0
   

All My Philosophy Packets (Files)

 
 
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 May, 2020 11:41 am
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: If a person had insomnia, and he had the thought of being sleepy, then that thought can't make him sleepy. He'd need to take some sleep medication to restore his feeling of sleepiness. That way, he can be sleepy again. Likewise, when a clinically depressed person is unable to feel wanting or liking, and he had the thought of wanting or liking something, then that thought can't make him want or like that thing. He'd need to take some antidepressants to restore his feelings of wanting and liking, so he can want and like things again.

My Reply: Right. Also, that sleep analogy does work. But, the difference being that a feeling of sleepiness isn't an emotional state, and wanting and liking are emotional states.

Other Person's Response: Since love, happiness, and perceptions of beauty are also emotions, then a clinically depressed person would need to take antidepressants to restore those emotions as well, wouldn't he?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Here's a link that talks about positive emotions being 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/

Here's another article as well:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2756052/

My Reply: Thanks for sharing.

Other Person's Response: Since emotions are feelings of wanting, liking, and disliking, then that means emotions possess qualities of wanting, liking, and disliking, which makes emotions wanting, liking, and disliking.

My Reply: Yes, and the same idea applies to emotions being good, bad, beauty, horror, love, happiness, compassion, etc. Our emotions possess those qualities as well.

Other Person's Response: Our emotions are nothing more than just feelings. They don't possess any of the qualities mentioned above.

My Reply: I think people who say this are delusional and in denial because my personal experience says emotions do possess those qualities.

Other Person's Response: Since positive emotions are the only perceptions of goodness, beauty, and awesomeness, and since they're the reward wanting and liking, then that means we see goodness, beauty, and awesomeness in things through rewarding feelings of wanting and liking.

My Reply: Yes. Also, when you, for example, have the thought that something is good, and said thought isn't just a thought that this thing is good, but is something you want or like, then that thought would normally make you feel good, and that good feeling would be a feeling of wanting or liking. But, like I said, there are circumstances that can prevent that thought from making you feel that emotion, such as having clinical depression, emotional trauma, mental fatigue, etc.

Other Person's Response: So, when thoughts make us feel emotions, the qualities that our thoughts possess become emotional qualities? That's why a good thought of wanting or liking becomes a good feeling of wanting or liking?

My Reply: Yes. But, remember, the thoughts alone can't be good, wanting, liking, disliking, beauty, horror, love, hate, etc. Only our emotions can. So, our thoughts alone don't actually possess any of those qualities. Rather, they're simply ideas of those qualities. It's our emotions that possess those qualities. Therefore, our thoughts alone don't possess any loving, hateful, good, bad, horrific, etc. power, and only our emotions do.

Other Person's Response: I really hope science finds cures in the future for depression and other mental illnesses that take away our ability to feel positive emotions. That way, people can have their love, happiness, goodness, beauty, wanting, liking, etc. restored back to them.

My Reply: Right. Also, if I had a cure for this recent, emotional trauma I've had, then I would've been cured the exact moment I had the trauma, which means I wouldn't have to go through all that misery, negativity, and absence of positive emotions. It took a very long time for me to recover from this emotional trauma, which means I had to wait for my positive emotions to return, and I had to endure through all that suffering. It was no way to live or be a composer for me, and I could've avoided all that waiting and suffering if I had a cure right then and there.

Other Person's Response: 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: Based upon my personal experience, I've concluded that these qualities are emotional, and I'd need a new personal experience to convince me otherwise.

Other Person's Response: When people claim these qualities aren't emotional, such as when they say they've obtained a state of happiness through yoga meditation, claim that said happiness isn't emotional, and say this happiness is instead a Soul quality, do you think this happiness is, in fact, emotional? So, do you think they're just getting a powerful, profound feeling of happiness from their meditation that they claim is non-emotional, when it's really emotional?

My Reply: That could be the case. No matter how powerful and profound of an emotion a person is feeling, that person shouldn't make the mistake of assuming that this feeling is something that transcends emotion, when that feeling was an emotion all along.

Other Person's Response: It could be the case that people are having powerful, positive, subconscious thoughts during their meditation that make them feel powerful, positive emotions, and they claim they're having powerful, positive experiences that are neither intellectual nor emotional.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: If a person claimed he had no ability to feel any emotions, he did certain tasks, and said these tasks mattered to him, then he must've felt some level of emotion, even though he didn't realize it.

My Reply: Right.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 May, 2020 10:26 am
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: If you were to have a discussion with someone in person, and you discussed all the material in this document, then if people would be interested and willing to listen in on that conversation, then why wouldn't they be interested and willing to read the material in this document?

My Reply: Right. If people are willing to listen, then why wouldn't they be willing to read? I know plenty of people who have conversations, and there are others listening in on those conversations. The conversations don't have excellent grammar, presentation, explanation, etc. Yet, these people are still interested in listening to those conversations. So, why wouldn't they be willing to read those conversations?

Other Person's Response: You didn't type all this information for nothing. So, if people would rather listen to you discuss all this information in person, then that would just be a waste of time and effort on your part, since you already have all that information typed out for others to read.

My Reply: Right. Not only that, when I type, I have plenty of time to plan and think, which would make the written material better planned and thought out than if I were to discuss the material in person. Also, if I were to instead have a discussion in person, then I'd have to remember as much written material as I can. But, I forget things often, which means I'd forget much of the written material.

Other Person's Response: If someone says that it would be a good thing to harm others if we felt good about doing it, then such a statement isn't necessarily indicative of a cold, unloving, serial killer. It could instead be indicative of someone whose emotions have power and control over him/her.

My Reply: Right. So, the very fact I have this philosophy doesn't mean I have the outlook of a cold, unloving, serial killer. It could just mean my emotions have complete dominance over my life. So, if someone says emotions are the only good and bad things, then it could just mean that this person is simply allowing his emotions to be the sole determiner of good and bad in his life. It doesn't mean this person is a serial killer or a cold, unloving individual.

Other Person's Response: You claim that love and happiness are positive emotions. I don't think you know what love and happiness are. They're things that go far beyond fleeting, emotional states.

My Reply: But, even scientists claim that love and happiness are positive emotions, and there's debate between scientists and other people in regards to what love and happiness are.

Other Person's Response: If someone was in a miserable, suicidal state of mind, couldn't see it as a good thing to help others, and someone came along and told that miserable person that he should endure his misery like a tough man, and help others anyway because it's still a good thing, then that would be inconsiderate because that person is in a horrible, miserable, suicidal state of mind, where he can't see goodness in anything.

Being in that state of mind is no way to live, and anyone who says otherwise would be inconsiderate. It would, therefore, be inconsiderate to tell that miserable, suicidal individual that he doesn't need to recover back into a positive state of mind (where he's able to see goodness in things), and that he instead just needs to focus on living the best he can, helping others, making contributions to the world, etc.

My Reply: Right. Our state of mind (perception) is what's important here, and must be taken into consideration when we're doing tasks and deeds. That's something that should never be dismissed. I, myself, have had miserable, suicidal perceptions (feelings) during my miserable struggles, and I couldn't see goodness in anything. People still told me to live the best I can anyway, to help others, contribute to the world, etc. But, these people would be inconsiderate and dismissive.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 May, 2020 02:57 pm
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: Your hedonistic philosophy faces an issue, which would be that it would be a good thing to harm others if we saw it as a good thing (felt it was a good thing). But, non-hedonistic philosophies also face an issue, which would be that it would still be a good thing to help others, even when we're in a miserable, suicidal state of mind, where we can't see helping others as a good thing (can't feel good about helping others). It's an issue because some people would disagree that it's still a good thing to help others if we can't see it as a good thing.

The issues these philosophies face are seemingly falsehoods (or absurdities). In other words, they make these philosophies seem false. So, people could name call you because of the absurdity your philosophy faces. They could call you a cold serial killer for thinking that it would be a good thing to harm others if we felt good about doing it. But, at the same time, you could name call others because of the absurdity their non-hedonistic philosophies face.

My Reply: Right. But, I'm not the type of person to name call others.

Other Person's Response: I heard that the astral beings want us to suffer, so we can develop as individuals. But, if a person suffers during a lifetime, and doesn't develop, then he must reincarnate and go through all that suffering again during another lifetime. This cycle of reincarnation and suffering will continue until that person finally develops. I realize all your miserable struggles have never transformed you as an individual, since you still live by this hedonistic philosophy. So, I think that means you're going to undergo all these miserable struggles again in another lifetime.

My Reply: Like I said, I think that's pointless, unnecessary suffering, when I could just have a powerful, positive, blissful experience that transforms me as an individual. Besides, no matter how many lifetimes of suffering I go through, that might never change my philosophy. So, why not just give me one of those powerful, heavenly, blissful, life-transforming experiences?

Other Person's Response: If these astral beings want your philosophy to change, but it can never change, then your philosophy is just your personal view, and these beings would be imposing their philosophy upon you by having you go through lives of misery. These beings think misery, apathy, and unhappiness is a good thing, while your philosophy says it's not a good thing. So, these beings should be working in your favor by ensuring your good feelings, rather than imposing their values upon you.

My Reply: I agree.

Other Person's Response: If someone had the thought of wanting or liking a movie, but didn't think it was a good movie, and that thought made him feel wanting or liking, then does that mean he'd want or like the movie, but won't see the movie as good, since the feeling of wanting or liking he got wasn't a good feeling?

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: You still have thoughts that certain animals are adorable, and said thoughts normally make you feel that they're adorable, right?

My Reply: Yes. So, just because I'm not attached to animals, and not bothered by their death or suffering, doesn't mean they don't matter to me at all. If they didn't matter to me at all, then I wouldn't have had that feeling of adoration.

Other Person's Response: You said earlier that feelings of beauty need to be good feelings. So, if someone felt beauty, and it wasn't a good feeling, then wouldn't that mean that feeling of beauty wasn't holy? Likewise, if someone feels disgust or horror, and it wasn't a bad feeling, then wouldn't that mean that feeling wasn't unholy?

My Reply: I think you're right.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 May, 2020 06:40 pm
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: Emotions are moods. So, a feeling of horror is a horrific mood, which is a perception of horror, which is a horrific emotion. Our moods are mental atmospheres. So, a feeling of horror would be a horrific, mental atmosphere.

My Reply: Right. Also, many people tend to trivialize moods. But, they're not trivial. They're the only beauty, horror, goodness, badness, tragedy, love, hate, etc.

Other Person's Response: When artists talk about conveying beauty, horror, tragedy, love, hate, etc. through their artwork, they're talking about conveying moods.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If I felt bad (was in a bad mood), then you're saying it wouldn't be a good thing if I helped others and made contributions to the world, since good moods are the only good things?

My Reply: That's right. When you do any given task or deed, then you need to feel good about it in order for it to be a good thing. So, when a person is playing his video game, he's experiencing a mental stimulus (the video game). But, that mental stimulus can't just be a mental stimulus. It needs to be accompanied by another mental state/experience, which would be a good, awesome, or beautiful mood (mental atmosphere). In other words, he needs to feel goodness, awesomeness, or beauty in regards to his video game in order for it to be good, awesome, or beautiful in his personal life/mental universe.

Other Person's Response: Are sexually erotic moods the only sexually erotic things?

My Reply: Yes. So, if nobody could have these moods, then nobody and nothing could be sexually erotic.

Other Person's Response: Are magnificent moods the only magnificent things?

My Reply: Yes. So, if nobody could have feelings of magnificence, then even the most talented performances and stunts couldn't be magnificent. Even if we were bestowed with genius intelligence, then that couldn't be magnificent. There are many people who treat intelligence as superior to emotions. But, without emotions, then intelligence couldn't be good, beautiful, or magnificent.

Other Person's Response: An apathetic mood is an emotionless state.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: I think children say that emotions are the only good, bad, beautiful, horrific, etc. things in life. Their emotional philosophy is immature, and they just need to develop a better, mature philosophy. So, I think you're just like a child who needs to mature. I don't think you're like a cold-blooded serial killer.

My Reply: Right. But, if my philosophy was true all along, then it wouldn't make sense to say that I'm like a child who needs to develop a better philosophy. That's because feeling good really is the only good thing in life, and it would make no sense to treat other things as good besides good feelings.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 09:36 am
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: If there is a divine perception of goodness that we obtain through meditation, then I don't think it would be a perception of goodness in regards to harming and torturing others. I think it would be a perception of goodness in regards to helping others, doing our hobbies, etc.

My Reply: Right. The same idea applies to divine happiness and love. I don't think a person would, for example, obtain the happiness of harming others through his meditation.

Other Person's Response: If you can never convert over to a different philosophy, no matter how hard you try, then perhaps your philosophy was right all along. The truth is the truth, and it can't be changed. So, if your philosophy is true, then you'll never convert.

My Reply: Right. But, if my philosophy is true, then the only way I could convert to a different philosophy would be if I deluded myself into believing another philosophy. That's never going to happen. So, if my philosophy is true, then I'll always have this philosophy.

Other Person's Response: Sometimes, the truth can change. For example, it could be true one moment that it's raining, and true another moment that it's sunny.

My Reply: Yes. But, if it's true that feeling good is the only good thing in life, then that's a truth that can never change. So, if my philosophy is true, then it's the truth, and I won't be able to convert to a different philosophy, since all other philosophies would be incorrect with their views of good, bad, beauty, horror, love, happiness, hate, etc.

Other Person's Response: If someone had the thought that killing himself was a good thing, and that thought made him feel good about killing himself, then we might as well say it's a good thing if he kills himself, since feeling good is the only good thing, according to your philosophy.

My Reply: That's right. Good and bad are personally determined by the individual's feelings. So, if an individual personally feels good about killing himself, then, for him, it would be a good thing, since he sees it as a good thing. To tell him it's a bad thing to kill himself, even though he feels good about doing it, would be no different than telling someone that certain works of art, hobbies, foods, sports, and clothes are bad and awful, when that individual personally loves them and sees them as good. For that individual, those things would be good, since he sees them as good. For those other people, they'd be bad and awful, since they see them as bad and awful.

Other Person's Response: So, good and bad are just personal feelings/judgments/perceptions?

My Reply: Yes. The same thing applies to beauty, horror, tragedy, magnificence, etc.

Other Person's Response: Of all the lives you've lived, I'm sure you've developed a better philosophy in one of these lives. But, here you are again in this lifetime, having regressed back to this shallow, hedonistic, self-defeating philosophy you have now. Therefore, you must find a way to develop a better philosophy once again.

My Reply: I'm not sure if I've ever lived by a better philosophy in a previous life. Who knows, I could've had this hedonistic philosophy throughout all the lives I've lived. But, if the morals (good and bad) advocated by better philosophies aren't false and delusional like my philosophy says they are, and I lived by these better morals in previous lives, then it seems pointless and unnecessary for all the life lessons, knowledge, and forms of personal growth I've obtained in previous lives to be erased by these beings, just so I can start out in a new life as a shallow, dumb hedonist who must find a way to reacquire the life lessons, knowledge, and forms of personal growth I've obtained in previous lives. I just don't see the point in having to find a way to develop a better philosophy/better morals, when I've already done so in a previous life.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Jun, 2020 12:43 am
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: So, the only way someone or something can be good, bad, horrific, tragic, etc. in my eyes is if I felt good, bad, horror, tragedy, etc. in regards to that person or thing?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: So, if someone thought that something was good or bad, believed something was good or bad, or believed he could perceive something as good or bad in the absence of his emotions, then those thoughts or beliefs alone wouldn't allow him to perceive something as good or bad?

My Reply: Correct. Our thoughts and beliefs alone can't allow us to perceive people and things as good or bad.

Other Person's Response: So, it could be the case that you're permanently stuck with this philosophy, and nothing will ever change it?

My Reply: That could be.

Other Person's Response: Since positive experiences are so important to you, then why not define a positive experience as something else besides positive emotions?

My Reply: I did and it didn't work for me. So, my positive emotions are the only positive experiences for me. Nothing else can be a positive experience for me, regardless of what I define as a positive experience.

Other Person's Response: If your philosophy was right all along, then positive emotions really are the only positive experiences, since they're the only good, beautiful, amazing, magnificent, etc. experiences.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, people should avoid having emotional traumas, since said traumas make them horrible, pitiful, or disgusting people, given the fact that having an emotional trauma causes an individual to have horrible, pitiful, or disgusting feelings (perceptions) in regards to himself.

My Reply: Right, and those feelings are things the individual can't help. So, a person can't help but become a horrible, pitiful, or disgusting person during his emotional trauma. I couldn't help but become such a person during my emotional traumas.

Other Person's Response: I'd imagine divine, unconditional love and happiness to be good feelings (perceptions of goodness). That's what would make them good, after all.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: Can reason alone allow us to perceive good, bad, beauty, horror, etc., even if it's at an extremely small intensity level that the individual is unable to detect?

My Reply: I don't think so. But, I could be wrong.

Other Person's Response: When reading music books for dummies (such as the book "Music Theory for Dummies"), are there some things in these books you have a difficult time understanding, even though said books are meant for dumb people to comprehend?

My Reply: Yes. When it comes to simple, straightforward things in these books, I can easily understand said things. But, when it comes to more complicated things in these books, I have a difficult time understanding said things.

Other Person's Response: Then perhaps you should have a music teacher or someone online who could clarify the things you have a hard time understanding in these books.

My Reply: I could just watch some youtube videos or read some material online that clarifies these things. After all, I've already done so with some of the material in these books. In order for me to understand something, it must be presented and explained in a way that a child could understand it, and these music books for dummies don't do that. But, there are some youtube videos and online sources that do.

Other Person's Response: So, when it comes to a more challenging musical topic than the basics (the basics being note names, the grand staff, etc.), then these more challenging topics must be presented and explained in a way that a child could understand them? So, they must be explained as clear, thorough, and simple as possible? Otherwise, you'd have a difficult time understanding them?

My Reply: Yes. So, if someone explains anything to me that's more challenging than the basics, then I'd be confused and start to misinterpret things being explained to me if said explanations aren't in a format that a child could understand.

Other Person's Response: I just think you lack the necessary knowledge and experience to understand things. So, if you had a lot of knowledge and experience, then nobody would have to present and explain things to you like a child. If you were highly intelligent, then you could even understand explanations geared towards professionals.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: I don't think you are naturally creating powerful, profound melodies in your mind. I think you're just creating meaningless, rubbish melodies in your mind that you think are powerful and profound.

My Reply: You could be right. But, it's possible I am creating powerful, profound melodies in my mind, and I'm going to find out once I learn everything I need to learn about composing. If my composing knowledge leads me to the conclusion that these melodies in my mind were meaningless rubbish all along, then so be it. I'll just have to create powerful, profound melodies through the knowledge I've learned, rather than through inspiration alone.

Other Person's Response: How can you expect to create awesome, powerful, profound melodies in your mind through inspiration alone, when you haven't even learned how to compose a good melody?

My Reply: In another packet/document, I talk about how our brains are naturally capable of creating awesome, powerful, and profound works of art in our minds during drug trips, dreams and nightmares, and inspiration alone. It's no different than how our brains are naturally capable of other functions.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2020 02:53 pm
@MozartLink,
Other Person’s Response: Emotions that are less intense can last for quite a while. For example, a mild feeling of anxiety could last for a long time. Think of people who have chronic anxiety. But, a panic attack only lasts for a short time.

My Reply: Yes. I’m able to continually enjoy my life and hobbies throughout the day (providing I don't have any miserable moments taking away my feelings of enjoyment). I think these feelings of enjoyment last because they're not intense feelings. If they were intense, then they'd only last for short periods of time.

Other Person's Response: You're right when you say there are certain things that can prevent us from feeling certain emotions, such as mental illnesses, stress, etc. Another thing would be not being in the mood. For example, if I just wasn't in the mood to exercise today, then any motivational thought I had wouldn't be able to make me feel motivated to exercise.

My Reply: Right. As for me, it's often the case that I'm not in the mood to exercise. But, I'm normally in the mood to do my hobbies throughout the day.

Other Person's Response: Works of art, by themselves, do convey feelings of horror, beauty, magnificence, tragedy, etc.? But, without our emotions, then those works of art can't be horrific, beautiful, etc.?

My Reply: Correct, and neither can they convey anything horrific, beautiful, etc.

Other Person's Response: During your emotional traumas, you say you've constantly perceived things in your life as morbidly insignificant and meaningless, which means you constantly felt that way until you've fully recovered from said emotional traumas.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: I heard that you're going back to your previous hobby (playing video games) if composing doesn't work out for you. In other words, if you're unable to create the awesome, powerful, profound music that expresses what you want to express to the audience, then you're giving up composing and going back to playing video games.

My Reply: Yes. I have no interest in any other field of art. So, if I give up composing, I'm not pursuing another field of art, such as writing, even though many people have told me I'm a talented writer.

Other Person's Response: So, you only pursue your own interests? That's why you're only pursuing composing? I think you should appreciate other fields of art. So, if composing just doesn't work out for you, then perhaps you should write stories, even though you're not interested. Over time, you might appreciate the art of writing and become interested in writing stories.

My Reply: That will be for me to decide. I am interested in writing all the material in this document to share to others because it's important to me that others gain plenty of insight about me, my composing dream, and my personal views. But, I don't care about writing stories or articles.

Other Person's Response: You haven't written all this material in such a way that it would be appealing to readers. It's all in a boring, explanatory, discussive format. So, readers aren't going to spend much time at all, if any, into reading it.

My Reply: But, there are people willing to read through all this, such as my mother and therapist. So, there will be other people who'd be willing to read through all this. But, like I said, not too many people.

Other Person's Response: Your therapist is willing to read through all your material because he gets paid to do so, and your mother is willing to because she's just your mother. But, if you want anyone else to read through all your material, besides a therapist or family member, then you'd need to pay them.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: I heard that you wish to convey a feeling of awesomeness (a positive emotion) through your music. It wouldn't be a feeling of awesomeness that has a light-hearted, cheerful tone to it (such as going on a summer vacation). It would be a feeling of awesomeness or magnificence that has a heavy, otherworldly, dramatic, demonic tone to it. You say such a feeling wouldn't be like something from the underworld/hell. It would be a feeling that's out of this world (celestial/cosmic), and such a feeling might be something that would be conveyed by an anime.

My Reply: That's right. I'm not sure if I'd even describe the feeling I wish to convey as alien, since describing it as such might give the impression that I wish to compose music that sounds like popular and famous alien-sounding themes. My music would be completely different than that, and I'm not sure how I'd accurately describe it.

Other Person's Response: In regards to positive emotions, such as feelings of awesomeness, they can either have a light-hearted, cheerful tone to them, or a heavy tone to them. An example of a feeling of awesomeness that has a heavy tone to it would be a hardcore wrestler who feels the awesome, masculine drive to beat down his opponent. If a theme song were to be created to express that awesome feeling, then it would be a heavy, hardcore theme song, as opposed to a light-hearted, cheerful theme.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: I heard you gave another example of the music you wish to compose. It would be heavy metal music with otherworldly-sounding instruments to it.

My Reply: Right. Again, this music would be nothing normal, which means it wouldn't convey a normal feeling, such as a heavy metal concert.

Other Person's Response: There are heavy metal bands that compose bizarre, otherworldly-sounding music. An example would be Slipknot.

My Reply: But, my music would be completely different than that. Slipknot composes music that evokes an ordinary reaction within the audience because it makes people want to scream things, such as: "What awesome ****! I'm going to bang my head to this!" But, my music would evoke a completely different reaction. It might make people want to slowly back away from it. So, I don't wish to evoke an ordinary reaction within the audience through my music, which means I don't wish to compose music that conveys normal feelings that make people want to get up and groove, dance, bang their heads, etc.

Other Person's Response: Yes, Slipknot, as well as some other heavy metal bands, do compose music that conveys a bizarre, otherworldly mood. But, such moods apparently have a normal, ordinary quality to them, since they evoke ordinary reactions within the audience. But, you say you wish to convey moods through your compositions that don't have such an ordinary quality.

My Reply: Right. So, if I were to compose a heavy metal song that conveys a bizarre, otherworldly mood, then it can't have an ordinary feeling to it, such as a heavy metal concert feeling that evokes the normal reaction of making people want to bang their heads and scream.

Other Person's Response: So, Slipknot, as well as some other bands, must be composing music that's not totally otherworldly and out of the ordinary. Otherwise, people wouldn't be getting ordinary reactions from it.

My Reply: Right. But, I wish to compose music that's totally otherworldly and out of the ordinary, which means I don't wish to evoke an ordinary reaction within the audience.

Other Person's Response: But, there are some people who do have ordinary reactions to things that are completely out of the ordinary.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: You say you wish to convey a feeling of awesomeness through your compositions. But, you could end up creating compositions that convey a feeling of horror. Just because you'd feel awesome about these compositions doesn't mean they convey a feeling of awesomeness. There's a difference between the feelings we get from certain compositions, and the feelings these compositions actually convey. For example, a person could feel sad in regards to a certain composition. But, that doesn't mean the composition conveys a sad feeling. A person could also get a feeling of beauty (a positive emotion) in regards to a certain composition. But, that doesn't mean the composition conveys a feeling of beauty. So, when composing music, make sure that said compositions actually convey the feelings you want to convey.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: There were times I felt joy from listening to horror music. But, the music doesn't convey feelings of joy. It conveys feelings of horror, since it's horror music.

My Reply: Right.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Jun, 2020 12:49 am
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: In regards to your goal as a composer, which is to compose otherworldly music that astonishes the audience, I really don't think Earth is a place to achieve our goals, since this Earthly realm is an unfortunate place where there are circumstances that prevent us from achieving said goals. There are 3 things that can prevent you from achieving your goal as a composer:

1.) Your emotional drive to compose gets taken away somehow. You say that, without this emotional drive, composing can't matter to you, and you can't see it as a good, valuable, or worthwhile endeavor. That's why you give up composing when you're not in the mood for it. Well, there are many things that can disable one's emotional drive, and you mentioned some of those things earlier.

But, what if your emotional drive to compose got disabled on a chronic, daily basis due to chronic depression? Who knows, you could develop chronic, clinical depression someday, or some mental illness, that renders you with a chronic absence of that emotional drive. That would put you in a position where you'd mostly be giving up on your composing dream. Thus, you wouldn't achieve your goal as a composer.

2.) An unfortunate circumstance happens to you, such as living on life support, having some fatality happen to you (such as a heart attack or stroke) that kills you off before you get the chance to achieve your goal as a composer, going to prison, living in a group home (where you'll be enslaved and would hardly have any time to achieve your composing goal), etc.

3.) You just don't have the talent to achieve your composing goal. There are people who just aren't talented at certain things, and I realize you're incapable in many areas, given the fact that you're an autistic, special needs person. So, you might be incapable of composing the awesome music you said you wanted to compose.

Given these 3 factors, you could still try to go through with achieving your composing goal. But, personally, I don't think it's really going to work out. So, if there's an afterlife, and there are some loving astral beings who care about your composing dream, then you could have everything about you (your personality, knowledge, inspirations, thoughts, etc.) telepathically shared to one of these beings.

After all, souls do have their information uploaded to astral beings, so these beings can know everything about these souls. Once you have your information uploaded to a loving, caring being, he'd know exactly the type of music you want to compose and the otherworldly feelings you want to convey through composing.

If he's an all-powerful, all-talented being, then he could compose music that's exactly the music you wanted to compose. From there, this music could be shared to audiences of souls in the astral realm. So, why even bother trying to achieve your composing dream here on Earth, when you can do so in the afterlife (astral realm)?

My Reply: If there's an afterlife, and astral beings really do exist, then I don't think any of them would be willing to do me that musical favor, given the fact they're not doing me any favors here on Earth, such as ensuring my happiness, preventing and/or healing my misery, ensuring that my life is filled with fortune, etc. So, I don't think there's any loving being in the astral realm who cares about my composing dream, my positive emotions, what happens to me, etc. Therefore, these astral beings must be unloving, uncaring beings.

Other Person's Response: In #2, going to prison was mentioned. But, you don't commit crimes, which means you're never going to prison.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: So, if none of these astral beings would be willing to compose the music you wanted to compose, then that means it's up to you to compose the music you want to compose. Hopefully, you're able to achieve this goal, and no unfortunate circumstance severely hinders or stops you.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: If one of these astral beings does do you this musical favor, your music gets shared to audiences of souls in the afterlife, and the audience praises said music, then you'd get to experience bliss from that in the afterlife, as opposed to positive emotions at a low intensity level here on Earth, since we're in a state of bliss in the heavenly afterlife.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: Could one of these astral beings also share music to audiences here on Earth by some means?

My Reply: I'm not sure.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Jun, 2020 04:52 am
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: Your philosophy says that emotions are the only good, bad, horrible, beautiful, horrific, disgusting, tragic, disturbing, pathetic, etc. things in life. So, that means feelings of horror are the only horrific things in life, feelings of disgust are the only disgusting things in life, feelings of tragedy are the only tragic things in life, etc.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, a feeling of disgust is disgusting, and it makes things, people, and situations disgusting for us. Without a feeling of disgust to color anyone or anything in a disgusting tone (mood), then nobody and nothing is disgusting in our personal lives (mental universes).

My Reply: Right. The same idea applies to feelings of good, bad, beauty, horror, tragedy, etc.

Other Person's Response: Our perception colors our world. For example, if someone perceives nature as beautiful, then that colors nature in beauty, which means nature becomes beautiful in that person's mental universe.

My Reply: That's right, and our emotions are the only things that color our world in beauty, horror, goodness, badness, tragedy, disgust, etc., since our emotions are the only perceptions of beauty, horror, etc. Without our ability to feel emotions, then there's no beauty, horror, etc.

Other Person's Response: So, feeling beauty in regards to nature is the only thing that makes nature beautiful? Without that feeling, then nature can't be beautiful?

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: Our feelings of value and worth color our world in value and worth, don't they?

My Reply: Yes, and those feelings are positive emotions. Without them, then nothing is valuable or worthwhile.

Other Person's Response: So, according to your philosophy, our emotions are the only source of good, bad, beauty, horror, etc.?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: A perception of beauty or horror is a mood (an emotion). Without our beautiful or horrific moods (emotions), then there's no beauty or horror.

My Reply: Correct. The same thing applies to fear. So, without our ability to feel fear, then there's no fearful mood, which means nothing could be frightening. Therefore, situations that are life-threatening and dangerous would just be life-threatening and dangerous. But, they wouldn't be scary or frightening.

Other Person's Response: So, if a person couldn't feel fear in regards to anything, then that means nothing in his world would be colored in fear, which means nothing in his world would be scary or frightening?

My Reply: Correct. It's the reason why spiders and heights are no longer scary or frightening for someone who has overcame his phobia of spiders and heights. He no longer feels fear in regards to them, and that's why they're no longer scary or frightening. The only way we can perceive someone or something as scary or frightening would be if we felt scared or frightened about that person or thing. Without that feeling/perception, nobody and nothing can be scary or frightening.

Other Person's Response: So, just as how nothing can be scary or frightening without our feelings of fear, nothing can be awesome, beautiful, good, bad, etc. without our feelings of awesomeness, beauty, goodness, badness, etc.?

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: We can only see people and things as scary or frightening through our feelings of fear, just as how we can only see people and things as awesome, beautiful, horrific, etc. through our feelings of awesomeness, beauty, horror, etc.?

My Reply: Correct.

Other Person's Response: Not only do our emotions color our world in goodness, badness, etc., but they color our world in a cheerful, sad, morbid, loving, happy, frightening, etc. mood (perception).

My Reply: Yes. Without our emotions, then there's no cheerfulness, sadness, fear, love, etc.

Other Person's Response: Many people say they live **** lives, due to the many unfortunate circumstances that happen to them. For example, if someone lived a life of poverty, then he might say he's living a **** life. But, according to your philosophy, the only thing that can make our lives **** would be if we felt our lives are ****.

My Reply: Yes. That **** feeling creates a **** mood (perception), which sets a **** tonality for one's life, which makes one's life ****. Having stress and emotional traumas triggers all sorts of negative emotions, including **** feelings. So, we should avoid stress and emotional traumas in order to avoid living **** lives. By avoiding **** feelings, as well as other negative emotions, we're keeping our minds (mental universes) out of a pit of **** and negativity. Our minds need to be in a realm of positivity, which is why we need to feel positive emotions, and avoid negative emotions.

Other Person's Response: So, according to your philosophy, if a person lived a life of wealth, fame, and fortune, couldn't feel positive emotions, and felt his life was **** because of much stress and emotional traumas in his life, then his life wouldn't be good, beautiful, or amazing? It would be a **** life?

My Reply: Correct. Also, if he was unable to feel positive emotions, then his wealth, fame, and fortunes couldn't be good, valuable, beautiful, or amazing.

Other Person's Response: Your philosophy says that emotions are the only things that give goodness, badness, etc. to our lives/mental universes. So, if I only felt bad about things, and I never felt good or any other positive emotion, such as beauty or magnificence, then I'd have nothing but the bad in my life. But, I'd want the bad because the bad makes me a stronger person. It builds my character.

My Reply: You act as though having the bad is a good thing. But, you need to feel good in order to have some good in your life. As long as you're not feeling good, then you shouldn't be acting as though you have something good going on in your life. That's why you shouldn't be acting as though having the bad is a good thing. Also, you'd have to feel good about the bad in order to see the bad as good. So, why feel bad at all? It would be better if we just feel good all the time because that would be bringing our lives more and more goodness.

Other Person's Response: Many people say there are things we should perceive as bad and tragic, such as the death and suffering of others. But, according to your philosophy, we shouldn't because perceptions of badness and tragedy color our world in badness and tragedy.

My Reply: That's right. That means perceptions of badness and tragedy bring our lives badness and tragedy, and we should avoid them. We need our world colored in goodness, beauty, magnificence, awesomeness, etc. That's why we need to have positive emotions (positive perceptions), and avoid negative ones. So, perceiving it as a good thing to help dying and suffering people would be better than perceiving their situations as bad and tragic.

Other Person's Response: Perceptions of badness and tragedy do motivate people to help those dying and suffering.

My Reply: Right. But, like I said, it would be better to perceive goodness than badness and tragedy.

Other Person's Response: Your philosophy has dangerous and harmful implications because, if feeling good was the only good thing in life, then that means it would be a good thing to do unwise, harmful deeds that we feel good about doing.

My Reply: I don't care how dangerous and harmful my philosophy is; my personal experience has led me to the conclusion that emotions are the only good, bad, etc. things, and that they're the only things that give goodness, badness, etc. to moments, situations, people, and works of art in our lives.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, the only thing that can make you a good or beautiful person would be if you felt goodness or beauty in regards to yourself.

My Reply: That's correct. As long I don't have those feelings to color me in beauty or goodness, then I can't be a good or beautiful person. So, it's not my actions and deeds that determine whether I'm a good, beautiful, horrible, or disgusting person. It's how I perceive myself (feel about myself) that determines this. Therefore, even if I harmed and tortured others, I'd be an amazing, beautiful, or good person if I felt that way about myself.

Other Person's Response: So, if you struggled with clinical depression, and didn't have your ability to feel good, then that means you couldn't be a good person, no matter how much you help others and contribute to humanity?

My Reply: That's correct.

Other Person's Response: Having an emotional trauma triggers all sorts of negative emotions, including feelings of disgust, and you've had many emotional traumas. You said you couldn't help but feel disgust in regards to yourself during your emotional traumas. So, that means you couldn't help but become a disgusting person.

My Reply: That's right. As long as I feel disgust in regards to myself, then I'll remain as a disgusting person, regardless of how much I help others and bring them joy. I also couldn't help but feel that I was a pitiful, **** person during my emotional traumas. So, that means I couldn't help but become a pitiful, **** person. But, once I'm fully recovered from an emotional trauma, I become a beautiful, awesome, and good person, since I'm able to feel that way about myself again.

Other Person's Response: Do you make decisions in your life that are based upon reason, rather than emotion? So, do you do certain things, regardless of how you feel?

My Reply: Yes. But, said decisions can't be good if I don't feel good about them, and they can't be bad if I don't feel bad about them. So, keeping my brain and body healthy can't be a good thing if I'm unable to feel good about it. Neither can it be beautiful, awesome, or magnificent if I was unable to feel that way.

Other Person's Response: When you listen to music, such as video game themes while playing video games, these musical themes normally convey the levels, characters, items, etc. in your eyes. But, during your miserable struggles/emotional traumas, these themes become morbidly insignificant and meaningless in your eyes, which means they now convey nothing in your eyes. You can't help but perceive the themes this way during your emotional traumas, since you can't help but feel that way about them. It would be no different than how a miserable, grieving person can't help but perceive things in his life as morbidly insignificant and meaningless during the loss of his loved one. But, your morbid perception doesn't match up with reality because those themes are still meaningful, regardless if you perceive them as meaningless. Musically speaking, they qualify as meaningful themes because they're not just a series of randomly chosen notes and chords.

My Reply: Right. So, works of art are meaningful by themselves, regardless if we see them as meaningless. But, they can't be good, bad, amazing, beautiful, tragic, horrific, etc. by themselves. Only our emotions breathe goodness, badness, etc. into works of art, which makes those works good, bad, etc. To say that works of art are still awesome or beautiful, even while we're in a miserable state of mind where we perceive them as morbidly devoid of awesomeness and beauty, would be dismissing that state of mind and treating it as though it doesn't matter. It implies: "It doesn't matter that I'm having this morbid perception/experience in regards to these works of art. Those works of art are still awesome and beautiful!"

But, as long as we're not feeling any positive emotions in regards to these works of art, then the positive doesn't matter, which means the awesomeness and beauty doesn't matter (i.e., it doesn't exist). As long as we're just feeling negative emotions, such as misery, then only the negative matters. So, that quote is false and should be replaced with the quote: "Those works of art are nothing awesome or beautiful because I'm perceiving them as morbidly devoid of awesomeness and beauty. Only once I recover back into a positive state of mind will those works of art become awesome and beautiful again."

Other Person's Response: During your emotional traumas, you say you've constantly perceived things in your life as morbidly insignificant and meaningless, which means you constantly felt that way until you've fully recovered from said emotional traumas.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: During your miserable struggles, did the realization that works of art are still meaningful allow you to perceive them as meaningful?

My Reply: No. So, I couldn't help but perceive them as morbidly insignificant, meaningless, and devoid of awesomeness and beauty during my miserable struggles. That means even video game levels and characters became morbidly insignificant in my eyes. I also couldn't help but feel all sorts of other negative emotions besides misery. So, that means I couldn't help but have the feeling/perception/desire to harm myself and others. But, I never acted out on those feelings.

Other Person's Response: So, during your miserable struggles, you couldn't help but perceive memorable theme songs and other works of art as morbidly insignificant and meaningless?

My Reply: Correct. I also couldn't help but feel other negative emotions in regards to works of art that I should've felt positive about.

Other Person's Response: Were your miserable struggles grieving processes?

My Reply: No. My miserable struggles were caused by certain thoughts and worries, as I said before.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Jun, 2020 07:56 pm
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: Are emotions the only good, bad, etc. things in life, or are emotions the only things that make moments, situations, objects, places, people, and works of art good, bad, etc. in our personal lives?

My Reply: I think it's both.

Other Person's Response: Without emotions, nothing can bother us and we can't be excited, which means we can't be impatient without our emotions because impatience means waiting around bothers us, or that we're excited to do something as soon as possible.

My Reply: That's right.

Other Person's Response: If this isn't the only life you have, and you get to reincarnate into a new Earthly body, then that would give you another opportunity to achieve your composing dream, just in case you don't get to in this lifetime.

My Reply: But, if I reincarnate, I'd be a completely different person. For example, in my next life, I could be a female who has a different goal/dream, such as being a model. Even if I did have a composing dream in my next life, the style of music I wish to compose might be something entirely different than the style I wish to compose in this lifetime. For example, I might wish to compose some stale, lame, bland music in my next life.

Other Person's Response: Hopefully, if you do reincarnate, you'll still have this composing dream, and wish to compose the bizarre, unique, otherworldly music you wish to compose in this lifetime.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: There are some emotions a person will feel that he has a very difficult time describing because some feelings are just hard to describe.

My Reply: Right. But, if he pays attention to the thought that caused him to feel that emotion, then he should be able to describe the feeling. Our thoughts take on an emotional form when they make us feel emotions. So, if he describes the thought, then he'd be describing the emotion. But, when it comes to subconscious thoughts making us feel emotions, it's difficult to describe those thoughts, since they're thoughts we're consciously unaware of. But, it becomes easier to describe conscious thoughts. Thus, it would be easier to describe emotions that are caused by conscious thoughts, as opposed to emotions caused by subconscious thoughts.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Jun, 2020 02:00 am
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: I realize that, when you don't have your ability to feel positive emotions, and you define good and happiness as something other than positive emotions, you ask yourself the question: "Is this definition really working for me? In other words, is this actual goodness and happiness?" Your personal experience always answers this question with: "No, it's not. I'm still not happy, and there's still nothing good in my life."

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: If good and bad were just labels we could slap onto anything we want (i.e., if good and bad could be defined however we want), then why are there philosophies, such as hedonism, that say something specific is good or bad, such as pleasure or displeasure, regardless if we defined something other than pleasure or displeasure as good or bad? The same thing applies to happiness. If happiness was something we could define however we want, then why are there philosophies that say happiness can only be a pleasant emotional state, regardless if we defined happiness as something other than a pleasant emotion?

My Reply: You bring up an interesting point. This says that something remains to be the only happiness or goodness in life, regardless if we define something else as happiness or good. This is what I refer to as "absolute happiness or goodness." It's up to each individual to conclude, based upon his/her personal experience, what he/she thinks is the absolute good, bad, love, happiness, etc. Again, my personal experience says emotions are the absolute good, bad, etc.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jun, 2020 09:08 pm
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: Things only become good, bad, etc. in our minds. That's why nothing would be good, bad, etc. if nobody perceived anything as good, bad, etc.

My Reply: Right. Perceiving things as good, bad, etc. is how things become good, bad, etc. in our minds. Without that perception, then nothing could be good, bad, etc.

Other Person's Response: If someone perceived something as good, while another person perceived it as bad, then that thing is good in that one person's mind, and bad in that other person's mind.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If a person had a feeling of beauty that's a feeling of goodness, then that would be like having 2 positive emotions combined together as one (a feeling of beauty with a feeling of goodness). It would be liking having milk mixed with water. The milk and water become as one. But, a feeling of tragedy can't be a feeling of goodness because a feeling of tragedy is an unpleasant emotion, and a feeling of goodness is a pleasant emotion. So, if a person had the thought that something's tragic and good, then that can't give him a feeling of tragedy that's a good feeling (a tragically good feeling).

But, it can give him mixed emotions, where he has a feeling of tragedy mixed in with a feeling of goodness, and it would be like mixing oil with water. The oil and water don't combine together as one, since the oil sits atop the water. But, they're mixed together. If he had the thought that something's tragic and disturbing, then that can give him a tragic feeling that's a disturbing feeling (a tragically disturbing feeling) because tragic and disturbing feelings are both unpleasant emotions. So, positivity mixes together with positivity, and negativity mixes together with negativity like milk and water. But, the positive and negative can only mix together like oil and water.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: You said you've never had feelings of tragedy that were good feelings, or feelings of beauty that were bad feelings. But, you've had feelings of tragedy that were disturbing feelings, and feelings of disgust that were bad feelings. Has it always been like this for you? In other words, has the positive and negative always been like oil and water for you?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, you're just a person who's nothing good, bad, etc. It's how you feel about yourself that determines whether you're good, bad, etc.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: I heard these beings do have the power to heal people of negative thoughts and emotions. So, I don't know why they didn't heal you.

My Reply: I don't know either.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Jun, 2020 03:57 pm
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: If you're intellectually capable of learning how to compose, then you should be intellectually capable of learning how to discover the truth in regards to controversial topics.

My Reply: I think I might be intellectually capable of learning how to compose because there are music books for dummies, and I might easily be able to comprehend such books. But, when it comes to controversial topics, there are many professionals who put forth research and supporting arguments that I can't even begin to comprehend. Not only that, controversial topics have ongoing debate, even to this very day. So, perhaps there's no truth for me to discover in regards to these topics, and it's nothing more than a never-ending debate. So, that means I'll never know the truth as to whether people should or shouldn't be taking vaccines (considering there are those who are pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine in debates regarding vaccines), I'll never know if taking supplements, such as calcium supplements, is ineffective or harmful as some people say, etc.

Other Person's Response: So, even if you conducted all the research in the world, you don't think you'd ever discover the truth in regards to controversial topics, since it might be nothing more than never-ending debates?

My Reply: That could be the case. I don't know.

Other Person's Response: When reading music books for dummies (such as the book "Music Theory for Dummies"), are there some things in these books you have a difficult time understanding, even though said books are meant for dumb people to comprehend?

My Reply: Actually, I have started reading these books, and there are many things I have a difficult time understanding. When it comes to simple, straightforward things in these books, I can easily understand said things. But, when it comes to more complicated things in these books, I have a difficult time understanding said things. One of my main weaknesses has always been the inability to understand things. For example, if someone was having a conversation with me, I'd often times misunderstand what this person was saying, or I'd just draw a complete blank. Some things I can easily understand, though. But, not very many.

Other Person's Response: Maybe if something is explained in a different style than you'd explain it, then that would also make it more difficult for you to understand.

My Reply: Yes. The style I explain all the material in this document is in a clear, thorough, simple format. So, if someone explained something to me, and it was in the style I'd explain it in, then that would make it more likely I'd understand it.

Other Person's Response: Perhaps you should have a music teacher or someone online who could clarify the things you have a hard time understanding in these books.

My Reply: I could just watch some youtube videos or read some material online that clarifies these things. After all, I've already done so with some of the material in these books. In order for me to understand something, it must be presented and explained in a way that a child could understand it, and these music books for dummies don't do that. But, there are some youtube videos and online sources that do.

Other Person's Response: So, when it comes to a more challenging musical topic than the basics (the basics being note names, the grand staff, etc.), then these more challenging topics must be presented and explained in a way that a child could understand them? So, they must be explained as clear, thorough, and simple as possible? Otherwise, you'd have a difficult time understanding them?

My Reply: Yes. So, if someone explains anything to me that's more challenging than the basics, then I'd be confused and start to misinterpret things being explained to me if said explanations aren't in a format that a child could understand.

Other Person's Response: If the basics are explained in a professional manner, then that would make it likely you'd have a hard time understanding them. So, even the basics would need to be explained in a way a child could understand them.

My Reply: But, since they're the basics, then there's a significant likelihood I'd be able to understand them, even if they're professionally written. But, the basics can't be explained too professionally. Otherwise, I'd have a hard time understanding them. For example, Music Theory for Dummies explains the basics in a professional manner, and not in a highly intelligent, super professional manner (after all, it's a book meant for dummies). So, I'm still able to understand these basic things. There are some sentences every now and then that I'm unable to understand. But, for the most part, I'm able to understand the basics in this book.

But, when it comes to more challenging topics presented in this book, that's when I have a hard time understanding a lot of things. Music Composition for Dummies is much more difficult for me to understand, since it's more challenging than Music Theory for Dummies. Music Composition for Dummies starts out explaining basic things, such as how to find inspiration to create melodies, to not trash melodies that you think are mediocre because a lot of people might love them, etc. Again, I'm able to understand these things. But, when it comes to the technical aspects of composing in this book, that's when I have a very hard time understanding these things.

Other Person's Response: Both the basics and even the more challenging topics must be professionally written, even if it's a book meant for dummies. That's because books need to sell, and they wouldn't sell if they were written in your style of writing (which is a simplistic, novice style).

My Reply: I see. But, if they were written in my style of writing, I think that would make it much more likely I'd understand them. I realize there are people on youtube who do explain aspects of music theory and composition in a simplistic, novice style. But, only some people do that. So, I'd have to find youtube videos that do explain these things in that style, so I can understand them. But, not one youtube video is going to explain everything I need to know. So, I'd have to search through many videos. I could also search for online teachings of music theory and composition that make it very simple and easy for me to understand.

Other Person's Response: Even movies must present themselves in a professional manner in order to sell.

My Reply: Right, and I have a hard time understanding what's going on in movies. But, movies are still interesting to watch.

Other Person's Response: How can you improve as a writer, a composer, a critical thinker, etc. when you're unable to understand the things you're trying to learn?

My Reply: Exactly. So, if I wish to learn something in order to improve in any area, then they must be teachings that are easy for me to understand, and there aren't many such teachings in this world. Most teachings are professionally explained.

Other Person's Response: You're poor in virtually every area, whether it be understanding things, intellectual tasks, playing sports, etc. Even your philosophy is very poor. There are just so many areas that need improvement.

My Reply: Right. But, as for my philosophy, I'm not sure that will ever improve, no matter how hard I try to improve it.

Other Person's Response: You must have a difficult time understanding many instructions, given the fact they're not written in such a way that a child could understand them.

My Reply: That's right. But, again, I can easily understand instructions that a child could understand.

Other Person's Response: In school, you passed tests. So, that means the teachers must've explained their subjects in a way that was easy for you to understand.

My Reply: Right. But, I don't think my grades were very good, since I wasn't a very good learner. As a matter of fact, I took a music class when I was a child, even though I wasn't interested in becoming a composer back then. So, I just took music class because my mother wanted me to. I was the slowest learner there, and couldn't keep up with the rest of the class. Also, whatever I learned in music class were things I learned many years ago. So, I forgot these things, which is why I'm learning music theory as an adult.

Other Person's Response: I think you just lack the necessary knowledge and experience to understand things. So, if you had a lot of knowledge and experience, then nobody would have to present and explain things to you like a child. If you were highly intelligent, then you could even understand challenging topics only professionals could comprehend.

My Reply: Right. The fact that I'm an autistic, special needs person also plays a major role in my difficulty in understanding things. I also think I have poor reading comprehension skills. After all, I'm poor in many areas, whether it be critical and rational thinking, memory, puzzles, riddles, etc.

Other Person's Response: Would your style of music be ancient and mythological, or would it sound modern?

My Reply: Modern.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, good feelings are the only perceptions of goodness. So, if I couldn't feel good about anything, then that means I couldn't see something as good for myself, others, or in general?

My Reply: Correct.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jun, 2020 05:39 am
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: Some people would say that your philosophy is too simplistic, since your definition of good and bad is way too simple.

My Reply: It's often times the most simple things and solutions people overlook. So, my philosophy might be true, despite its simplicity, and people are overlooking it.

Other Person's Response: Are you female? The reason I ask is because females are often emotional and live by an emotional philosophy.

My Reply: I'm male.

Other Person's Response: Seeing colors is what colors our mental world, and colors don't exist in the physical world. Seeing goodness, badness, etc. is what colors our mental world in goodness, badness, etc., and good, bad, etc. don't exist in the physical world either.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: You're allowing your emotions to define you. You're so much more than your emotions because you're a human being who has a personality.

My Reply: There's no more goodness, badness, love, hate, etc. than emotions. So, there really is nothing more good, bad, loving, hateful, etc. about me than my own emotions.

Other Person's Response: I heard that your mother easily feels rage whenever someone mistreats her, even if she wasn't having any stress or emotional trauma. If she was never in that enraged mood, then the mistreatment of others wouldn't bother her. So, this shows that negative emotions make things, people, and situations bother us.

My Reply: Right. As for me, I'm normally not bothered by anything, which means I'm only enraged during an emotional trauma. But, I would normally feel fear. So, fear is an emotion that's easy to trigger for me, even when I'm happy and doing just fine.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, it would be better if your mother never felt rage, you never felt fear, and you both instead felt positive emotions all the time.

My Reply: Right. So, it would be better if me and my mother just felt positive in the face of any circumstance. As for my mother, it would be better if she felt positive about those people getting what they deserve, or if she felt positively forgiving. It's her pick. She's obviously not the forgiving type. So, I'm sure she'd choose to former, rather than the latter.

Other Person's Response: So, whether she feels positive about those people getting what they deserve, or if she feels positively forgiving, she'd be getting a positive experience either way, and we need the positive experiences in life, according to your philosophy.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If she wants to feel positive while people mistreat her, then she'd need to change her mindset, wouldn't she? She'd have to change from an enraged mindset to a positive mindset.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Emotions are sometimes triggered automatically, regardless of our mindset. For example, a person would still feel fear in a dangerous situation, even if he had a brave, bold mindset. That's because fear is meant to protect us.

My Reply: Right. But, there are many instances where emotions are triggered by our mindset. For example, my emotional traumas were triggered by a troubled mindset. If I somehow changed this mindset, then I wouldn't have had these emotional traumas. But, that's easier said than done because changing one's mindset isn't always easy. Sometimes, it can be an entire journey.

Other Person's Response: You said that, consciously, you didn't have a troubled mindset during your emotional traumas, while, subconsciously, you had a very troubled mindset.

My Reply: Yes, and it's this subconscious mindset that would have to be changed in order for my emotional traumas to be eliminated right then and there. But, nothing I did or told myself helped changed this mindset. So, I had to recover from these emotional traumas in order for them to be eliminated. Again, our psyche naturally recovers on its own, and that's how I recovered.

Other Person's Response: I heard that your mother feels rage, even during dangerous situations. For example, if someone had a vicious dog, your mother would feel like killing the dog with a knife. She wouldn't feel afraid at all. But, if you were in that situation, you'd feel fear. So, perhaps our emotions, whether they be fear, rage, sadness, etc. are entirely determined by our mindset. You have a frightened mindset during dangerous situations that causes you to feel fear, while your mother has an enraged mindset during certain dangerous situations that causes her to feel enraged.

My Reply: You could be right.

Other Person's Response: Your mother does feel nothing but fear during certain dangerous situations, right?

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: Emotions do desensitize (fade away upon continued exposure to them). So, perhaps your mother has felt fear for so long from people mistreating her and attacking her that she no longer feels afraid about that.

My Reply: If that's so, then she wouldn't have just stopped being afraid, and no longer caring. It seems she developed an enraged mindset that now causes her to feel rage when others threaten and mistreat her. But, if she kept on feeling rage all the time from these circumstances, I'm sure that feeling would fade away on its own, which means she'd no longer have that rage. So, she'd neither be afraid nor enraged about these circumstances. She might now feel positive or just not care anymore. It would be like how I'm no longer troubled by the situations that once troubled me, since that tribulation/emotional trauma has desensitized.

Other Person's Response: When a emotion completely desensitizes (fades away), does that mean the subconscious mindset that caused said emotion completely fades away as well? For example, when you fully recovered from your emotional traumas, does that mean your troubled, subconscious mindset has completely faded away? Or, is that mindset still there, and it's just not making you feel troubled?

My Reply: I think the mindset would be gone.

Other Person's Response: During an emotional trauma, you feel many negative emotions. Perhaps it's negative, subconscious mindsets that are causing those negative emotions, and those mindsets disappear once you're fully recovered from said trauma. But, they return again when you have another emotional trauma, which is why you feel those negative emotions all over again.

My Reply: Right. I don't think I'm going to have another emotional trauma again. So, I don't think those negative mindsets and negative emotions will ever return.

Other Person's Response: Is fear a negative emotion that's triggered by your emotional traumas?

My Reply: No. So, it's just other negative emotions that are triggered by these traumas, such as misery, disgust, horror, rage, etc.

Other Person's Response: When you're fully recovered from an emotional trauma, you could have a troubled, conscious mindset. But, you say that mindset wouldn't make you feel troubled, since you no longer have a troubled, subconscious mindset.

My Reply: Right. The same thing would apply to my mother. She's no longer afraid of people who threaten her, and if she has chosen to have a frightened, conscious mindset about these people, then that wouldn't make her afraid, since she no longer has a frightened, subconscious mindset.

Other Person's Response: As for phobias, I don't think they're caused by a person's mindset. So, this shows that, sometimes, fear has nothing to do with our mindset.

My Reply: Right. That would mean there are instances where emotions are triggered automatically, regardless of our mindset.

Other Person's Response: There's a difference between a character weakness and a character defect. Defective means means there's something wrong with a person's body, a piece of equipment, etc., such as if someone had a birth defect, there was a defective piece of equipment, etc. But, a weakness is simply a lacking quality, such as if someone had weak muscles or skill, since he doesn't train. To say your philosophy stems from a character defect implies there's something wrong with you. But, to say your philosophy stems from a character weakness implies you're lacking as an individual, and that you just need to improve.

My Reply: Right. But, defective things sometimes can't be fixed. So, perhaps I have a character defect, and I can never be fixed, which means I can never develop a better philosophy, no matter how hard I try. Could a handicapped person in a wheelchair get up and walk? No. He must live in that wheelchair, and he can never be fixed.

Other Person's Response: You do have a mental defect, since you're an autistic, special needs person. So, perhaps you also have a character defect, and you can never develop a better philosophy.

My Reply: You could be right.

Other Person's Response: There are mentally disabled people who don't have a character defect. Thus, they're able to upgrade to a better philosophy than hedonism. But, you might have a character defect, which means you might be incapable of upgrading to a better philosophy.

My Reply: You could be right.

Other Person's Response: Even though you're mentally disabled, you're not severely mentally disabled to the point where you can hardly function. You're able to function mostly well in life, and you're still capable of tasks, such as writing all this material. As a matter of fact, you're a skilled writer. So, perhaps you'll also be capable of upgrading to a better philosophy someday.

My Reply: You could be right.

Other Person's Response: If someone explained something to you in a very simple way, and you still didn't understand it, then perhaps it's the style he explained it in that made it difficult for you to understand.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: There are only some near death experiences where people meet that stern god who wants them to suffer. Many people will have different near death experience journeys. So, one person could have a near death experience where he encounters a god who tells him that life's about the positive emotions, that he doesn't need to suffer from unhappiness or illnesses, and heals him of any unhappiness or illness he has.

My Reply: Right. After all, people do have near death experiences where god or heavenly beings heal them. But, why would they only heal some people, and tell others they need to suffer? Also, why don't they heal anyone who's here on Earth? Why must souls on Earth meet them in the afterlife via a near death experience or psychedelic drug trip in order to be healed?

Other Person's Response: A person could feel positive about ending his life, though.

My Reply: Then ending his life would be a positive thing. But, when most people have the desire to end their lives, that desire is a negative emotion. When someone feels the negative desire to commit suicide, he's not feeling that ending his life is a bad thing, which means that ending his life wouldn't be bad. Rather, he feels that his life is bad, which would make his life bad. It's this feeling that's motivating him to commit suicide. So, the very act of committing suicide wouldn't be good or bad from his perspective, since he's not feeling good or bad about it in this example.
MozartLink
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Jun, 2020 04:22 pm
@MozartLink,
Other Person's Response: Sometimes, is the material in this discussion section randomly assorted?

My Reply: Yes. But, for the most part, it's structured. So, sometimes, you'll read a response and reply that talks about one thing, and then immediately read another response and reply that talks about another thing.

Other Person's Response: There are people who say that good, bad, etc. don't exist at all. These people are meditation gurus who tell others to not attribute any judgment of good or bad to anything because all things in this life "just are." Such advice is given in order to encourage us to have a quiet mind that's free of judgment.

My Reply: But, according to my philosophy, there's one thing that's good, bad, etc., and it's our emotions. The moment we think or believe something is good or bad, and that thought or belief causes us to feel good or bad about that thing, then goodness or badness has been brought into existence because we've just colored that thing in goodness or badness.

Other Person's Response: So, all things in this world are no big deal, and neither are they good or bad? We're the ones who make them a big deal and good or bad?

My Reply: Yes, and we do so through our emotions. Without emotions, we'd be apathetic, which means nothing would matter to us. It would mean nothing would be a big deal or good, bad, etc. I, myself, have had moments where I couldn't feel any emotions, and I could clearly tell I was apathetic, no matter what mindset I had and no matter what I did with my life.

Other Person's Response: You might've actually had some intensity level of emotion during those moments, even if it was an intensity level so small you couldn't detect it.

My Reply: Right. That would mean things did matter to me, and I did see things as good, bad, etc. It would've just been at a very small intensity level.

Other Person's Response: If a person had a phobia, and he overcame it, then the stimulus he once feared would no longer bother him anymore, since he no longer feels afraid of it. This indicates that emotions do make things a big deal, they do make things matter to us, and they do make things good, bad, frightening, etc.

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: According to your philosophy, we should seek positive emotions, since they're the very goodness, magnificence, beauty, etc. we need. But, if we couldn't feel any emotions, then seeking positive emotions wouldn't matter, and neither would it be a good thing to seek them.

My Reply: Right.

Other Person's Response: Thoughts make us feel emotions, and we need to think that something's good to feel good about it. Your philosophy says that good feelings are the only good things. So, if I currently wasn't feeling good, and I had to think that something's good to make myself feel good about it, then that would mean it wouldn't be good to think this thing is good.

My Reply: Right. But, you could still think this thing is good anyway. It will only be a fraction of a second before that thought is able to make you feel good (providing there's nothing preventing that thought from making you feel good, such as clinical depression). Once that thought makes you feel good about that thing, then that thing becomes good. But, having the thought this thing is good still isn't a good thing. You'd need to feel good about that in order for it to be a good thing. So, you'd need to have the thought that it's good you're thinking this thing is good. Once you feel good about that, then that means it's good you're thinking that thing is good.

Other Person's Response: So, whatever thing, situation, or person we feel good, bad, etc. about becomes good, bad, etc. in our personal lives?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If I wished to sustain the good in my life, then that means I must keep on feeling good?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: Religions always talk about our consciousness/soul. The question is, which mental (conscious) state is the most important? Your philosophy says it's the positive emotional states that are important, and they're what we need.

My Reply: Yes. They're holy, divine mental states (perceptions) that make our world a holy paradise for us. So, if we were profoundly blissful, then we'd be having a paradise here on Earth, since our world would be colored in intense, profound positivity.

Other Person's Response: You've had many emotional traumas. So, that means you've created an unholy hell for yourself here on Earth.

My Reply: Yes, because all those negative emotions I've had were unholy mental states.

Other Person's Response: If positive emotions were so holy, then why doesn't god or any heavenly being deem them as holy, vital, necessary things, and why do they allow people to have miserable and unhappy struggles, where their positive emotions are taken away from them?

My Reply: I'm not sure. Perhaps god or these heavenly beings live by a different philosophy than mine, or they're just uncaring beings who realize that positive emotions are holy, vital, and necessary, but don't care if there are struggling people who are unable to feel them. God and these beings allow so much suffering, whether it be the torture of animals, illnesses, etc. So, it seems to me they're uncaring beings.

Other Person's Response: You feel negative emotions during an emotional trauma, such as feeling like you can never develop a better philosophy, and I'm curious if you feel this particular emotion when you're not having an emotional trauma, and doing just fine.

My Reply: I don't feel that emotion when I'm doing just fine. I instead feel positive, such as feeling that perhaps there is a way I can develop a better philosophy. So, that's a positive feeling (perception) I have when I'm doing just fine. But, even so, it's possible I might never be able to develop a better philosophy, and I consider this possibility.

Other Person's Response: There's a better philosophy than hedonism called "Stoicism." Here's the definition of Stoicism online:

1.) The endurance of pain or hardship without the display of feelings and without complaint.

2.) An ancient Greek school of philosophy founded at Athens by Zeno of Citium. The school taught that virtue, the highest good, is based on knowledge; the wise live in harmony with the divine Reason (also identified with Fate and Providence) that governs nature, and are indifferent to the vicissitudes of fortune and to pleasure and pain.

My Reply: But, I think positive emotions are the only things that can color our world in positivity. So, I think hedonism was the right philosophy all along, even though it's a very limiting and self-defeating philosophy.

Other Person's Response: Isn't Stoicism the philosophy that Spock (a character from Star Trek) lives by?

My Reply: I think so. I'd be the opposite of Spock, since I live by a philosophy opposite of his.

Other Person's Response: Do you have any actual evidence to back your claim that emotions are the only perceptions of good, bad, beauty, horror, etc.?

My Reply: No, and I wouldn't know where to find such evidence, since I'm a dumb person. So, it's up to others to find the evidence. When searching online, I don't know where to look, since I'm not knowledgeable when it comes to research, evidence, articles, etc. I only do basic google searches to find things, such as finding out about the new Super Mario or Zelda game that's currently out, or searching for online forums. But, at least I found the link to that emotion perception theory by typing "Are emotions perceptions?" into google.

Other Person's Response: You could always ask an intelligent person on a forum if he could give you evidence to share to others.

My Reply: Right, and I might do that someday. In the meantime, I have a lot of information to share that's based upon my personal experience, and I want others to read as much of it as they can (if they're willing to).

Other Person's Response: You're right when you say that many people trivialize emotions. For example, if a person was miserable and didn't feel like going to work, he'd go to work anyway, and disregard his emotional state. He'd trivialize his miserable and lethargic mood, and regard his duties as important.

My Reply: Yes. But, I think life's all about how we feel. So, I think people shouldn't be trivializing emotions.

Other Person's Response: Your personal experience has led you to the conclusion that emotions are the only perceptions of good, bad, etc. That's when you discovered the emotion perception theory on your own through a google search.

My Reply: Yes. Everything I've learned from my personal experience could be the truth, and many people would say it's an entire doctrine/teaching. Like I said, it's my own philosophy I wish to share to others.

Other Person's Response: When emotions go through moments of wearing off and returning, do the subconscious mindsets that caused said emotions disappear during the times these emotions wear off?

My Reply: I'm not sure.

Other Person's Response: I don't think it's just subconscious mindsets that make us feel emotions. I also think conscious mindsets can.

My Reply: Maybe you're right.

Other Person's Response: During your emotional traumas, you've and profoundly **** feelings, didn't you?

My Reply: Yes.

Other Person's Response: If Jake saw himself as a beautiful character, and Jon treated him as a horrible monster, since he did a misdeed, then, from Jake's perspective, Jon is talking to a horrible monster that's not even there. In Jake's mind, he's a beautiful character and not a horrible monster.

My Reply: Right. In his mental universe, he has become a beautiful character.
0 Replies
 
 

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 07/11/2020 at 02:40:39