to have to wait in this pit of darkness.

Other Person's Response: If your psyche fully recovers on its own, then wouldn't that already be a change in your mindset, since that worry is gone, and no longer causing you any more negative emotions, such as feelings of misery, hate, etc.?

My Reply: I think you're right. I could say the same thing about that person who was devastated by the loss of his loved one. Once his psyche fully recovers on its own from the grief, I think that state of full recovery would be a change in his mindset. But, it's an extremely long wait for my psyche to fully recover on its own. That's why I need things to help me get to a full recovery faster.

Other Person's Response: I'm going to quote something you said, and respond to it:

Quote:
Thank you. But, god has still allowed me to suffer through all that misery, even if meditation was the answer that could've helped me all along. I don't think he should've allowed me to suffer like that, since my life was sheer hell, devoid of any beautiful, joyful, loving, worthwhile experience. All positive experiences were completely absent for me, due to that worry.


In my opinion, what you're saying right now is what's keeping you miserable. What you tell yourself is like an affirmation. It's your internal dialogue, and a recording you have in your head that you've created. It is a very intimate conversation that you're having with yourself. Just think of the possibility that, maybe, you're looking at this all wrong, and that's what's causing you to be miserable.

In my opinion, you need to change that recording in your head, and develop some positive affirmations. Take responsibility for your life, and stop blaming your problems on God. If you want to experience joy, and get out of your suffering, then you've got to change the things you are telling yourself. This is where joy and fulfillment begins: in your self talk. You need to start talking sense to yourself, and a counselor can help you with that.

We all have work to do on ourselves. I can blame God for allowing me to go blind. But, looking back, my blindness was a blessing. It was what I needed to go through to wake up, and maybe what you're going through right now is part of your waking up process. There can be a dawn after the darkness, if you allow that dawn to happen. I have been through eye surgery more than a dozen times.

The first time, I was in the hospital, going through eye surgery. Afterwards, in the recovery ward, there was a guy, laying in a bed next to me. He had also gone through eye surgery, and he was very angry at God, yelling out things, such as: "Why did you do this to me?" I laid there quietly in the same room as he. We both had only a 50/50 chance of regaining our eyesight.

We went home, and the guy, who was next to me at the hospital, took his life. I continued with my treatments, and learned a great deal from my period of blindness, much later regaining my eyesight. While I did not have any outer sight when I was blind, I gained great insight. I did not suffer, and I do not blame God. What I went through is what I needed to go through to wake up. It was a part of my human journey.

My Reply: The only times I'm miserable would be moments where I have a devastating worry, or some other type of negative thought, that puts me in a state of misery. But, my way of thinking about god doesn't cause me any misery at all, which means that's not what's keeping me in a state of misery. The reason why I was trapped in a miserable state during that moment of worry was because this was a worry my mind had an extremely difficult time letting go.

It had nothing to do with my way of looking at god as a cruel, unloving being for allowing me to suffer. Also, seeing as how god, or these heavenly beings, have the power to instantly heal me, but aren't going to instantly heal me of any misery-inducing thought or worry I might have in my life, then I'll just try my best to find ways to help me. I can't promise anything would really help me though. Nonetheless, I'll still try my best.

Other Person's Response: If this misery-inducing worry of yours really served a good purpose, which would be for you to improve yourself and your life through certain methods (such as meditation), then fully recovering from this worry on your own would completely defeat that purpose. That's because you'd be all better, and would no longer require these methods to give you a stronger, more resilient mind, more control over your thoughts and emotions, a calmer mind, a better philosophy, etc. In which case, why did god, or these heavenly beings, have you go through all that misery, when they knew all along that it wasn't going to serve that good purpose? They're all knowing beings who can see into the future, which means they would've known this.

My Reply: You're right, and I think I'm nearing a fully recovery on my own. But, even if my misery did result in me bettering myself as an individual, and my philosophy, I still think there'd be a better, healthier, happy way of doing so.

Other Person's Response: Let's pretend you tried your best to better yourself and your life. Do you really think it's possible for you to live by a better philosophy than the one you currently have?

My Reply: No. I don't think my hedonistic philosophy can ever change. But, I might be able to relax my mind more through meditation, and I might regain more control over my thoughts and emotions through certain therapeutic methods, including meditation.

Other Person's Response: You must be open to new philosophies. I think your philosophy can change, and you're just being closed-minded.

My Reply: I am open. But, I'm very doubtful.

Other Person's Response:
Quote:
I can't promise anything would really help me though. Nonetheless, I'll still try my best.


Then I wish you good luck on your healing journey!

My Reply: Thank you. Now, you said there are healing methods, such as meditation, and that this would be the answer that would help ease this constant worry of mine, so my mental suffering would also be eased. But, let's pretend there was a very poor person who was in the same predicament as me. However, he didn't know anything about meditation, or other therapeutic/healing methods, he couldn't afford them, didn't have access to them, couldn't research them on the internet or through reading books (since he can't afford to do that either), and the people he meets in his village (or on his streets) are just average people who don't know anything about meditation, or these healing methods, and couldn't help him, since they're not mental health professionals, or teachers in the art of meditation.

God, and these heavenly beings, would just allow that person to suffer from his constant, misery-inducing worry until, hopefully, his brain fully recovers from the worry on its own, which would take a very long time. As you can see, I'm looking for every excuse to blame god, and these heavenly beings, since I suspect they're not the all-loving beings many people make them out to be. That is, if they really do exist. I don't know if they exist or not, since I'm undecided when it comes to the existence of supernatural things, such as god, the afterlife, the soul, psychic abilities, etc.

Other Person's Response: If that person, in your example above, had the will to recover from his misery, then his will would attract things in his life to help him recover. So, as that person continues to try to help himself, god will grant him the help he needs, which means nobody is in a truly hopeless situation.

My Reply: Well, there are already forms of suffering that people have to bear through to the end. So, I wouldn't be surprised if that person would be left to suffer to the end.

Other Person's Response: If that person, in your example, tried to get the help he needed, but still didn't get the help he needed, then his spiritual vibration must be low because people with high spiritual vibrations are able to attract the things they want in their lives, whether it be money, psychological help, etc. So, he'd need to raise his spiritual vibration somehow.

My Reply: Well, how's he supposed to know that? If he's ignorant of this, then he'd be stuck, not getting the help he needs. God should've, at least, bestowed knowledge upon him that he needs to raise his spiritual vibration, and how he should do that.

Other Person’s Response: If that person in your example had to live his entire life in prison, then there’s no way he could get the help he needed.

My Reply: You’re right.

Other Person’s Response: I heard that your recent emotional crisis took the longest to fully recover from. I think it’s completely unnecessary for you to suffer like this, and neither do I think it’s necessary for you to dedicate so much of your time and energy in trying things that might help you recover faster, when god can just heal you instantly. Even while you’re trying things that might help you, you’re still suffering the whole way through, and I don’t think you should have to suffer like this. Any therapeutic methods won’t completely heal you instantly. They’ll only heal you slowly and gradually over time. But, the thing is, god and his angels have the power to completely heal your mind instantly. So, I don’t know why they don’t.

My Reply: I don’t know why either.

Other Person's Response: Perhaps your difficulty is that you want someone to blame for your suffering. You have this belief that God, or some heavenly beings, could relieve your suffering in an instant. Since you continue to suffer, then you conclude that God, and these heavenly beings, are, therefore, not all-loving. Why not take responsibility for your suffering? If you suffer, then the cause of your suffering is within you, and the solution to your suffering is also within you. Don't wait for someone to wave a magic wand, and remove all your suffering. You could be waiting a long time. Go within and discover whatever it is within you that's making you suffer. Then, you can begin to end all your suffering.

My Reply: Thank you. But, I do think god, and these heavenly beings, aren't all-loving. Not only because they allowed me to go through all that suffering, but because they just send souls to a planet, where positive emotions are very fleeting things.

Other Person's Response: Maybe you should keep trying, and not give up so easily. I'm quite sure there's a way to ease this worry of yours, and it doesn't have to be through waiting for your brain to recover from it on its own.

My Reply: You could be right.

Other Person's Response: "Change how you see and see how you change."-Zen Quote

I do readings for people, or come across those who are in need of spiritual healing (i.e. 'ordinary,' 'everyday' people who have no interest in the ideologies or theologies). One, in particular, was going through a particularly harrowing time in her life, and was at an emotional crossroad. Long story short, she was relying on someone else because she didn't think she had the strength. She came to me, looking for answers, as her hopes and dreams were coming apart.

Even from the beginning, I knew what was coming. Yet, I had to try and be objective, as the empath in me wanted to tell her that her world was about to fall apart, and that, emotionally, she would end up on the floor. I knew what she had to go through was going to make her stronger, far more capable, and that the person she was relying on was only going to be a liability. It was one of the heaviest readings I've done. At the time, I was in a deep dilemma on a few levels.

But, now, I can see how, because of what she had to endure, she's found more strength than she ever thought she had. I heard my daughter was being abused by her partner, and my first thought was to travel some 400 miles, just to go down, and put him in the hospital. My two brothers would've come with me. My wife persuaded me not to because it would've only made the situation worse. It's the same old story that's been repeated over and over again.

But, I knew I had to let things play out, after I'd calmed down, and I'm glad I did. I guess the point is that, often, we see these things from the perspective of victim hood, and not from the perspective of it being there to help us in some ways. Nothing happens TO us, and everything happens BECAUSE of us. It's easy to blame God, and anyone else.

But, while we're waiting for God to get us out of a fix, he's waiting for us to get our backsides into gear because, unless we take action, he doesn't know which way we want to jump. It's easy to blame others when we're feeling sorry for ourselves. It's not so easy to understand that, in the longer term, those 'bad times' have been given to us to make us into bigger, better, stronger people. That understanding only comes from retrospect, and when we turn those hurts into halos, it all makes so much sense.

My Reply: Sure. But, the question is, I heard heaven is where we can have all our wishes granted. I hear many people report that they've almost been driven to suicide, and that their lives were no longer worth living. But, they've gained some form of learning and growth out of it, and I just see no need for them to go through such suffering to obtain said learning and growth, when they can just live the most beautiful, worthwhile existence in heaven for eternity, and have all their learning and growth handed to them.

Other Person's Response: When people have struggles, the result is, often times, that their lives have much more beauty and worth than not having those struggles.

My Reply: But, again, even this greater form of beauty and worth can be granted to us in heaven. So, there's no need to suffer in order to obtain any form of learning and growth, or any greater positive experience, when it can all just be granted to us.

Other Person's Response: It seems you really didn't gain anything from your miserable struggles anyway. You're still the same, shallow hedonist, and your struggles didn't make you a better person who contributes to the world, serves humanity, makes new discoveries, etc.

My Reply: Exactly. But, I do hear from spiritual believers that, if you struggle, but don't learn the life lessons you were supposed to learn from said struggles, and didn't obtain the growth you were supposed to obtain, then you reincarnate into a new body on Earth, and suffer again, so that you, hopefully, obtain the learning and growth you were supposed to obtain. Like I said though, I think that's just a pointless, unnecessary process when all that learning and growth can just be granted to the individual by god, or the heavenly, spiritual beings.

Other Person's Response: Maybe, heaven doesn't grant our every wish. Perhaps that's why souls must suffer in order to obtain the learning and growth they need to obtain, since there's no way they can just wish for it, and have it granted to them.

My Reply: Perhaps you're right.

Other Person's Response: If we can be given all the learning we needed, why are we here? If I knew that, I'd have stayed, never have came here in the first place, and I'll bet the billions of other souls on the planet would've done the same thing. So, if you were to speak to god about being granted the wish of having all forms of learning and growth granted to you, will that, all of a sudden, end reincarnation, and you'd just be granted that wish, with no need to reincarnate on Earth anymore in order to obtain further learning and growth? Also, considering the generations of people who've gone through their lives, suffering, they're too dumb to work out they can stay in heaven, and live in bliss? No offense, Matt, but you could use a rethink there, buddy.

My Reply: You're right. It does seem absurd.

Other Person's Response: My question is, is it possible for heaven to grant our every wish, and god, and these heavenly beings, are unwilling to grant us some wishes? Maybe they can grant us all the learning and growth we need, but refuse to grant us this wish, since they want souls to earn it the hard way by going through much suffering.

My Reply: I'm not sure. If it's possible for them to grant us all forms of learning and growth we wish for, then souls are going through unnecessary suffering here on Earth. So, I'd take issue with that, and have a little chat with god, and these heavenly beings, if my soul enters heaven after the death of my physical body.

Other Person's Response: If god, and these heavenly beings, want souls to learn and grow, then why don't they just give souls all the learning and growth they need, rather than having them go through this long, grueling process of suffering and reincarnating?

My Reply: I'm not sure.

Other Person's Response: There's a far bigger picture here that you're obviously not willing to see. The greatest forms of learning come through hardships, and the story of the chrysalis comes to mind. Unconditional Love means nothing until there are conditions, either for yourself or others.

Empathy is equally meaningless until you've been through the same experiences yourself. Forgiveness wouldn't exist because, in heaven, everybody is so nice there's nothing to forgive, and forgiveness for yourself and/or others is very important.

In heaven, everything is pure, there's no meaning to that experience, and there's nothing to experience that would expand your consciousness any more. The real question is, what are the reasons you think the way you do? The grass isn't always greener on the other side, and the whole point of coming here to Earth is that we can have experiences that just aren't possible in heaven.

My Reply: I thought anything we gain through having experiences on Earth can be granted to us in heaven if we wish for it. That even includes the things you've just mentioned. Like I said though, maybe god, and these heavenly beings, just refuse to grant us this wish. Also, any experience we have here on Earth we can have in heaven as well, since that's another wish that's possible to grant.

Other Person's Response: If someone lives a beautiful existence in heaven, then he'd be living a meaningful existence because it makes no sense to say that someone's living a beautiful existence that's meaningless.

My Reply: That's right. So, heaven can never be a meaningless existence, since we can have all the positive experiences we want there. All positive experiences make life meaningful. So, if you're living a life where you're having the most profound, powerful, positive experiences, then you're living a life that has the most profound, powerful meaning. Again, heaven is where we have the most profound, powerful, positive experiences, which means heaven would be the most meaningful existence.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, a person in a vegetative state of bliss would be living a very meaningful existence, since he'd be having powerful and profound positive emotions.

My Reply: Yes. But, if I said that a person would be living a very meaningful existence if he had profound and powerful positive thoughts while in a vegetative state, such as thoughts of love and beauty towards life, then many people would agree. My philosophy just switches that from positive thoughts to positive emotions, since we can only experience a beautiful existence once positive thoughts, or beliefs, make us feel positive emotions.

Other Person's Response: As for having experiences on Earth that we can't have in heaven, I can't have the experience of drinking a rather fine, single malt in heaven because I'm just a spirit, with no physical body, which means I have no taste buds. Furthermore, there's not a single malt whiskey in heaven. Also, nobody can grant you the experience of having something to forgive if they can't smack you in the mouth.

My Reply: Well, couldn't you wish for any physical body you want in heaven, and have one? From there, couldn't you wish for a malt, it magically appears out of thin air, and you have it? Also, couldn't you wish for any situation to happen to you that puts you in the position of having to forgive?

Other Person's Response: In heaven, I could even wish for the experience that I've forgiven thousands of times, and be satisfied with all the forgiveness I gave, when, in reality, I never forgave once in heaven.

My Reply: Sure.

Other Person's Response: I heard your goal in composing is to share awesome, memorable music to the world that expresses the things you wish to express to your audience. But, if heaven grants our every wish, then you wouldn't have to go through the process of learning how to compose, or creating music, since you could just wish for any song to pop into existence that you want to share to your audience of souls in heaven, and you'd have that wish granted. Any awesome, memorable music you've yet to create would just instantly pop into existence for you, and I'd find that to be boring. It's very interesting when a person must go through the process of learning and creating works of art. So, in my opinion, I think you're better off here on Earth, where you must go through that process.

My Reply: In heaven, I could wish for music to pop into existence for me. Or, I could wish to go through the learning and creating process in heaven, and wish for all the tools and equipment I need to go through this process. So, I see no need for me to be here on Earth. Especially when I can enjoy the learning and creating process far more in heaven than I can here on Earth, since positive emotions are far more profound and intense in heaven, and they're not fleeting.

Other Person's Response: If you could enjoy having the music you want instantly pop into existence, and sharing said music to your audience, just as much as you would enjoy going through the learning and creating process in heaven, and sharing your music that way, then both endeavors were just as beautiful, valuable, precious, and worthwhile, since you'd be getting the same level of joy out of them.

My Reply: Yes. In which case, I could just choose any one of these endeavors I want in heaven.

Other Person's Response: Perhaps it was actually best for your soul to pursue the endeavor of going through the process of learning and creating. But, if you were to remain in heaven, you'd be tempted to wish for any music to pop into existence. To avoid this, your soul same to Earth. That way, you're forced into a position where you can only pursue endeavor #1 (the process of learning and creating), rather than endeavor #2 (wishing for any music to pop into existence).

My Reply: Well, god, and these heavenly beings, would've realized this, and wouldn't grant me the wish of endeavor #2. So, I could've still remained in heaven, and pursued endeavor #1.

Other Person's Response: If you could wish for any song to pop into existence, then you could wish for one of the most amazing, powerful songs to pop into existence that the world has yet to hear. I don't think you'll ever produce one of the most amazing, powerful songs yourself, since you'll never amount to a genius composer like Beethoven. You might develop some level of composing talent. But, I doubt you'll ever be an amazing composer. So, that's why I think it would be best if you could pursue endeavor #2 instead of endeavor #1.

My Reply: Well, I'm here on Earth, which means I have to pursue endeavor #1.

Other Person's Response: I heard you're someone with hardly any knowledge and life experience. That means you're very ignorant, and unenlightened to the truth of many things. So, how could someone like you be in a position of saying things, such as that all your miserable struggles were just a pointless waste of your life, and god is doing things all wrong by having you sent here to Earth?

My Reply: Well, there are many atheists who say the same things as me, and they're intelligent people. They say god is cruel and unloving for allowing so much suffering, and how it would be better if souls remained in heaven, if there was a heaven.

Other Person's Response: Everything is in perfect order, which means there's no such thing as pointless, unnecessary suffering. So, your suffering served some grand purpose that you're not realizing.

My Reply: I hope you're right.

Other Person's Response: I heard from spiritual believers that, when our physical bodies die, and our souls meet god, god doesn't judge us. We're the judges. We have a life review, and we judge everything that's happened in our lives. We judge our actions, the hardships we've been through, etc.

My Reply: Well then, I'd judge all those miserable struggles I've had as pointless, unnecessary suffering that did nothing but wasted my life away. I'd tell god there was no reason for me to go through all that, and how much better it would've been if I never had those struggles. I'd also tell god that I didn't earn the reward I deserved for having gone through all that mental turmoil. But, like I said, even if I did obtain that reward, I wouldn't need to suffer at all to obtain said reward in the first place, when I could just wish for it in heaven, and have it granted to me.

Other Person's Response: Any truth you wish to know can be granted to you in heaven anyway.

My Reply: Exactly. So, there's no need for me to suffer like I did in order to discover the truth.

Other Person's Response: I think you can give yourself that reward you expected. Just change your mindset, and that will allow you to feel positive emotions on a whole new level. When you're fully recovered from this worry of yours, then just have much more profound and powerful thoughts of beauty, love, joy, etc. than you ever did before, and that should allow you to feel beauty, love, joy, etc. on a whole new level.

My Reply: When I'm all better and happy again, it seems I just have the usual positive experiences I normally have. I'm not sure if that can change. But, even if it did change, and I did have more profound, powerful thoughts than I ever did before to make me feel positive emotions that are more profound and powerful, there's a major limit set upon this, which means a person can't just give himself the most powerful, profound experience of beauty, love, etc. in the world. Such a powerful experience would have to come about through drug use, since people have such experiences during their trips. When people have a near death experience, and go on trips, they have such experiences as well.

Other Person's Response: I heard souls are very limited here on Earth, and that they have much more powerful, profound experiences when they're free of their physical, Earthly bodies. An example would be people, who experience god's love, when their souls are in heaven. It's a powerful, profound experience beyond anything they could achieve here on Earth. As a matter of fact, I hear from near death accounts that this Earthly existence seems insignificant compared to what they experience in the heavenly and hellish, spiritual realms.

My Reply: Yes. Not only are we limited in terms of knowledge here on Earth, but also in terms of experience.

Other Person's Response: So, there's a major limit to how powerful and profound our thoughts and emotions can be here on Earth?

My Reply: Yes. But, in heaven, it's something much greater.

Other Person's Response: Could you give me a link that shows me the near death accounts?

My Reply: Sure. Here it is:

https://www.nderf.org/Archives/NDERF_NDEs.html

Other Person's Response: If you can't convert anyone to your views, then why did you write all this material in regards to your philosophy?

My Reply: Again, I'm just sharing my views. If anyone does become convinced by them, then that's their conviction.

Other Person's Response: You say you have a negative perspective and attitude during your miserable moments. So, perhaps you're just having a bad attitude when you say your miserable struggles were a pointless waste of your life. Maybe, once you're happy again, you'll see things from a new perspective, and realize just how beautiful and worthwhile your struggles were.

My Reply: No. I have every reason to think they were pointless. Besides, I'm very close to a state of happiness, and I'm still coming to the conclusion they were pointless. So, even if I was completely happy right now, I'd be having a positive attitude in regards to my struggles. But, it would be: "I just hope god realizes how pointless these struggles were, and learns his lesson. I'm the judge here, and I wish for the happiest existence I can live. Not a miserable one."

Other Person's Response: I'm going to quote something you said and respond to it:

Quote:
I'm actually doing fine (although, I'm not fully recovered from this misery-inducing worry I've had, which I talked about earlier). I'd say I'm 90% to a full recovery now. That means I only have a very small amount of misery from time to time, and I think all my misery will soon be gone.

Lastly, many spiritual believers would say we're very limited in terms of our perspective here on Earth, and that, once my soul leaves my body, and enters heaven, I should have a whole new perspective, see all my struggles as having been worth going through, and realize they weren't the pointless, unnecessary hardships I thought they were when I was on Earth. I'm not sure if this is true or not.

Who knows, I still might think they're pointless when my soul meets god in heaven. If that's the case, then I'd have a little chat with god, since my life was wasted with pointless misery.


For some reason, I thought of the following poem, which you're probably familiar with:

One night I had a dream…

I dreamed I was walking along the beach with the Lord, and across the sky, flashed scenes from my life. For each scene, I noticed two sets of footprints in the sand. One belonged to me, and the other, to the Lord. When the last scene of my life flashed before us, I looked back at the footprints in the sand. I noticed that, many times along the path of my life, there was only one set of footprints. I also noticed that it happened at the very lowest, and saddest times in my life. This really bothered me, and I questioned the Lord about it.

“Lord, you said that, once I decided to follow you, you'd walk with me all the way. But, I've noticed that, during the most troublesome times in my life, there was only one set of footprints. I don’t understand why, in times when I needed you the most, you should leave me. The Lord replied, “My precious, precious child. I love you, and I'd never, never leave you during your times of trial, and suffering. When you saw only one set of footprints, it was then that I carried you."

My Reply: Thanks for sharing that poem. I just hope you're right about god being loving, caring, and not having me go through pointless suffering.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2020 07:08 pm
@MozartLink,
File #6: More On My Philosophy (Part 10/26)

Other Person's Response: Good to hear that you're on the road to full recovery. Does it ever occur to you that you could use your own struggles to help others going through a similar process? You've been where they are, and you understand what they're going through. Maybe your struggles were a gift, which you can share with others. If you had received instant healing, then you'd have no understanding of the journey to recovery.

My Reply: I have no interest in helping others though. As a matter of fact, I lack interest in so many things. For example, I have no interest in learning new things (which is why I'm a very dumb person), I don't care what clothes my mother buys me, I don't care about growing as an individual, etc. I also don't care what's going on in the world, which is why I don't watch the news, or read the newspaper. Neither do I care about other people suffering in this world.

I just let them carry on with their lives, while I carry on with my own life. Even if a person suffered in agony, and died before my very eyes, I don't think I'd care. It just wouldn't bother me. But, I'd still help that dying person, only if I had to. If I didn't have to, then I'd just let him suffer and die. Perhaps someone else would then come along and help him. In summary, I'm just a very casual person who doesn't care about much.

Other Person's Response: But, during your miserable struggles, you're not a casual person, since you're not doing well. You're in a state of psychological turmoil, you become hateful, and violent.

My Reply: Yes. But, when I'm happy again, I'm the casual person who has fun, doing the hobbies he loves to do.

Other Person's Response: So, in order to be a casual person, you need to feel casual?

My Reply: Yes. That feeling would be a positive emotion. When I feel troubled and miserable, I'm no longer a casual person.

Other Person's Response: It seems you're a cold, uncaring person. Does this mean you treat others with a cold, cruel attitude?

My Reply: Not at all. I have a very kind, polite personality that many people love about me. So, I wouldn't describe myself as cold and cruel. Rather, I'm just a casual guy who doesn't care about much. So, I'm casual and carefree. But, during an emotional crisis, I do become cruel and hateful, since I can only have negative experiences. I also display a very negative attitude.

Other Person's Response: Do you even become cruel and hateful towards your therapist during an emotional crisis?

My Reply: No. Only towards those who give me a stern or agitated attitude, or name call me.

Other Person's Response:
Quote:
I have no interest in helping others though. ... Neither do I care about other people suffering in this world. I just let them carry on with their lives, while I carry on with my own life. Even if a person suffered in agony, and died before my very eyes, I don't think I'd care. It just wouldn't bother me. ... In summary, I'm just a very casual person who doesn't care about much.


Yet, you complain because God seems to have no interest in helping you. You complain because God, and the heavenly beings, don't seem to care about your suffering in this world. You complain because God just lets you carry on with your life, while God goes about his business.

You complain because God doesn't seem to care, because God doesn't seem bothered about your suffering, because God is so casual where you are concerned. You have truly created a God in your own image. You wonder why god didn't heal your misery? It's because you don't help others. You must give to the universe if you want the universe to give to you in return.

My Reply: Well, I think I'm a decent human being just the way I am, which means god should see me as worthy of being healed/assisted. There are qualities about me worth appreciating. For example, I'm still kind and polite towards my family, and others out in the community. There are many other qualities about me worth appreciating as well. So, god should accept me for who I am, rather than seeing me as someone unworthy of healing. If he's an all-loving god, he'd appreciate me, and heal me, rather than leaving me to suffer. I, myself, am not an all-loving person. But, like I said, I'm still a decent person who should be worthy of healing in god's eyes.

I shouldn't have to meet a higher standard as an individual in order to be worthy of god's healing, since god should love all humans, and, thus, heal them. So, god, and these heavenly beings, should lower their standards, if they already have high standards. Especially considering that many kind people accept me, appreciate me, don't expect me to meet a higher standard, and don't think I'm unworthy if I don't meet said standard. As long as I'm a kind person who helps these people when they ask for my help (an example being my family), then that's good enough in their eyes, they think I'm worthy of being assisted, and getting the things I want, which is why my mother buys me the things I want.

But, I don't need to help the world, contribute to science, make the world a better place, or any of that. So, I can just let the world suffer, and go about its business. Also, even if I was a very giving, helpful person, I still don't think god, or the universe, would've healed my misery. So, I don't think my lack of healing has anything to do with me not being a giving, helpful person. After all, even very loving, giving, helpful, compassionate people are allowed to go through immense suffering that strips their lives of beauty, joy, and worth. They don't get healing from god, heavenly beings, or the universe, and they're allowed to suffer in a dark pit of despair, hate, etc. An example would be miserable, suicidal people.

Other Person's Response: I heard that people, who go on heavenly trips during their near death experience, report that god is an all-loving being who loves all humans, and doesn't judge them as disgusting or unworthy. That even applies to the heavenly beings.

My Reply: Then why didn't they heal my misery, if they loved me, and thought I was worthy of healing?

Other Person's Response: If god, or these heavenly beings, required you to help humanity, or do something else, in order to earn their healing, then they should've told you. They should've bestowed the knowledge upon you that you should do these things.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Do other kind people, such as your mother, sometimes expect you to help them, or other people?

My Reply: Yes. I do so because I'm expected to. Not because I care. I don't want to be given a stern attitude, punished, and not get the things I want. So, that's why I have to help. Well, actually, I've been known to feel positive emotions when giving to others (providing I do have my ability to feel positive emotions). That means I do care, since there were caring thoughts, making me feel that way. But, giving to others isn't something I really have a passion for though. It's no different than how I have no passion for football, dentistry, chemistry, physics, etc.

Sure, I might feel some joy in doing those things. But, they're not something I'd want to dedicate my life to. To expect me to dedicate my life to helping humanity, and contributing to the world, would be no different than expecting me to dedicate my life to football, dentistry, etc. It's unnecessary, and it's up to the individual what he wishes to dedicate his life to. So, frowning upon me, or thinking I'm unworthy of healing and assistance, since I don't dedicate my life to something I don't need to dedicate my life to, is absurd.

Other Person's Response: Helping others, and contributing to the world, shouldn't be compared to football, dentistry, etc. I think it's necessary, since it shows love and compassion towards humanity.

My Reply: I don't see it that way. If there was a stranger on the road, with a sign that reads: "Will work for food," then I don't have to help that person. I can just be like the rest of the world, who'd drive on by him, or walk past him, without helping him. Another example would be donating blood or organs, and donating to charity. Many people don't donate. It's something they have no passion for. But, that doesn't make them repulsive people who are deserving of punishment, ridicule, scorn, etc.

Other Person's Response: Even if others, including your mother, didn't expect you to help the world from time to time, I think you should help the world. You should, at least, make some small contribution to the world.

My Reply: Again, I don't think I need to, just as how a person doesn't need to play football at all.

Other Person's Response: If the world didn't have helping people, it would be a horrible place to live.

My Reply: But, there are plenty of helping people in the world. So, I don't see any need for me to be one of those people. But, let's pretend, even if I was the only person on this planet who got to live a nice, luxurious life, while the rest of humanity lived very difficult lives, filled with poverty and illness, I wouldn't need to help anyone in this world. Humanity can just help themselves, and help each other. I don't need to be a part of the picture. For example, if there was a team in this world, helping one another, then I don't need to be a part of that team.

Other Person's Response: I think the reason why you don't help humanity isn't because you're a cold psychopath. Rather, it's because you're like the rest of the world, and you live your life by a lower standard. You don't expect much from yourself, and you think you're good enough as an individual.

My Reply: Yes. There are many hedonists who just live for their own happiness, don't help humanity, and think they're decent human beings just the way they are.

Other Person's Response: You said you didn't want to help humanity, and that you just want to live for yourself. So, why should god, or these spiritual beings, help you out, nurture you, and protect you from life's hardships then?

My Reply: Because that's just what an all-loving being would do. Since positive emotions are the only things that make life beautiful and worth living, then an all-loving being would see to it that human beings have their positive emotions preserved. Besides, it's not like I'm someone who's unworthy of being helped. I'm a kind, polite individual, and I think that's enough for me to be worthy of aid, nurture, and protection.

Other Person's Response: I think, if someone doesn't help humanity and contribute to the world, that bad karma will fall upon him.

My Reply: The universe just needs to appreciate human beings. Even though there are some people who don't help humanity and contribute to the world, there are still qualities about these people worth appreciating.

Other Person's Response: Do you help your family when they need your help?

My Reply: Yes. That's mandatory. But, I don't need to live my life, helping out humanity, since that's optional. My family is fine with me not helping humanity, and they appreciate me for who I am. Other families don't appreciate their sons and daughters like my family does. Instead, they expect things from them, and frown upon them if they don't meet these expectations. I think people need to learn to appreciate things more. Some people can't appreciate my writing, since they don't think it's good enough, and some people don't appreciate me as a human being either.

Other Person's Response: The very fact you help your family when they need help should be appreciated by other people, too.

My Reply: Yes. At least I'm not like some spoiled person who doesn't help his family.

Other Person's Response: Does your mother have any problems with you?

My Reply: Not that I know of. She's accepting of me, and appreciates me. But, she does have problems with other people, since they do things she doesn't like, such as leeching money off of her, or treating her with an attitude she doesn't like. Since I don't do anything like that, then that's why she has no issues with me.

Other Person's Response: Does your mother sometimes have high expectations of you?

My Reply: Actually, she gets a bit disappointed when I don't do something right, or when I don't do something that I was unaware I was supposed to do. She'll just need to understand that I'm not perfect, I can't hear her call my name every single time when she needs my help, I'm unaware and incapable of many things, and what she should expect from me is failure on many occasions. I can only do my best, and I can't meet her expectations all the time. Other than that, she doesn't have extremely high expectations of me, such as that of a slave-driving mother.

Other Person's Response: What do you do for a living? I'm just curious as to how much life experience you have.

My Reply: I do my hobbies, such as composing, and playing video games. I also ride with my mother to stores sometimes, and I also go to the gym to walk on the treadmill. That about summarizes my life. Some people would say I should be doing so much more with my life, such as learning new things, and putting myself through hardships for the sake of helping others. But, I'm not going to do any of those things. I'm just going to live the lifestyle I want to live.

Other Person's Response: I realize you're presenting all your arguments in an attempt to help people understand why god is the one to blame for all your pointless suffering. But, what if it's the opposite? What if you're the one to blame, and your suffering wasn't pointless?

My Reply: You're right. It could be the opposite. But, it just doesn't seem like it.

Other Person's Response: There will be some people who think like you. They'll think it was the fault of god, and these heavenly beings, for allowing you to go through all this pointless suffering. But, then you'll have people who'll just blame you. So, different people will have different views.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: People suffer, and some gain much compassion towards others. Their struggles make them more giving towards humanity. But, some people don't gain such benefits from their struggles. An example would be someone like you. This says to me suffering doesn't serve a grand purpose. It's just there, and you either benefit from it, or you don't.

My Reply: Right. So, there might be no god, or afterlife, and suffering just happens in a universe of pure chance. If suffering did serve some grand purpose, then I would've expected those people, who'd gain much benefit from suffering, to be the ones to suffer, while people, such as myself, wouldn't have suffered from miserable struggles, since they were pointless forms of suffering for us that were a waste of our lives. But, the universe doesn't work that way. It seems anyone could suffer, and some benefit, while others don't benefit from it.

Other Person's Response: In the distant future, I bet there will be cures for illnesses, including clinical depression. I bet there'd even be something that would instantly cure a person of an emotional crisis. So, that means, if you were suffering from this misery-inducing worry in the distant future, then you could purchase the cure, which would instantly rid of that misery-inducing worry, and bring you back to a state of joy again.

That would even include anyone else who suffers from misery-inducing worries that are as chronic and devastating as yours. They could just instantly cure themselves if they had the money to buy the cure. Given this, if god, and these heavenly beings, do exist, then it seems they just don't care. If someone suffers in this time period like you have, then they'd allow that person to suffer without healing him, and no cure being invented for him.

At the same time, if this person suffered in the distant future, then they'd allow that person to purchase a cure to instantly rid himself of his mental turmoil, so he can regain his positive experiences, and no longer has to remain in that miserable, suicidal state, which stripped him of all experiences of beauty, love, and joy. So, it seems to me they just don't care one way or the other what happens to humanity, and it seems suffering doesn't serve any grand purpose.

It's either there, and people bear with it in a time period where there's no cure for it. Or, it's there, and people can just cure it in the future. Given this, I think it's better to assume that god, and these heavenly beings, don't exist. A universe where humans are allowed to suffer, and no heavenly being intervenes, seems a lot like a meaningless universe of pure chance, and no grand purpose, where humans are just insignificant, transient life forms who only have one life to live.

My Reply: You're right. But, like I said, I still have to remain undecided on the existence of god, the supernatural, and the afterlife.

Other Person's Response: I heard there's a form of therapy that instantly relieves people of their emotional suffering. Here's a youtube link to it:

https://youtu.be/ficOFz_OKZg

It combines Linguistic Programming (NLP) and Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT). If god inspired people to invent this technique, since he cares about humanity, and wants people to be healed of their mental suffering, including you, then he would've instantly relieved your suffering from the very beginning, including the suffering of so many other people, using his divine healing powers.

There's no need for him to inspire people to invent ways to relieve the suffering of others, when he can just directly, and instantly, heal those who are suffering. So, that says to me god, and these heavenly beings, don't care about the suffering of humanity, and it's instead other human beings who care, since they're the ones inventing these techniques, and finding other ways to relieve the suffering of others.

My Reply: Thanks for sharing. But, I tried that technique by following the instructions, and it didn't work for me. Perhaps I'm doing it wrong somehow.

Other Person's Response: Personally, I don't think god had you go through all this suffering for a good reason. He's just allowing you to suffer, since he doesn't care, and it's just up to you to rely on others to help you. It's also up to you to find ways to help yourself.

My Reply: Yes. If god had people go through such suffering for a good reason, then there'd be no cure for said suffering in the future. That says god allows suffering, since he doesn't care, and you're either lucky, and you get a cure for it, or you're unlucky, and have to live with it.

Other Person's Response: Since there are therapeutic methods that help speed up a person's recovery process from mental grief and agony, this already conveys a message, and that message would be: "You shouldn't have to suffer like this. There are things out there that can help you, so you don't have to suffer for so long." Given this message, why doesn't god just instantly cure someone of his mental turmoil? That would be an instant, full recovery right there!

My Reply: If god does exist, then think it's because he doesn't care, and it's instead other people who care, since they're the ones inventing ways to help speed up a person's recovery. Also, if god allows people to suffer for a very good reason, and that's his wish, then there wouldn't be methods out there to help ease suffering, since such methods would go against god's wish, and god wouldn't allow such methods to be invented. So, that says, if god does exist, then he doesn't allow suffering for a good reason. He just allows it because he doesn't care.

Other Person's Response: That all goes back to what you said earlier, which was: "If god allows suffering for a very good reason, then why would god allow cures to be discovered for said suffering?"

My Reply: Yes. It seems to me god just allows anything to happen.

Other Person's Response: I heard, from spiritual believers, that suffering exists for a good purpose, and that people, who have cancer, and other horrible forms of suffering, are going through all of this for a good reason. But, if that were the case, then wouldn't god, and these spiritual beings in the heavenly realms, prevent cures from being discovered? If all this suffering is so good, then why cure it? Why allow science to progress to the point where a utopia life is eventually created for us, where virtually all diseases and forms of suffering are eliminated?

It makes all that suffering seem pointless because people living in this future, utopia world would look back and wonder what was the point of going through all this suffering. If all that suffering was meant to be eliminated, then why go through it in the first place? Why did god allow it to exist to begin with? If god's plan was to create a utopia life for us, then why didn't he create one for us since the beginning of creation, rather than allowing science to eventually progress to the point where a utopia life is created for us, while so many people suffer in the meantime, waiting for cures?

My Reply: Another question to ask is: "If souls are here to learn and grow through suffering and disease, and this is the ultimate goal in life, then how would god, and these spiritual beings, respond once all that suffering and disease is eliminated in a future, utopia life?"

Other Person's Response: You're right when you say it would be wonderful if god instantly healed those in need of healing. Especially those who have little control over their emotions, and are very likely to harm themselves, and others, during an emotional crisis. By allowing these people to bear through their emotional crisis to the very end, that puts themselves and others at risk of being harmed. But, if their minds could instantly be healed, then that risk would be gone.

My Reply: Exactly. Sure, those people might still be a risk to themselves and others, even in their fully recovered state of mind, since they might feel joy in doing risky things. But, at least their emotional crisis would've been gone, which would've posed a serious risk of harm. I, myself, have felt violently enraged so many times during each one of my emotional crises. Fortunately, I never acted out on those feelings. The less control you have over your emotions, the more likely it is you'll harm yourself and/or others. So, the very fact I never harmed myself or others shows I do have some control. But, let's pretend I hardly had any control at all. It would've been god's fault for not healing my mind of an emotional crisis, and allowing me to harm myself and/or others.

Other Person's Response: If you felt violently enraged, and killed someone, then god would allow you to remain in prison. So, not only does god allow you to suffer so much, but he'd also allow you to live your life in prison.

My Reply: Yes. He really doesn't care about me (if he does exist). If he's so loving and caring, not only would he heal my mind of suffering, so I can be happy again, but also so I could avoid the risk of going to prison. The only thing that puts me at risk of going to prison is an emotional crisis, since that's the only time I feel violently enraged. Other than that, I'm a very polite person who's not at risk of committing any crimes. I obey the laws of society, and conduct myself in a moral fashion.

Other Person's Response: Like you said though, you're not going to act out on those violent feelings, are you?

My Reply: I'm not. So, I don't think anyone has to worry about me going to prison.

Other Person's Response: I heard you had a composing dream to live for. Apparently, god doesn't care about that either, since he allows you to remain in a miserable state, where you can't enjoy your composing. Furthermore, if you went to prison because you killed someone, due to a feeling of violent rage that occurred during an ongoing emotional crisis, god wouldn't care that you could no longer pursue your composing dream, and had to live your life in prison. So, I think this says that whatever talents or goals we have are things god doesn't care about.

My Reply: Yes. So, amazingly talented people, who say they're blessed by god with a talent to pursue, might be wrong. Sure, they have an amazing talent. But, that doesn't mean it was a divine talent that was bestowed by a loving god who ensures that these talented individuals achieve their goals. So, this says to me human beings are just here, and there's no grand purpose to life. Nobody is destined to achieve goals, which means god doesn't ensure that we achieve our goals. Some people are lucky, and manage to achieve their goals and dreams, while others are plain unlucky. So, this seems like a universe of luck, rather than destiny, or a grand purpose. Given this, god might not exist, and this really is the meaningless universe skeptics always talk about.

Other Person's Response: So, that means people, who have amazing talents and goals, aren't chosen by god. If they were, then god would care about them, their talents, and goals, and he'd ensure they achieve their goals and dreams.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: In regards to god not healing suffering people, if there was a loving parent who had healing abilities, then he'd heal a suffering child in need of healing. So, the very fact god doesn't heal those in need of healing, must mean he's not a loving god.

My Reply: You're right. That's assuming if god does exist.

Other Person's Response: I believe god, and these heavenly beings, exist. But, I don't think they allow suffering for any good reason. This Earthly existence is simply a domain of free will, where they don't intervene, and they allow people to make whatever choices they make in whatever circumstances they face.

My Reply: It seems they just don't care about humanity then, since they don't intervene. So, you can see why this whole idea of Earth being a domain of free will, where god, and these heavenly beings, don't intervene, clearly depicts them as unloving beings. I'll give another example that gives this depiction. In my example with the talented singer who permanently lost her voice, that's like a big middle finger to her, and it's like saying to her: "I don't care about you, and I'm not going to restore your voice, even when I have the power to. Just use your free will to do something else with your life because you're not ever going to be a singer again."

Other Person's Response: Suffering is allowed because it erases sin, and raises our level of consciousness.

My Reply: If that's the purpose of suffering, then why allow cures to be discovered for suffering?

Other Person's Response: I think god allows suffering because it has to do with karma. If we inflicted suffering upon someone in a previous life, then the moment we reincarnate, we must suffer in this lifetime.

My Reply: Again, if that's the reason why he allows suffering, then why does he allow cures for suffering? A future utopia life, where all suffering has been eliminated through cures, contradicts this purpose of suffering you put forth, as well as any other purpose put forth as to why god allows suffering.

Other Person's Response: I'd contend there's no contradiction. An all knowing God, omniscient God, knows the fallen nature of humanity will include self-destructive behaviors that lead to suffering. That knowledge would also include humanity contracting diseases, like cancer.

The Creator insured a means of healing so as to address those maladies. Inspiring minds to invent medicinal remedies after Creator gave us plants and herbs for healing naturally.

Christian Scientists don't believe in physician assistance. They think prayer will solve all their ills. But what if God created science and doctors so that those would serve as an answer to those prayers.

My Reply: Again, there's no need for all of that when god is all powerful, and can instantly heal all suffering people in need of healing in the blink of an eye.

Other Person's Response:
Quote:
Again, there's no need for all of that when god is all powerful, and can instantly heal all suffering people in need of healing in the blink of an eye.


Completely agree. I hate to see people suffer in a lot of pain emotionally. For example, there’s no reason my sister should be going through what she's going through right now. If I had the opportunity, I’d erase her problems, and the problems of anyone else in need of their problems erased.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: I think god should imbue human beings with his energy around them. It would be an aura that would protect them, and would heal them of any illness or suffering they have.

My Reply: I agree.

Other Person's Response: If an amazingly talented singer permanently lost her voice, and god didn't restore it, I'd actually consider that a blessing because there's so much problems when a person, who has an amazing talent, enters into fame, fortune, stardom, being idolized, etc. It's best to just keep a low profile.

My Reply: But, what about a talented singer who doesn't want to sing for any fame, fortune, etc., and would never enter into fame, fortune, etc.? If she just wishes to sing privately because she likes to do it as a hobby, and finds it profoundly beautiful, then it would be a blessing for god to restore her voice if she permanently lost it. As a side note, few people enter into fame, fortune, etc.

Other Person's Response: I think you were right when you said earlier that your miserable struggles were pointless, unnecessary hardships because, not only is god, and these heavenly beings, allowing suffering for no grand purpose, but all your misery didn't result in you obtaining something that was worth all that mental suffering.

My Reply: Exactly.

Other Person's Response: I believe in god. But, I don't think he's a being who's allowing suffering because, if he was, then there'd be the contradictions you've pointed out earlier, such as god allowing suffering, and allowing cures for suffering. I think god is literally everything, and all circumstances that occur.

My Reply: Many people, who have heavenly trips during their near death experience, report meeting god, who's an actual being of light. In addition, these people meet heavenly beings.

Other Person's Response: If you had the choice, would you violently threaten god, and these heavenly beings, to heal you of the mental suffering you've gone through?

My Reply: Yes, because they don't seem to care about me, and allow me to suffer.

Other Person's Response: Even if god wasn't allowing your suffering for a good reason, you would, at least, have gained something by trying to help ease your mental suffering through therapy. You would've gained the benefits certain therapeutic methods offer, such as having more control over your thoughts and emotions, learning relaxing exercises, etc.

My Reply: Again, all that mental suffering wasn't worth obtaining these benefits. It would be like earning a crumb after having gone through years of mental turmoil.

Other Person's Response: I think god, and these heavenly beings, inspire scientists to create cures.

My Reply: There's no need for them to do that when they already have the power to instantly heal people of all illnesses and forms of suffering. But, since they're not healing anybody, then I don't think they're inspiring scientists either. So, they just don't care about humanity, and don't intervene.

Other Person's Response: What about people with healing abilities who can heal people of illnesses?

My Reply: There's still no need for god, and these heavenly beings, to bestow healing abilities upon certain people, when they have the power to heal people themselves.

Other Person's Response: It could be the case that healing abilities are fake, and many people believe this crap.

My Reply: You could be right, which means people, such as spiritual healers, don't really have these healing abilities. But, if they do, then such abilities might be a natural phenomenon, and not a divine gift that's been bestowed by god, or heavenly beings.

Other Person's Response:

Quote:
It seems to me they don't care about humanity, and they allow anything to happen. They don't intervene, and they just allow life to play out.


Adversity breeds invention. If there was no adversity, wouldn't you just sit back and enjoy the ride? The cure is reached through the struggle to attain knowledge. Cure is the goal. Suffering is not. Have you noticed, when a disease is cured, that a new disease pops up from somewhere? The next lesson continues moving us forward. God has placed a limit on pain. The body goes into shock when it reaches a certain level.

So many times in life, we don't get life as we want it. Our narrow view sometimes brings us to focus on one thing, rather than the Big Picture. Furthermore, this world contains many many people learning their lessons. The dynamics of it all are amazing. There is a lot to consider. As I see it, God will give a person anything, unless it interferes with their lessons, or the lessons of another. Adapt, learn, grow.

If we can't have something, go for something we can have, or get someone else something they need. The possibilities are limitless. If a singer can no longer sing, perhaps she can create music making sound. Perhaps she can advance computer generated singing. The avenues of creating are moved. But, there's always a way to move forward in some way. Who said anyone should give up? Not here, my friend. Life is about living, and forward is the only way.

My Reply: I consider what's the better, loving solution an all-loving god would implement. Would it really be the better, loving solution to allow humanity to go through this whole process of suffering and finding cures? Or, would it be the better, loving solution for god to just instantly heal those in need of healing? I think the latter solution is the better, loving one. Especially considering there are miserable people who are suicidal for many years, even with ongoing treatment, and are in need of mental healing.

Also, in regards to goals and dreams, if that singer permanently lost her voice, she might not have any interest in creating music. Sure, she might find an interest in doing another hobby. But, her singing hobby might always be the one hobby she has most interest in, and sees as the most beautiful. Now, she can no longer pursue that hobby, since god won't heal her voice. As a matter of fact, it could be an even worse scenario. She might not have an interest in any other hobby, no matter how much she tries other hobbies, and her singing hobby is the one and only hobby she has interest in.

Other Person's Response: Could you show me an example of someone who thinks like you (i.e. someone who thinks this Earthly existence is pointless, that there are pointless forms of suffering, and that it would be better if all souls remained in heaven)?

My Reply: Sure. It's an entire topic I'll link you to. The person who made this topic, on a spiritual forum, isn't me. It's someone who sort of has the same views as me:

http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=118755

Other Person's Response: I heard there are spiritual beings, such as Jesters, and Machine Elves. Perhaps they're pranksters, who play a cruel joke on us, by having souls be here on Earth, where they go through pointless forms of suffering, and have to reincarnate on Earth many times.

My Reply: That could be.

Other Person's Response: There are many people with amazing talents, and great goals to achieve, only to find themselves in a position where they lose everything. For example, a person can have an amazing singing voice, but permanently lose his voice. If you listened to the song "In the End" by Linkin Park, you'll get the idea. This says to me life's a cruel joke.

My Reply: I agree.

Other Person's Response: You say your miserable struggles were a pointless waste of your life, and nothing more. Well, I think you writing all these packets is just a pointless waste of your life, and nothing more.

My Reply: I don't think so. I think it's material well worth sharing.

Other Person's Response: I'm just curious. Were you really waiting for god, or these heavenly beings, to heal you of this misery-inducing worry you've had?

My Reply: No. If god, and these beings, do exist, then I knew they wouldn't heal me, even though I do think they should've healed me. So, I was really waiting for my brain to fully recover on its own. I gave up after trying some things to help speed up my recovery process, since it just wasn't working for me. Especially since my therapist is telling me that the best thing I can do is to focus on my daily activities, and allow the worry to resolve on its own over time (i.e. to just let my brain fully recover on its own). But, perhaps I shouldn't give up so easily, and see if there's something more that can be done for me.

Other Person's Response: The goal of meditation is to help relax your mind, which would get you to a state of full recovery faster, so that you have your joy back to you again, and no longer have to be in a state of suffering any longer. So, meditation would offer you a form of spiritual growth, which would be to overcome your suffering. But, even if you didn't do meditation, and allowed your psyche to fully recover on its own, that's still a form of spiritual growth, since you're still overcoming your suffering.

My Reply: I think it would be better if I didn't have such suffering to begin with. That way, there'd be no horrible, miserable state to recover from.

Other Person's Response: I think you'll look back and see just how necessary and worthwhile your miserable struggles were. I think it was worth going through all that suffering, and people often times look back at their struggles, and come to realize just how beautiful they really were.

My Reply: I don't think that will ever be the case with me.

Other Person's Response: In regards to your hedonistic philosophy, the astral plane (the plane corresponding to the emotional body) is considered as the plane of duality. It is, therefore, difficult to only feel positive emotions without also feeling so-called negative emotions. The yogic path teaches the cultivation of emotional serenity, so that we become free from all emotions.

This does not make us cold and uncaring. Qualities, such as love, compassion, joy, and humor, are not considered as emotional states. Instead, these are seen as qualities of the Soul, or Consciousness. When the emotional body is serene and still, then these Soul qualities can be expressed without distortion.

I would suggest that consciousness is beyond all intellect and emotions. The qualities of beauty, joy, love, compassion, etc. arise spontaneously out of consciousness. These qualities may be reflected on an intellectual and emotional level. But, these are just reflections.

My Reply: If that's the case, then I'd need a new personal experience to convince me that my emotions aren't the only way I can experience beauty, joy, love, horror, disgust, tragedy, etc. Who knows, it could be the case that these qualities are being ruled and dictated by my emotions. This means that, for me, I really am experiencing these qualities through my emotions, and have yet to experience them through my Soul, or Consciousness. After all, I need to experience these qualities somehow, someway to give my life beauty, joy, greatness, etc. My current way of experiencing them would be through my emotions.

Other Person's Response: Do you think your miserable struggles were not only pointless, but unnecessary?

My Reply: Yes. It would be like having unnecessary grime on a nice vehicle. The grime was meant to be removed, just as how all my misery was meant to be removed out of my life. It would be better off if that vehicle remained polished and clean, and never had any grime on it to begin with, just as how it would be better off if I never had those miserable struggles to begin with.

Other Person's Response: If your philosophy is correct, and the goal in life should be to live the happiest life we can, then having misery really is like unnecessary grime. It just doesn't belong.

My Reply: Yes.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 08/08/2020 at 09:20:27