Sun 19 Jul, 2020 08:04 pm
I'd like to being with a quote by William Shakesphere:
"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."
All things in this world are nothing good, bad, beautiful, horrific, tragic, disgusting, valuable, precious, worthwhile, etc. by themselves. So, life just is, and things just are. They're nothing good, bad, etc. You even hear this being said by meditation gurus because they'd say to not attribute any judgment of good, bad, etc. to anything, given that all things are nothing good, bad, etc. Such advice is given to help people have a quiet mind that's free of judgment. But, according to my philosophy, perceiving things as good is what makes them good, perceiving things as bad is what makes them bad, etc. That's because our perception colors our world in goodness, badness, beauty, horror, etc.
For example, if someone perceives nature as beautiful, then that colors nature in beauty, which makes nature beautiful in his personal life (mental universe). If nobody perceived nature as beautiful, then nature couldn't be beautiful because nobody would be coloring it in beauty. Perceiving something as good, bad, beautiful, etc. is the same thing as seeing said thing as good, bad, beautiful, etc. So, if someone sees it as a good thing to help others, then he's perceiving it as a good thing to help others, and that perception is what makes it a good thing. If someone helped others, but didn't see it as a good thing to help them, then that means it wasn't a good thing that he helped them. That's because perceptions of good are the only good things, perceptions of bad are the only bad things, etc.
That means the only goodness and badness that exists is the goodness and badness we perceive (i.e., good and bad only exist in our minds). So, good and bad only exist as perceptions, and don't exist anywhere else in the world. That's why acts of kindness, by themselves, wouldn't be good deeds. We make them good deeds by perceiving them as good. Criminals make their crimes good by perceiving them as good. But, as for the police, those crimes would be bad, since they see them as bad. So, in the mental universe of the criminals, their crimes are good. But, in the mental universe of the police, their crimes are bad. In other words, those crimes are good for the criminals, but bad for the police.
It would be like how a work of art is beautiful for a person who perceives it as beautiful, and disgusting for a person who perceives it as disgusting. So, things only become good, bad, beautiful, disgusting, etc. for us when we perceive them as such. But, the only way we can perceive things as good, bad, etc. in the first place is through our emotions, and not through our thoughts or beliefs alone. A life without emotions would be a dull, gray world (an apathetic existence). So, it's our emotions that color our world in goodness, badness, etc., which means our emotions are the only perceptions of good, bad, etc. An example of some emotions would be a feeling of panic from being in a dangerous situation, a feeling of sexual arousal, a feeling of rage, a feeling of misery, etc.
As I said before, emotions are the only perceptions of good, bad, etc. Just having the thought or belief alone that something is good or bad isn't the same thing as perceiving it as good or bad. It would be like how just having the thought of red isn't the same thing as seeing (perceiving) red. If we're not seeing red, then we'd just be perceiving the idea of red in our minds if we thought of red. But, we wouldn't be perceiving actual red. So, when a person just has the thought or belief alone of something being good or bad, he's just perceiving the idea that this thing is good or bad. But, he's not perceiving it as good or bad, which means he's not perceiving actual goodness or badness in regards to that thing.
His thought or belief needs to make him feel good or bad (which are emotional states). If he felt good about that thing, then that means he perceived it as good, since feelings of goodness are the only perceptions of goodness. The same idea applies to bad, beauty, horror, tragedy, etc. Feeling good is the only good thing in life, since perceptions of good are the only good things, feeling bad is the only bad thing in life, feeling horrible is the only horrible thing in life, etc. Also, not only do our emotions color our world in goodness, badness, etc., but they color our world in an angry, loving, hateful, happy, sad, frightening, etc. mood (perception).
Without our ability to feel emotions, then we'd be apathetic, which means we'd be in an apathetic state of mind, which means we'd have an apathetic perspective. We'd still be in this apathetic state, regardless of our mindset because having the mindset alone of caring about people and things won't allow us to care about them, just as how our mindset alone of being sleepy, hungry, thirsty, emotional, mentally fatigue, etc. won't allow us to be sleepy, hungry, etc. A person needs to feel sleepy to be sleepy, he needs to feel hungry to be hungry, etc. So, a person without his ability to feel emotions can't make himself care about people and things through his mindset alone of caring about them, just as how a person with insomnia can't make himself sleepy through his mindset alone of being sleepy.
Without emotions, good, bad, etc. wouldn't exist, and neither would anger, love, hate, fear, etc. After all, when we're apathetic (emotionless), nothing matters to us, and we can't love anyone when nobody matters to us, we can't be angry or sad, etc. Even though a person without emotions can act like he cares about people and things, he still doesn't care about them, which means you shouldn't trust his acts, tones, and expressions, regardless of how much he claims he still cares about them. As a matter of fact, it's often the case that a person's acts, tones, and expressions can't be trusted. For example, a serial killer can act loving. But, that doesn't mean he's loving. He could be filled with hate on the inside. Another example would be that a depressed person can fake a smile and act happy, even though he's not happy.
So, regardless if a person claims he cared about someone, or was loving, angry, happy, etc. in the absence of his emotions, you shouldn't trust that claim because I think it's a false claim, based upon my personal experience of being apathetic during moments where I was unable to feel emotions. Also, if you want an example of how love, hate, anger, sadness, fear, good, bad, etc. wouldn't exist in the absence of our emotions, then here's an example of how fear wouldn't exist. When a person has a phobia, and he overcomes it, then he's no longer afraid of the stimulus he once feared, since he no longer feels afraid of it. This indicates that, without feelings of fear, then fear doesn't exist, which means nothing would be colored in a frightening tone (mood).
In conclusion, the positivity is what we need in life (which would be the goodness, beauty, magnificence, awesomeness, value, worth, love, happiness, etc.). We should avoid the negativity (which would be the badness, tragedy, horror, disgust, hate, misery, etc.). That means we need the positive emotions (pleasant emotions), which would be feelings of goodness, beauty, etc. We should avoid the negative emotions, as well as apathy. After all, the more positivity we have in our lives (mental universes), the more goodness, beauty, etc. we have. So, life's all about coloring ourselves and our world in positivity through our positive emotions (positive perceptions). We should avoid coloring ourselves and our world in negativity or apathy.
The more positive moments we have, the better, which means, the more moments we have of feeling positive emotions, the better. But, having an absence of positive emotions is no way to live or be an artist, a teacher, a parent, an athlete, etc., regardless of how much a person helped others, made them feel positive, and contributed to the world in the absence of his positive emotions. Unfortunately, it's often the case that people do have an absence of positive emotions because positive emotions, along with negative emotions, are transient, fleeting things, since brain damage, mental illness, stress, etc. can render us without the ability to feel them. For example, people who struggle with clinical depression often lack the ability to feel positive emotions. Thus, they have few moments where they can have a positive experience.
I, myself, have had many emotional traumas, which were horrible feelings that made my existence horrible. These emotional traumas have disabled my ability to feel positive emotions, which means I couldn't perceive my hobbies as good, valuable, precious, beautiful, worthwhile, etc. I had no emotional drive to pursue them, which means I was apathetic in regards to them. Not only that, I only felt a lot of negative emotions during my emotional traumas, such as hate, misery, disgust, rage, etc. Since feeling positive is the only positive thing in life, then that means there was nothing positive about my suffering, and suffering like that was no way to live. Therefore, I don't know why god or the heavenly beings (astral beings) have allowed me to suffer like this.
They should be preserving what's positive (the positive emotions) by healing people of illnesses and forms of suffering that take away their positive emotions. If god and these astral beings somehow think there's more positivity to life than positive emotions, and that positive emotions are unnecessary, trivial things, then they're wrong. That's why they should be healing people, rather than allowing them to suffer. That is, if they do exist. It could be the case that we live in a natural, godless universe, where they don't exist, and there's no paranormal or afterlife. In which case, it's up to us and science to preserve our positive emotions the best we can. As a matter of fact, it could be the case that science will create a blissful, utopia life for us in the future that's free of illness and suffering.
But, if we're going to be blissful, non-suffering beings in the future, then that bliss needs to be feelings of goodness, beautiful goodness, loving goodness, happy goodness, etc. Those feelings would bring different forms of goodness into our lives (mental universes). Not only that, since these would be blissful feelings, then that would be bringing our lives intense goodness, since bliss is an intense, positive emotional experience. Also, if these are profound feelings of goodness (perceptions of profound goodness), then that would be even better because having intense, profound goodness is better than just having intense goodness.
Shakespeare was somewhat late to the game of course.
Organised religious beliefs gave us these 'right & wrong', 'good & bad'. 'Holy & evil' constructs. Which are of course social control mechanism, Designed for a time when there was not all encompassing policing and judicial systems. Without 'bad' of course, there can be no 'good'. No hell, no heaven.
Do any of these constructs exist? No. Of course not. They are intangible perceptions driven by IQ level, socio economic factors, level of education, religious beliefs, origins, ethnicity of the person and a myriad of other inputs.
Yes, some or most people hold them as perceptions, but as my signature says in effect "One person's terrorist, is another person's freedom fighter' ... So even as constructs the whole 'good & bad' comparison have no stable form.
As a point of order; When a human 'sees' a colour, that is how the rods/cones of their particular eyes have perceived the incoming information, which is then passed onto the brain ... What we do not know is the 'colour' which each individual 'sees' ... Colours are no more fixed than time. Look at Synaesthesia if anyone doubts the fluidity of information and how different people decant it.
Quote: Without our ability to feel emotions, then we'd be apathetic, which means we'd be in an apathetic state of mind, which means we'd have an apathetic perspective.
That is completely without grounds; indeed it is not true, not a fact. Not even close.
Both my wife and I are clinically defined as having no recognisable emotional register .... My wife is a Dr of Psychology amongst many other things. Myself I am a business portfolio owner, amongst many other things ... We are not apathetic in any way
..... Rather we are extremely successful, entirely driven people. Our two adult children are also doctors. You really need to re-think that view you have, as it is simply incorrect.
My wife and I have 30yrs together .... We still grow happier and closer by the day. We see a percentage (not love) and we are as close to 100% perfect for the other as is possible, any unmatching parts are 'trace' .... We trust each other implicitly and to us trust means "That person will die on all occasions without thought to protect me"
. We have become an egalitarian, symbiotic and Gestalt entity.
You see if not for the 'they will die' clause in our trust then you cannot trust anyone at all .... Because at some point before death they will step back and not protect the other person .... At which point is that? No idea, not even the person will know. It is the emotional who are entirely untrustworthy and self absorbed.
My wife and I know that megalomania works
. How positive do you want? This stance has been lately proven by academic research ... We do not suffer with 'Dunning Kruger Effect' thinking, rather we easily can see those who do, the 99.999%.
So yes, there is only what happens and it is neither good nor bad until some human decides it is ... But after that my friend, you're talking twaddle.