A recent discussion has caused me to get very clear about one aspect of my value system; namely, that I value intellectual integrity more than happiness. I would not surrender my intellectual integrity, even under threat of lifelong sadness and frustration. Conversely, I would surrender my current happiness if I discovered it was incompatible with intellectual integrity.
What (if anything) do you value more than happiness?
Happiness to me finds its way through so long as I'm not bent on preventing it. I can be happy in spite of most things (then again, my life's not so bad). I would never value happiness over knowledge though.
Right now, bringing criminals to justice ;D
(sounds ambitious, I know.)
That my grandchildren get a decent education and have opportunities for success in life.
Freedom.
There are many things I value more than happiness. I am adept at being miserable and content, so to speak, so happiness is a bonus, really.
Examples..? My friends, intelligence, reliability, integrity... The list is not exactly short.
I like happiness, I appreciate melancholy as well.
If you can manage a mix of these things it's probably a richer life.
Sad songs are often the most beautiful.
Quote from: Pharaoh Cat on December 23, 2011, 07:01:16 PM
What (if anything) do you value more than happiness?
A religious friend of mine once expected to win a point with me by asking if I'd rather the right or happy. She did expect it when I told her that was a ridiculous question, but she didn't expect it when I continued "of course I'd rather be right!" A lot of things make me happy, and the rare occasions on which I'm right about something is one of them. It's a win/win situation.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on December 23, 2011, 07:32:04 PM
Right now, bringing criminals to justice ;D
(sounds ambitious, I know.)
Why am I seeing a cape involved in this?
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on December 24, 2011, 05:39:23 AM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on December 23, 2011, 07:32:04 PM
Right now, bringing criminals to justice ;D
(sounds ambitious, I know.)
Why am I seeing a cape involved in this?
LOL
Marvel at the cape you're seeing ;D
QuoteA religious friend of mine once expected to win a point with me by asking if I'd rather the right or happy. She did expect it when I told her that was a ridiculous question, but she didn't expect it when I continued "of course I'd rather be right!" A lot of things make me happy, and the rare occasions on which I'm right about something is one of them. It's a win/win situation.
I never really understood why people would prefer a delusion over the truth, if they were able to know the truth. Would beliefs based on fact be more valuable than anything made up and kept just because they make you happy? ???
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on December 24, 2011, 06:25:28 AM
I never really understood why people would prefer a delusion over the truth, if they were able to know the truth. Would beliefs based on fact be more valuable than anything made up and kept just because they make you happy? ???
My guess is it depends on how comforting the fantasy is. I've heard a number of people say that facts aren't enough, or they're "too cold". Altho I don't agree, I do get that point of view since I find supernaturalism not enough, and the common god-as-ultimate-helicopter-parent revoltingly creepy -- what we value and why is very subjective territory.
As Bruce said, my children and grandchildren.
My health has got to be up there close to the top. Without that I'd be a miserable bastard.
I'm a a miserable bastard anyway. :'(
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on December 23, 2011, 07:32:04 PM
Right now, bringing criminals to justice ;D
(sounds ambitious, I know.)
Sounds cool, frankly. My younger daughter is majoring in criminal justice.
Quote from: squidfetish on December 24, 2011, 11:25:27 AM
My health has got to be up there close to the top. Without that I'd be a miserable bastard.
Yes, but if you had to choose between health and happiness - if you couldn't have both - which would you choose?
As noted in the OP, my answer is intellectual integrity. I realized this morning that this means I'm not amoral! :o
My morality is intellectual integrity.
I think the thing you would sacrifice happiness for is your morality.
This is a pretty large revelation to me, because I thought I was an ancient Greek kind of guy, me and Aristotle a couple of buds, but no, ain't so. The Greeks figured the right thing to do would inevitably be the thing that made us happiest. It turns out I disagree. The right thing is the right thing, happiness be damned. For me the right thing is intellectual integrity. Aristotle would agree with my choice of right thing, but would look at me like I had two heads if I suggested happiness could ever be in conflict with my choice.
Quote from: Pharaoh Cat on December 24, 2011, 06:17:55 PM
Quote from: squidfetish on December 24, 2011, 11:25:27 AM
My health has got to be up there close to the top. Without that I'd be a miserable bastard.
Yes, but if you had to choose between health and happiness - if you couldn't have both - which would you choose?
Good grief, I'm not sure I can adequately answer that as my happiness is very strongly entwined with my health as I'm very sporty... weights, surfing and cycling are the things that bring me the most happiness and keep me laid back. That probably sounds weird to others, but tha's the way it is. I have no satisfactory answer to that!! :-\
Quote from: Pharaoh Cat on December 24, 2011, 06:16:06 PM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on December 23, 2011, 07:32:04 PM
Right now, bringing criminals to justice ;D
(sounds ambitious, I know.)
Sounds cool, frankly. My younger daughter is majoring in criminal justice.
My sister wants to as well. Though I wouldn't pursue such a career because I can easily imagine it getting very trying to have to deal with cowardly criminal scum on a daily basis.
But the torches get past on, and I'm happy to see such people brought to answer for what they do by someone else, someone competent. ;D
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on December 25, 2011, 02:32:01 AM
But the torches get past on, and I'm happy to see such people brought to answer for what they do by someone else, someone competent. ;D
Are you personally involved at all with bringing criminals to justice? I had assumed you were, because you cited it as what you value more than happiness.
It's a difficult question to answer. Happiness is the means by which we gauge the value of our assets, it isn't an asset in itself. ie. I "value" X in proportion to how happy it makes me. So you're asking us to measure the ruler.
Quote from: Melmoth on December 25, 2011, 01:08:12 PM
It's a difficult question to answer. Happiness is the means by which we gauge the value of our assets, it isn't an asset in itself. ie. I "value" X in proportion to how happy it makes me. So you're asking us to measure the ruler.
I'm not sure that happiness is the only gauge we use. I think at least some of us apply one or more additional gauges. Pride would be such a gauge. Pride and happiness can be in contention, as would be the case if I had to choose intellectual integrity over happiness. It is possible to be proud and unhappy at the same time.
it's possible sure. I suppose my problem with that was seeing the point... which would make my answer nothing, I suppose. Happiness is my highest value.
Er... nothing.
Even PC's assertion that we would, on the face of it, put morality over happiness is ignoring the bigger picture. We are ultimately always in pursuit of personal happiness, however this is dressed. Faced with any dilema, we will always choose the action that we believe will afford us, personally, the least pain - the most acceptable on aggregate. We will weigh the pain of breaking our moral code against the pain of the alternative. Ultimately, our aggregate happiness (or, at least, our judgement thereof) is always the deciding factor.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on December 26, 2011, 08:20:05 PM
We are ultimately always in pursuit of personal happiness, however this is dressed. Faced with any dilema, we will always choose the action that we believe will afford us, personally, the least pain - the most acceptable on aggregate. We will weigh the pain of breaking our moral code against the pain of the alternative. Ultimately, our aggregate happiness (or, at least, our judgement thereof) is always the deciding factor.
I'm sure this is the case for you, since you say it is, but it isn't universally true, nor is it true for me. But it's almost true. In fact maybe the difference between what you're saying and what I would say is merely semantic. I don't imagine violating Occam's Razor, for example, and reject that scenario because it hurts me or frightens me. Rather, when imagining the scenario, a pressure builds up inside me, like steam in a turbine. I relieve the pressure by taking the path of least resistance, which, in this case, would be to adhere to Occam's Razor.
I would say it is universal that living creatures take the path of least resistance so as to relieve pent up pressure and return to a state of equilibrium. That path may well entail physical or emotional pain, but that path will be taken if it relieves more pressure than any other path.
Thus the question in the OP could be expressed as, "What value exerts more pressure on your psyche than the prospect of physical or emotional pain does?"
Quote from: Pharaoh Cat on December 25, 2011, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on December 25, 2011, 02:32:01 AM
But the torches get past on, and I'm happy to see such people brought to answer for what they do by someone else, someone competent. ;D
Are you personally involved at all with bringing criminals to justice? I had assumed you were, because you cited it as what you value more than happiness.
I wouldn't place my involvement in the same way as a criminal justice lawyer is involved, I just facilitate some processes. Neither am I a vigilante of sorts, I'm just going after those who caused me harm and my family potential harm. I call them criminals because they are involved in criminal acts (everything from slander to cyber bullying with the intent to humiliate and drive me to suicide to invasion of my and my family's privacy.) and I have spent the last year or two enveloping them to cut off their exits (I actually have no problem saying that now, what's done is done...the cards will soon be on the table) to make sure that a number of possible scenarios would happen that I could take advantage of. I won't go into further details...
Unfortunately I haven't reached the point I'd want to be in, but am satisfied with what I've got. It will do.
But yeah, it all started about 4 years ago, and I still find the motivation to never give up till I reach that goal...one way or the other.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on December 27, 2011, 04:24:05 AM...
I purposely snipped your whole post because it's obvious you don't want to expand on it and I'm sure your reasons for that are excellent.
I just want to say that I admire anyone for whom a spirit of retribution exerts greater pressure on the psyche than the prospect of pain or pleasure, physical or emotional, does.
Quote from: Pharaoh Cat on December 27, 2011, 02:29:40 AM
Thus the question in the OP could be expressed as, "What value exerts more pressure on your psyche than the prospect of physical or emotional pain does?"
Now that's a different question!
The happiness of my children might take precedent over my own happiness, but that in itself is acknowledging my own desires. The evaluation of happiness-quotients of any choice of action is based on how it would affect me. How much pain can I put up with before it overrides the happiness of my children? Who knows, but it's all about me.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on December 26, 2011, 08:20:05 PM
Er... nothing.
Even PC's assertion that we would, on the face of it, put morality over happiness is ignoring the bigger picture. We are ultimately always in pursuit of personal happiness, however this is dressed. Faced with any dilema, we will always choose the action that we believe will afford us, personally, the least pain - the most acceptable on aggregate. We will weigh the pain of breaking our moral code against the pain of the alternative. Ultimately, our aggregate happiness (or, at least, our judgement thereof) is always the deciding factor.
Pain and happiness are not mutually exclusive, neither is pain and pleasure. SM is an example of how people gain pleasure from pain. Happiness rarely factors into my decisions, and avoiding pain is also a rare consideration for me. Decisions involving permanent damage are less common for my life, but risking permanent damage does usually rate pretty high over pain and/or happiness, though I know that with most permanent damage, I can still be happy. The error you make here, is to suppose that everyone is the same and holds the same values and motivations, even if you suppose that "deep down" everyone is the same.
If I am proven to be in error in my supposition that my argument is a universal truth then I will concede that point. But until then I shall argue the point as follows:
I would give 'happiness' to mean the feeling derived from anything which pleases. And, as you say, pleasure does not preclude pain and vice-versa.
I dispute that differing personal values and motivations have any baring on this. What might be the overriding motivation for anyone's deportment if it weren't the pursuit of happiness? You claim that avoiding permanent damage is a major motivational force for you. Why? The reason is that the decisions you are making are an attempt to optimise your happiness because avoidance of permanent damage pleases you. Your aggregate happiness is based on damage limitation.
I challenge you to provide an instance of a decision you made that - however altruistic it may have been - was not made under the premise that the ultimate result would please you more than an alternative decision.
This is not selfishness. And altruism is by no means devalued.
Do we think that Bob Geldof is not swooning at his own achievements? Do we think that Gandhi died miserable? Did Mother Teresa decide to give up because she wanted some time to herself?
The common thread here is that all of these outwardly altruistic individuals derived their happiness from helping others because they valued it above more personal pleasures.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on December 30, 2011, 10:09:26 PM
I would give 'happiness' to mean the feeling derived from anything which pleases. And, as you say, pleasure does not preclude pain and vice-versa.
Ye but,,,, it seems everything seems to have been squashed into a word that isn't usually thought of this way.
A person may have a view of how the world should be and they strive to make it so, they may not be successful, they may not reach a happy day. I suppose they can lay in their death bed and look back and take solace, they failed but they did fight the good fight.
I'd prefer to think of someone like Wilberforce as a hero, they fight to have their will realised. Calling this a quest for happiness demeans it, it's too small a word.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on December 30, 2011, 10:09:26 PM
I challenge you to provide an instance of a decision you made that - however altruistic it may have been - was not made under the premise that the ultimate result would please you more than an alternative decision.
I still think the discrepancy here is more semantic than anything else. You're using words more loosely than some of us would. For example, let's say I'm walking in the woods. I see a bear. The bear sees me. I have no gun. The bear starts to run in my direction. I flee.
Fleeing the bear, I'm not thinking about pleasure or pain, physical or emotional. I'm thinking about the bear, and the nearest tree, and how fast I can run. I fear the bear, hope for the tree, hate my slow legs.
Sure, if the bear caught me, I wouldn't be happy. But that's not the focus of my consciousness. At that moment I'm all about the bear, the tree, and my legs.
If we talk about psychodynamic pressure, avenues of release, the path of least resistance, and the return to equilibrium, we can do justice to what any stimulus and any response really mean to any real person having to make a real decision in real time. In the above example, I'd be experiencing psychodynamic pressure to get the hell away from the bear, my avenues of release would be to run in any of a dozen directions, the path of least resistance would be to run toward an available escape mechanism, and if I reach the tree and get up it in time, I will first be elated and then gradually relax into a state of equilibrium.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on December 30, 2011, 10:09:26 PM
I challenge you to provide an instance of a decision you made that - however altruistic it may have been - was not made under the premise that the ultimate result would please you more than an alternative decision.
There are the people who self harm.
I don't think they are doing it to please themselves.
They may think they don't deserve happiness.
Maybe being unhappy makes them happy?
I'd say being yourself is more important than being happy.
Quote from: Pharaoh Cat on December 31, 2011, 02:23:06 AM
I still think the discrepancy here is more semantic than anything else.
Possibly. If you are saying that happiness is a discrete entity, something independent of experiences, actions and decisions then I suppose you could argue that something else might be of more value (as in the OP). I just don't think this is the case. Every decision, inherently, has a happiness-quotient attached and we evaluate this whenever a decision is made - consciously or not.
Quote
For example, let's say I'm walking in the woods. I see a bear. The bear sees me. I have no gun. The bear starts to run in my direction. I flee.
Regardless of the result of running from an angry bear, the instinctive flight mechanism will most likely kick-in without any 'decision' being made. In any case, escape from the bear is a conscious priority as the alternative would surely not hold a greater happiness-quotient. You have still not provided the example that disproves my assertion. I will concede when you do.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on December 31, 2011, 10:09:49 AM
Every decision, inherently, has a happiness-quotient attached and we evaluate this whenever a decision is made - consciously or not.
If you do it unconsciously, how do you know you've done it? The unconscious is unverifiable. I could say to you, "Unconsciously you compare the various decisions to what Jesus would do." And hey, maybe you do, but if you do, you'll never know, and if you don't, you'll never know that either.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on December 31, 2011, 10:09:49 AM
You have still not provided the example that disproves my assertion.
Nor will I ever manage to do that. The unconscious cannot be disproven. You might as well have asserted leprechaun intervention.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on December 31, 2011, 10:09:49 AM
I will concede when you do.
I concede. You win.
QuoteI will concede when you do
Taken in context, this was to say that I will concede when you provide the example I requested.
To restate: I challenge you to provide an instance of a decision you made that - however altruistic it may have been - was not made under the premise that the ultimate result would please you more than an alternative decision. And you may answer for any conscious decision you wish.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on December 31, 2011, 09:32:12 PM
To restate: I challenge you to provide an instance of a decision you made that - however altruistic it may have been - was not made under the premise that the ultimate result would please you more than an alternative decision. And you may answer for any conscious decision you wish.
This morning I decided to visit this thread and see what you wrote. I never gave a moment's thought to my happiness. I wanted to satisfy my curiosity.
This morning, on another thread, I decided to wish everyone a Happy 2012. I never gave a moment's thought to my happiness. I wanted to connect in a friendly way with all the people who wander in and out of here each day.
This morning I decided to feed my cat her wet food. I never gave a moment's thought to my happiness. I wanted my cat to have a full belly and get nutrients unavailable in her other food, which is dry nuggets.
I could write similar comments regarding every decision I make, Scissorlegs. I never calculate my happiness versus my unhappiness before deciding to do something. Rather, I experience one or more pressures demanding release, and I choose the path of least resistance so as to relieve the most pressure with the least effort and risk. Sometimes the effort or risk may be substantial, but it will still be the least of any of my available options. I'm sure I would attempt to run into a burning building to save my cat or either of my daughters. Substantial risk to life and limb there may be in that, but the risk of other lives and other limbs would press upon me so heavily as to outweigh other considerations, and hopefully I would be capable of enduring the heat and smoke. Not one nanosecond would I spend doing arithmetic around the relative happiness potential in each of the various options presenting themselves. I would be too busy running toward the fire.
I think I agree with Scissorlegs on this one. We may not make every conscious decision with the intent that of "If I do A+B the result will be happiness", but I think it's a pervasive motivation, really. I might think "I'm hungry, I'll eat an apple" not "eating an apple will make me 'happy'", but I'd argue that the second thought process is probably closer to the reality of the situation, even if it's not conscious. We are always moving towards making ourselves "happier", it's usually just a question of whether we're focusing on doing this in the short-term or in the long-term.
I think the reason that we don't think about it in these terms is because we're pretty desensitized to most levels of happiness. Waking up, getting a coffee and getting a shower does make me happier, but, because I do it every day, it doesn't necessarily excite me much. Most of our "happiness" is more of a dull roar, as opposed to really exciting, so it's easier to dismiss as being an actual causation.
Quote from: Pharaoh Cat on January 01, 2012, 12:15:10 PM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on December 31, 2011, 09:32:12 PM
To restate: I challenge you to provide an instance of a decision you made that - however altruistic it may have been - was not made under the premise that the ultimate result would please you more than an alternative decision. And you may answer for any conscious decision you wish.
This morning I decided to visit this thread and see what you wrote. I never gave a moment's thought to my happiness. I wanted to satisfy my curiosity.
Which would of course made you happy. ;D
Quote from: Pharaoh Cat on January 01, 2012, 12:15:10 PM
This morning I decided to visit this thread and see what you wrote. I never gave a moment's thought to my happiness. I wanted to satisfy my curiosity.
Why?
QuoteThis morning, on another thread, I decided to wish everyone a Happy 2012. I never gave a moment's thought to my happiness. I wanted to connect in a friendly way with all the people who wander in and out of here each day.
Why?
QuoteThis morning I decided to feed my cat her wet food. I never gave a moment's thought to my happiness. I wanted my cat to have a full belly and get nutrients unavailable in her other food, which is dry nuggets.
Why? Because if you didn't , your cat's hunger/misery would make you sad.
QuoteI'm sure I would attempt to run into a burning building to save my cat or either of my daughters. Substantial risk to life and limb there may be in that, but the risk of other lives and other limbs would press upon me so heavily as to outweigh other considerations, and hopefully I would be capable of enduring the heat and smoke. Not one nanosecond would I spend doing arithmetic around the relative happiness potential in each of the various options presenting themselves. I would be too busy running toward the fire.
...because you know that if you didn't, you would not be very happy with yourself. Guilt, loss, cowardice, etc... You know this to be the case so you act selflessly for a happier outcome. The alternative decision would not be a bearable position.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on January 01, 2012, 12:58:28 PM
I might think "I'm hungry, I'll eat an apple" not "eating an apple will make me 'happy'", but I'd argue that the second thought process is probably closer to the reality of the situation, even if it's not conscious.
OK. Obviously my leprechaun gambit was unsuccessful. I'll just reiterate that I can't argue against hypothesized unconscious thought processes. If you said you unconsciously pictured pink chimps lighting handkerchiefs on fire and always decided for altruism if there were an odd number of handkerchiefs and selfish bastardliness if the number of handkerchiefs was even, I would be left with nothing to say except, "Oh, well I guess maybe you do, but neither you nor I will ever know."
But consider this. Some stranger (a girl) randomly dials your cell phone number and tells you she's about to jump off a bridge. She describes the rocks below in great detail and tells you she's dangling by one foot and one hand. You immediately begin trying to reason with her, console her, trick her, or any other tactic that seems like it might work so as to get her to choose life instead of death. While this is under way, would you in any sense be concerned with your own happiness?
Doesn't Occam's Razor suggest that if I make a decision, the elements of reality that I was thinking and emoting about just prior to making the decision are the elements of reality relevant to the decision I made? Why, in interpreting my decision, would I add in some other element retroactively and claim that element to be most relevant?
Quote from: Pharaoh Cat on January 01, 2012, 04:56:14 PM
But consider this. Some stranger (a girl) randomly dials your cell phone number and tells you she's about to jump off a bridge. She describes the rocks below in great detail and tells you she's dangling by one foot and one hand. You immediately begin trying to reason with her, console her, trick her, or any other tactic that seems like it might work so as to get her to choose life instead of death. While this is under way, would you in any sense be concerned with your own happiness?
How would you feel if you had allowed her to die? Not sure I could live with myself if I hadn't done what I could - and suffered any associated injury/inconvenience/discomfort - to save her. So, the outwardly altruistic act was made knowing that an alternative decision would have a personally unsatisfactory outcome.
QuoteDoesn't Occam's Razor suggest that if I make a decision, the elements of reality that I was thinking and emoting about just prior to making the decision are the elements of reality relevant to the decision I made? Why, in interpreting my decision, would I add in some other element retroactively and claim that element to be most relevant?
The elements to which you are adamantly clinging are in fact tertiary to the primary (more basic) element of happiness.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on January 01, 2012, 04:45:57 PM
Quote from: Pharaoh Cat on January 01, 2012, 12:15:10 PM
This morning I decided to visit this thread and see what you wrote. I never gave a moment's thought to my happiness. I wanted to satisfy my curiosity.
Why?
Curiosity is a psychological drive. It's a primary fact. It doesn't need some antecedent principle to explain it.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on January 01, 2012, 04:45:57 PM
Quote from: Pharaoh Cat on January 01, 2012, 12:15:10 PM
This morning, on another thread, I decided to wish everyone a Happy 2012. I never gave a moment's thought to my happiness. I wanted to connect in a friendly way with all the people who wander in and out of here each day.
Why?
The desire for friendly connection is a psychological drive. It's a primary fact. It doesn't need some antecedent principle to explain it.
Is it important to you that human motivation boil down to a single unifying principle? I can understand that, but why are you willing to postulate unconscious (and therefore unverifiable) processes?
As far as I can tell - and please correct me as needed - your logic could be expressed as the following syllogism:
A causes B.
Pharaoh Cat chose A.
Conclusion: Pharaoh Cat chose B.
(In the foregoing, B is happiness.)
That syllogism isn't valid. The valid version would be written like this:
A causes B.
Choosing A causes A to occur.
Pharaoh Cat chose A.
Conclusion 1: A occurred.
Conclusion 2: B occurred.
In the foregoing, Pharaoh Cat chose A. Pharaoh Cat did not choose B. Rather, Pharaoh Cat's choice of A caused A to occur, which caused B to occur. In order for Pharaoh Cat to choose B, Pharaoh Cat must actually choose B. Causing B and choosing B are not the same thing. Pharaoh Cat may be unaware that A causes B, or may be indifferent to the fact that A causes B, and in either instance, it would be misleading to suggest that Pharaoh Cat chose B, albeit no one would dispute that Pharaoh Cat caused B.
Rather, B is an intrinsic part of A. They are inseparable.
I don't disagree with your well-considered logic, but we evidently disagree about what happiness is which renders this argument irreconcilable.
It's not important to me that human motivation boils down to a single unifying principle, I just think it does.
Peace and happiness :-*
Quote from: Scissorlegs on December 30, 2011, 10:09:26 PM
If I am proven to be in error in my supposition that my argument is a universal truth then I will concede that point. But until then I shall argue the point as follows:
I would give 'happiness' to mean the feeling derived from anything which pleases. And, as you say, pleasure does not preclude pain and vice-versa.
I don't think this is true either, I can be very depressed and as far from happiness as I can be, and still find things pleasing. Pleasure is a very short term experience that ends as soon as the experience, while happiness is something that lasts longer and doesn't require environmental stimulation. While I think that ones mood can be affected by stimulation from outward sources, I don't think that those are the driving factors for ones mood. In my experience (I know, personal bias), it's more like a point based system, little things can hurt or help my mood a little bit but to take my mood from one thing to another takes something huge. I don't accept your definition of happiness, because it fails to define the thing in my brain that lasts longer than the pleasure and can occur after not feeling so awesome without experiencing pleasure. Also, it seems that the term "pleasure" is enough to describe what you're describing.
Quote from: ScissorlegsI dispute that differing personal values and motivations have any baring on this. What might be the overriding motivation for anyone's deportment if it weren't the pursuit of happiness? You claim that avoiding permanent damage is a major motivational force for you. Why? The reason is that the decisions you are making are an attempt to optimise your happiness because avoidance of permanent damage pleases you. Your aggregate happiness is based on damage limitation.
Avoiding permanent damage doesn't please me, having all my body parts that I've become accustomed to is useful to me. Don't try to tell me what I find pleasure in, that is another common mistake people make, not only towards me, but towards other people. You can tell people how you feel and what pleases you, but you can't speak for someone else... unless you have some kind of psychic powers you're not telling me about.
Quote from: ScissorlegsI challenge you to provide an instance of a decision you made that - however altruistic it may have been - was not made under the premise that the ultimate result would please you more than an alternative decision.
I put on white socks instead of black socks, either are equal in my opinion and neither would bring me ill feelings. I make thousands of decisions a day without the consideration of pleasing me or avoiding suffering.
Quote from: ScissorlegsDo we think that Bob Geldof is not swooning at his own achievements? Do we think that Gandhi died miserable? Did Mother Teresa decide to give up because she wanted some time to herself?
The common thread here is that all of these outwardly altruistic individuals derived their happiness from helping others because they valued it above more personal pleasures.
Sounds exactly like personal pleasures to me, and I don't know if they were happy or not, so I won't speculate.
I dunno, I don't see much of a distinction between pleasure and happiness.
Quotepleasure
Pronunciation: /ˈplɛʒə/
noun
[mass noun]
a feeling of happy satisfaction and enjoyment
Quotehappy
Pronunciation: /ˈhapi/
adjective (happier, happiest)
feeling or showing pleasure or contentment:
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on January 01, 2012, 10:26:32 PM
I dunno, I don't see much of a distinction between pleasure and happiness.
Quotepleasure
Pronunciation: /ˈplɛʒə/
noun
[mass noun]
a feeling of happy satisfaction and enjoyment
Quotehappy
Pronunciation: /ˈhapi/
adjective (happier, happiest)
feeling or showing pleasure or contentment:
Many of the differences between words is the result of many of the definitions of the words, not the one bridge where people may use the words interchangeably.
Of course. But I still think that there's more which points to them being synonym-ish than being distinctly and usefully different from a philosophical perspective.
Quote from: Davin on January 01, 2012, 10:13:50 PM
Avoiding permanent damage doesn't please me, having all my body parts that I've become accustomed to is useful to me. Don't try to tell me what I find pleasure in, that is another common mistake people make, not only towards me, but towards other people. You can tell people how you feel and what pleases you, but you can't speak for someone else.
You, yourself, wrote:
Quote"...risking permanent damage does usually rate pretty high...".
My argument is that I believe your motivation for minimising permanent damage is that this offers you more pleasure than allowing yourself to come to harm. Is that not correct?
QuoteI make thousands of decisions a day without the consideration of pleasing me or avoiding suffering.
I addressed this in answering PC's comments. The underlying premise in any decision - I believe - is a pursuit of happiness. I won't labour this point (again). If you dont accept this, then OK.
QuoteSounds exactly like personal pleasures to me, and I don't know if they were happy or not, so I won't speculate.
I don't either, but, by all accounts, none of these people regretted their (reported) decisions in life. I can only assume from this that they were - on aggregate - 'happy' with their alturistic decisions.
We are in many ways survival machines, just driven by genes to reproduce.
Many people don't seem to make a profit if happiness is the currency.
To say a starving person eating a cockroach is motivated by a pursuit of happiness is stretching the definition a smidge. There is instinct at play and it doesn't care if we are happy, not unless it serves the process of passing on genes.
Fear is instinctual, if I'm in the sea and a shark bites a guy's leg off, I scramble up shell encrusted rock which grates the flesh from my feet, legs, hands, arms, chest. Where's the thought of happiness? In some situations if you did the potential happiness/suffering equation you'd just lay down and die.
And the things we do for love? Is it for happiness? Well I suppose some of us are eternally optimistic but I think we're having our strings pulled and the puppeteer couldn't care less if we are happy.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on January 01, 2012, 11:34:44 PMOf course. But I still think that there's more which points to them being synonym-ish than being distinctly and usefully different from a philosophical perspective.
I fall in line with the psychological definition that happiness is a pleasant state of mind, but not derived solely from pleasure. As I stated earlier, happiness is a more persistent state than that of experiencing a pleasurable experience. Ones mood doesn't change instantly from one experience to the next (at least not for those without a mood disorder), it changes more slowly (except with extreme cases, like ones sister just died), so there must be something else to describe this mood one is in rather than using pleasure.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on January 01, 2012, 11:54:10 PM
Quote from: Davin on January 01, 2012, 10:13:50 PM
Avoiding permanent damage doesn't please me, having all my body parts that I've become accustomed to is useful to me. Don't try to tell me what I find pleasure in, that is another common mistake people make, not only towards me, but towards other people. You can tell people how you feel and what pleases you, but you can't speak for someone else.
You, yourself, wrote: Quote"...risking permanent damage does usually rate pretty high...".
My argument is that I believe your motivation for minimising permanent damage is that this offers you more pleasure than allowing yourself to come to harm. Is that not correct?
That certainly does sound like your argument, but again you failed to address my contention: you can't tell other people what they find pleasing or why they decided to do things.
Also, try the whole thing I myself said:
Quote from: Davin on December 30, 2011, 12:45:47 AMDecisions involving permanent damage are less common for my life, but risking permanent damage does usually rate pretty high over pain and/or happiness, though I know that with most permanent damage, I can still be happy.
Quote mining is not an admirable trait. Notice the last part I myself said. Loss of limb will most likely not affect my happiness because I can be happy with or without them, yet I still make decisions to avoid situations where my limbs are very likely to be lost.
Quote from: ScissorlegsQuoteI make thousands of decisions a day without the consideration of pleasing me or avoiding suffering.
I addressed this in answering PC's comments. The underlying premise in any decision - I believe - is a pursuit of happiness. I won't labour this point (again). If you dont accept this, then OK.
Please do explain how my decision to wear white socks is made to make myself happy over wearing black socks which would make me equally happy.
Quote from: ScissorlegsQuoteSounds exactly like personal pleasures to me, and I don't know if they were happy or not, so I won't speculate.
I don't either, but, by all accounts, none of these people regretted their (reported) decisions in life. I can only assume from this that they were - on aggregate - 'happy' with their alturistic decisions.
This just sounds like circular reasoning here: you propose that people only do things to make themselves happy, these people seemed happy, therefore they must have only done things that make themselves happy.
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on January 02, 2012, 12:54:43 AM
Fear is instinctual, if I'm in the sea and a shark bites a guy's leg off, I scramble up shell encrusted rock which grates the flesh from my feet, legs, hands, arms, chest. Where's the thought of happiness?
I just want to say that I love your new hat - and your logic! ;)
Congratulations! The Logic Elf rewards anyone who thinks logically. Look for an event that doesn't suck to happen soon in your life and when it does, think blue.
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi43.tinypic.com%2Fv6tefm.jpg&hash=20d0d324fdb17f1f3b6b62a1429dfc447812fe8f)
Quote from: The Magic Pudding on January 02, 2012, 12:54:43 AM
We are in many ways survival machines, just driven by genes to reproduce.
Many people don't seem to make a profit if happiness is the currency.
To say a starving person eating a cockroach is motivated by a pursuit of happiness is stretching the definition a smidge. There is instinct at play and it doesn't care if we are happy, not unless it serves the process of passing on genes.
Fear is instinctual, if I'm in the sea and a shark bites a guy's leg off, I scramble up shell encrusted rock which grates the flesh from my feet, legs, hands, arms, chest. Where's the thought of happiness? In some situations if you did the potential happiness/suffering equation you'd just lay down and die.
And the things we do for love? Is it for happiness? Well I suppose some of us are eternally optimistic but I think we're having our strings pulled and the puppeteer couldn't care less if we are happy.
It is no coincidence that it is exactly these survivial requirements that offer the most pleasure - eating, sex, family bondng, endorphines after exertion.
The puppeteer (evolution) has deduced that the optimal technique in self-aware humans to follow a course of action conducive to survival resides in those humans that link pleasure with survival needs... and so we have evolved.
And as for escaping - painfully - from the shark, this flight mechanism is not necessarily a conscious decision. And adrenaline is a potent painkiller.
Is love making pleasurable or happyful?
What about eating chocolate or a delicious desert?
Or receiving a good massage?
There is a distinct emotional difference between pleasure and happiness
Quote from: Scissorlegs on January 02, 2012, 09:14:35 AM
It is no coincidence that it is exactly these survivial requirements that offer the most pleasure - eating, sex, family bondng, endorphines after exertion.
A implies B.
A equals B.
Do you see that these two statements say different things?
Quote from: Davin on January 02, 2012, 08:34:15 AM
That certainly does sound like your argument, but again you failed to address my contention: you can't tell other people what they find pleasing or why they decided to do things.
I'm not trying to telling people what they feel, I'm suggesting that we are all ultimately striving for optimal happiness when we make decisions, whether this is the primary or tertiary level of thought. ie, to use DJ's example, when you eat an apple it is the tertiary decision to 'sate my hunger' that is the foremost in the consciousness. The primary consideration of "what can i do to make myself feel happier?" may not spring to mind, but is the basis of the tertiary decision. Does eating the apple make you happier or sadder? Would you eat the apple if it was disgusting to you, given that it would also sate your hunger? It depends on the level of hunger, the level of disgust and the resulting pleasure/pain equation.
If you disagree with this, fine. Your approval is not required.
QuoteDecisions involving permanent damage are less common for my life, but risking permanent damage does usually rate pretty high over pain and/or happiness, though I know that with most permanent damage, I can still be happy.
Quote mining is not an admirable trait. Notice the last part I myself said. Loss of limb will most likely not affect my happiness because I can be happy with or without them, yet I still make decisions to avoid situations where my limbs are very likely to be lost.
Why? Is it because the inconvenience of having one less limb would make life a little more awkward and therefore have more of a negative impact rather than positive impact on your life? The happiness-quotient of losing a limb is somewhat less than the happiness-quotient of avoiding its loss.
Quote mining? That's a little unfair. I picked out this sentence because it was the specific comment to which I was referring when I was arguing over your permanent damage assertion, and subsequently on which you were contending me.
QuotePlease do explain how my decision to wear white socks is made to make myself happy over wearing black socks which would make me equally happy.
In this equation, the happiness-quotients of each decision is equal. But you've got to make a decision, right?!
QuoteThis just sounds like circular reasoning here: you propose that people only do things to make themselves happy, these people seemed happy, therefore they must have only done things that make themselves happy.
On aggregate - Exactly! There're no circles here, just cause and effect. But it must be noted that it is the PERCEPTION of what will make us happy that is the deciding factor, not necessarily what will ACTUALLY make us happy.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on January 02, 2012, 09:14:35 AMIt is no coincidence that it is exactly these survivial requirements that offer the most pleasure - eating, sex, family bondng, endorphines after exertion.
The puppeteer (evolution) has deduced that the optimal technique in self-aware humans to follow a course of action conducive to survival resides in those humans that link pleasure with survival needs... and so we have evolved.
We all concede pleasure is important, but there's more to motivation than that. Sex is nice but I'd suggest the actual pleasure reward isn't commensurate with the extreme extraordinary crazy lengths people and animals go through to get a bit. The puppeteer is driving us hard and tossing us mere tidbits of pleasure.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on January 02, 2012, 09:14:35 AM
And as for escaping - painfully - from the shark, this flight mechanism is not necessarily a conscious decision. And adrenaline is a potent painkiller.
Are we going to ignore unconscious influences on our actions, what would Sigmund say?
The mother who accepts death to safeguard her young child, well she's going to be dead so there's not going to be any reward of happiness. I suggest evolution places an imperative in her mind which makes her act this way.
It's a complicated thing the human noggin, there's primal fears, desires, guilt, phobias, aversion, attraction, it doesn't work perfectly. All kinds of decisions are made that make no rational sense at all.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on January 02, 2012, 10:03:30 AM
Quote from: Davin on January 02, 2012, 08:34:15 AM
That certainly does sound like your argument, but again you failed to address my contention: you can't tell other people what they find pleasing or why they decided to do things.
I'm not trying to telling people what they feel, I'm suggesting that we are all ultimately striving for optimal happiness when we make decisions, whether this is the primary or tertiary level of thought.
You're not trying to tell people what they feel, just what feelings they're making decisions for. You can't rationally do that either, that is unless you have some kind of amazing telepathic insight ability into other peoples minds... do you?
Quote from: Scissorlegsie, to use DJ's example, when you eat an apple it is the tertiary decision to 'sate my hunger' that is the foremost in the consciousness. The primary consideration of "what can i do to make myself feel happier?" may not spring to mind, but is the basis of the tertiary decision. Does eating the apple make you happier or sadder? Would you eat the apple if it was disgusting to you, given that it would also sate your hunger? It depends on the level of hunger, the level of disgust and the resulting pleasure/pain equation.
If you disagree with this, fine. Your approval is not required.
So we make decisions for happiness whether we make decisions for happiness or not? This seems all too unfalsifiable, which to me is useless. Do you really consider a "decision" one is not conscious of, a decision? That is far too contradictory to what a decision is.
Quote from: ScissorlegsQuoteDecisions involving permanent damage are less common for my life, but risking permanent damage does usually rate pretty high over pain and/or happiness, though I know that with most permanent damage, I can still be happy.
Quote mining is not an admirable trait. Notice the last part I myself said. Loss of limb will most likely not affect my happiness because I can be happy with or without them, yet I still make decisions to avoid situations where my limbs are very likely to be lost.
Why? Is it because the inconvenience of having one less limb would make life a little more awkward and therefore have more of a negative impact rather than positive impact on your life? The happiness-quotient of losing a limb is somewhat less than the happiness-quotient of avoiding its loss.
Are you saying that the fewer limbs one has, the less happy one can be? So someone like Stephen Hawking who has lost almost all control of his body cannot be as happy as I can? Is that seriously where you want to take this? Do you have some kind of bias towards cripples and amputees?
Anyway, my happiness will most likely be the same with fewer limbs as it is now. There is also the possibility that one could be happier with the loss of limbs. Because I cannot tell whether I will be happier or more miserable with the loss of limbs, I don't consider happiness in my decisions.
Quote from: ScissorlegsQuote mining? That's a little unfair. I picked out this sentence because it was the specific comment to which I was referring when I was arguing over your permanent damage assertion, and subsequently on which you were contending me.
You changed the context of my comment and ignored the important bits regarding my contention which made it look as if my statement didn't cover that my happiness would still be attained with the serious injury. Quote mining matches, but either way, it was definitely taking my statement out of context.
Quote from: ScissorlegsQuotePlease do explain how my decision to wear white socks is made to make myself happy over wearing black socks which would make me equally happy.
In this equation, the happiness-quotients of each decision is equal. But you've got to make a decision, right?!
So you suggest that happiness is still a consideration to my decision, even when I know it doesn't matter? Wow, I must be a completely different person than I know myself to be. Normally I only consider things that matter to me and things that I can be sure about, but I guess I must submit to a stranger over the internet, who apparently has amazing Professor X powers, for what I make decisions for.
Just so you know, I've played this boring game many times before: I tell you I'm not considering happiness most of the time when I choose one option over another and you ask "why did you consider/choose that?" for eternity because I really don't make very many decisions with the consideration of my happiness. You'll most likely never accept that I don't as if you have direct insight into my brain and can watch over all my decisions to make sure that every one I make and have ever made has been in consideration for my happiness. At least that's how it normally goes and appears to be going here.
Quote from: ScissorlegsQuoteThis just sounds like circular reasoning here: you propose that people only do things to make themselves happy, these people seemed happy, therefore they must have only done things that make themselves happy.
On aggregate - Exactly! There're no circles here, just cause and effect. But it must be noted that it is the PERCEPTION of what will make us happy that is the deciding factor, not necessarily what will ACTUALLY make us happy.
You haven't cleared up the circle, only seemed to make an attempt at making it unfalsifiable. I can make a similar argument that people make decisions for muffins, even if they don't know they are making decisions for muffins. No matter what decisions they think they're making, they're making them for muffins, even if it's subconsciously. Do you see how useless the kind of reasoning you're proposing is?
Because a thing is unfalsifiable does not preclude its truth. I'm not saying that this is absolutely the truth, it is a conjecture with which I choose to ally because it matches my perception of reality. I have merely argued my case. I am not so arrogant as to assume my own infallibility.
I will consider what you all say and revise my thinking accordingly if it fits with my reality. I expect nothing less from anyone else. If my perception of reality is flawed, then that's a cross I'll have to bare.
Thanks for your time.
Peace and happiness.
I value my mom and my older brother. It's just been us three since as long as I can remember. My brother and I used to fight like siblings do on a daily basis, but now that he is in college, we spend a lot more time together when we can. He is going for a math degree to be a professor, and has a job at a tutoring place in South Bend. I usually tag along when he goes to work if Mom isn't home. He literally gets paid to help me with my math homework. ^^
Mom and I haven't been spending too much time together lately. She works two jobs now and is usually busy. I'm a little sad because Mom worked both jobs the 24, 25, and 26 of December. Even slept at one of them. I really feel bad for her, but in another year or so, I'll have my license and I can get a job to help with some things.
We are all going down to Florida during spring break, though. Super stoked about being able to spend time with them. ;D
Our values are closely correlated with our state of mind, including happiness. For example, a man who values loyalty unto death may kill himself. A man who values rebellion and anti-authority might steal. It is my belief that these two associations--what we value and our state of mind--are closely related. In my opinion, then, the value of "happiness" over all things leads to a state of mental hedonism.
Quote from: Wessik on January 18, 2012, 10:12:37 PM
Our values are closely correlated with our state of mind, including happiness. For example, a man who values loyalty unto death may kill himself. A man who values rebellion and anti-authority might steal. It is my belief that these two associations--what we value and our state of mind--are closely related. In my opinion, then, the value of "happiness" over all things leads to a state of mental hedonism.
Not if your happiness is derived from alturism or even just leading a respectful life.
people are not even conscious of their motivational driving parameters.
all behaviours of volition and accepted repeated automated responses eventually
signal dopamine and cause some type of joy, contentment, relief.
being here mr chance is a happy operation
altuistic investment
stoic self sacrifice
masochistic abstinence
all sorts of distorted suffering
as well as the simple smelling of a jasmine flower
and egoic self-fulfilling conscious direct joy seeking, is the most fleeting, least satisfying and short-acting of them all
somehow please us , satisfy us