(October 2, 2017 at 11:54 am)Transcended Dimensions Wrote: Alright, I will just say these brief things then:

It is only through pain (dysphoria) and pleasure (euphoria) that we become aware of the good and bad qualities of life just as how a sighted person is able to visualize the color red. 

This is still as plainly and demonstrably untrue as it was the first time you asserted it.  Obviously, there is more than one way to become aware of the good and bad qualities of life.  Your continued misapplication of a fundamentally dubious analogy does nothing to discredit a reality with which it is in contradiction.

You may prefer some specific way, you may think it's the best way, but that's all you can do in the face of the fact that people in this thread, all over the world, and for all of recorded history, have leveraged things other than their euphoric and dysphoric states to both become aware of and describe what is good, or bad.  I think that your preferred method of distinguishing a moral good from a moral evil is hilariously inept. You further erode any credibility with the inanity of both claiming it to be the only way...and the manner in which you've attempted to establish that this is so.

"I think that making me feel good is the only True Moral Good™"
-Why do you think that?
"Because it makes me feel real good."

O-kay...............

(October 2, 2017 at 12:07 pm)Khemikal Wrote:

(October 2, 2017 at 11:54 am)Transcended Dimensions Wrote: Alright, I will just say these brief things then:

It is only through pain (dysphoria) and pleasure (euphoria) that we become aware of the good and bad qualities of life just as how a sighted person is able to visualize the color red. 

This is still as plainly and demonstrably untrue as it was the first time you asserted it.  Obviously, there is more than one way to become aware of the good and bad qualities of life.  Your continued misapplication of a fundamentally dubious analogy does nothing to discredit a reality with which it is in contradiction.

You may prefer some specific way, you may think it's the best way, but that's all you can do in the face of the fact that people in this thread, all over the world, and for all of recorded history, have leveraged things other than their euphoric and dysphoric states to both become aware of and describe what is good, or bad.  I think that your preferred method of distinguishing a moral good from a moral evil is hilariously inept,  topped only by the inanity of both claiming it to be the only way...and the manner in which you've attempted to establish that this is so.

"I think that making me feel good is the only True Moral Good™"
-Why do you think that?
"Because it makes me feel real good."

O-kay..............

I respect your point of view and I think this was an interesting discussion even if you didn't think so.  At least, it was an interesting exercise and discussion for me.  But if you read the other person's response and my reply to it in that post, then I said that I was willing to keep an open mind, but wasn't really sure though.  I just hope that, someday, there can be an alternative form of real good value (inner light) in my life besides my euphoric states.  With all of that being said, I would like to present to you my artistic view of my positive emotions which holds profound meaning to me.  I presented it to you in a previous post, but you have said it was too long to read.  That is the reason why I trimmed it down part by part.

I'm very receptive to the idea that positive experience is generally a good thing, and that our experience of positive emotions is a common, though unreliable, indicator of the moral status of some x as we see it.  This is hardly earthshattering, worldview changing information, however.  I'm not entirely sure how a profound comment on morality could really be arrived at through recognition thereof.  We all know that "good people" don't like the icky shit....but do they dislike it because it is icky, or is it icky because they dislike it?  Your position insists on the latter.  I disagree.  I think that it's both, but that..if we were discussing delusions and meaningful blindness...then it would be the advocates of the latter, such as yourself..that have manufactured poor moral assessments.  You are deluded in thinking that the things you find icky are actually made icky by you finding them to be so.  You are blind to the suffering of the victim if you cannot identify the satisfaction of a sex offender as wrong.  You are deluded if you believe that your own personal satisfaction demonstrates the good moral nature of your actions or experience, and blind to your own human condition if you cannot identify a situation in which you would very much enjoy doing some wrong thing.

If your "artistic view" is a rehash of dragonball z fanboi-ism you can spare yourself the trouble. I would suggest that the totality of human emotional response is beyond the scope of your love of dragonball z to competently, let alone profoundly, describe. We certainly wont learn any non-trivial thing about morality from being subjected to a lifted plot synopsis, by you, of your favorite episodes and themes.

(October 2, 2017 at 12:34 pm)Khemikal Wrote: I'm very receptive to the idea that positive experience is generally a good thing, and that our experience of positive emotions is a common, though unreliable, indicator of the moral status of some x as we see it.  This is hardly earthshattering, worldview changing information, however.  I'm not entirely sure how a profound comment on morality could really be arrived at through recognition thereof.  We all know that "good people" don't like the icky shit....but do they dislike it because it is icky, or is it icky because they dislike it?  Your position insists on the latter.  I disagree.  I think that it's both, but that..if we were discussing delusions and meaningful blindness...then it would be the advocates of the latter, such as yourself..that have manufactured poor moral assessments.  You are deluded in thinking that the things you find icky are actually made icky by you finding them to be so.  You are blind to the suffering of the victim if you cannot identify the satisfaction of a sex offender as wrong.  You are deluded if you believe that your own personal satisfaction demonstrates the good moral nature of your actions or experience, and blind to your own human condition if you cannot identify a situation in which you would very much enjoy doing some wrong thing.

If your "artistic view" is a rehash of dragonball z fanboi-ism you can spare yourself the trouble.  I would suggest that the totality of human emotional response is beyond the scope of your love of dragonball z to competently, let alone profoundly, describe.  We certainly wont learn any non-trivial thing about morality from being subjected to a lifted plot synopsis, by you, of your favorite episodes and themes.

My artistic metaphor also had a religious element it as well which described the divine light of god allowing us to perceive good values through his eyes, so to speak.  My Dragonball Z and Sonic metaphor were simply an extension of that religious metaphor.  But in regards to what you just said to me, I will admit, it does make my worldview look like a terrible model for society and just outright false.  But let me point this out to you.  Evolution has made it in such a way that our thoughts of things being good send a signal to make us feel a positive emotion so that we can truly perceive said situation as good while thoughts of things being bad send the signal to our brains to make us feel a negative emotion that allows us to truly perceive things as being bad.  For example, if you thought that it was a lovely, good day today, that would make you feel euphoric and it is this state of euphoria that allows you to truly see that day as being lovely and good.  This is just our biology and how our brains work.  For anyone to frown upon me and my worldview would, thus, be no different than frowning upon me because I need sight to visualize colors or that I need a heart to live. 

Our euphoric and dysphoric states are truly all we have to allow us to see the good and bad values in our lives just as how sight is the only thing that can allow a person to visualize colors.  However, we also have an additional mechanism which is a deluding mechanism.  Our brains are wired for delusion.  For example, many people believe in false ideas such as Thor the God of Thunder.  It doesn't matter how hard you to try to sway these people otherwise.  It just won't work due to their deluded wiring.  This means that we are wired to believe in this false definition of good and bad because it has aided ourselves as well as the rest of humanity.  But there are such people like me who do not have this deluding mechanism just as how an atheist can see the falsehood of these gods.  Even though this delusional religious wiring aids our survival and the survival of others, the atheist is beyond this wiring since he sees the real truth just like me.  I can truly see that our positive emotions are the inner light while mostly everyone else can't due to their delusional wiring.

I'm even less interested in religious metaphor than I am in dragonball z references.  

If our brains are wired for delusion, then it's going to be difficult for you to squeeze our brains emotional response out of your own criticisms. You believe that you are somehow free of a deluding mechanism. You aren't. Unless you're free of the brain you've described -as- this deluding mechanism......which, I doubt, but it's a notion I'd entertain after reading your posts. You may be special....but not in the way you think you are.

Again we find your own blindness, and your own delusions, as the source of your stated position.

(October 2, 2017 at 1:05 pm)Khemikal Wrote: I'm even less interested in religious metaphor than I am in dragonball z references.  

If our brains are wired for delusion, then it's going to be difficult for you to squeeze our brains emotional response out of your own criticisms.  You believe that you are somehow free of a deluding mechanism.  You aren't.  Unless you're free of the brain you've described -as- this deluding mechanism......which, I doubt, but it's a notion I'd entertain after reading your posts.  You may be special....but not in the way you think you are.

Again we find your own blindness, and your own delusions, as the source of your stated position.

One last thing here.  There are many organisms out there who do not have euphoric and dysphoric states.  Yet, they choose to make the best of their lives and help others of their kind.  According to my own personal worldview, this means that they are living their lives by this delusional mechanism.  In other words, they are just living out the motions and nothing more without even realizing it.  They have no real good value, joy, beauty, love, bad value, etc. in their lives.

Things according to your own personal worldview aren't very convincing, at present, you realize?

(October 2, 2017 at 1:54 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Things according to your own personal worldview aren't very convincing, at present, you realize?

I realize this.  Now, if my worldview really says that the acts of a child molester are good simply because he felt a positive emotion from doing these deeds, then one might think that looking down upon me as some sort of repugnant individual is justified.  You are free to think that.  But I just want people to realize that I don't harm anyone else, I am kind towards others and towards my family, and my positive emotions are, for me, the most profoundly beautiful inner light that I simply need in my life.  They are all that I have in my life.  Just because I only find my life to be good, beautiful, and worth living through being happy and enjoying my hobbies, does that really mean I should be looked down upon for that?  It sort of sounds silly to me.  I understand that my worldview could very well advocate the idea of the acts of a child molester being something good, but you should just consider this completely irrelevant when it comes to my life since I do not go around molesting children or harming anyone else. 

Sure, I might live by the model of a child molester, but this model has been altered into a different form when it comes to my personal life and hobbies.  Rather than me being some child molester who gets positive emotions from harming others, this version of my model would be someone who simply views his positive emotions as the divine light of the cosmos, metaphorically speaking.  Lastly, many people say it takes strength of character to find real good value during moments of misery and unhappiness.  Take those famous and genius artists for example.  They were miserable, but claimed they had real good value and beauty in their lives through pursuing their art and inspiring others.  Personally, I do not think any character strength can ever replace the inner light in my life.  I hope I'm wrong, but I just don't know.  This means that, even if I was the most weak and pitiful coward on the face of this planet, none of that would matter to me.

I find it strange that you're chiefly concerned with whether or not you're being looked down upon as you describe a worldview in which you claim that nearly everyone -but- you is emotionally or intellectually disabled.  

-10/10 for the balls it must take?

"I'm the only one who's not deluded"

-every crazy person, ever