Emotions are intrinsically good and bad

[The Grand Nudger]

There is a difference between what is and what it's like. If a person saw the color red, then he could report back to you that it was like a trip to a paradise. This would be what it's like. But what is would be a different question. Seeing the color red would be a state of visualizing a certain color. This would be what is. A blind person cannot know what it is to see the color red since he can't see it.

I think that you mean to say he cannot know -what it is like- to see red.  A dubious claim, but at least get it right. 

Now, here is where my worldview comes in. If you were in the most hopeless state of your life which would be a negative emotion and you believed that your life was still good and beautiful, then you could say that this thought is something good and beautiful since it is the words "good" and "beautiful" being spoken in your mind. From there, if you felt a positive emotion later on which would be an emotional value judgment of good value and beauty rather than a thought form of value judgment, then you could also say that this positive emotion is good and beautiful as well.

We're capable of saying that anything is good and beautiful.  No one needs your worldview, or any particular worldview...for that.

It's the same scenario with the thought form of good value and beauty, but, this time, with the positive emotion. Now, here is the question. If you were blind and you thought of the color red, then what would that be for you? Remember, this is asking the "what is" question. The answer here would be that it would just be a thought. There is no quality of red there being perceived at all. So, it's not actual red, but just the thought of red. The same idea would apply to our emotions versus our thoughts.

No idea, but there's a fun thought experiment about a colorblind scientist named Mary which explores the issue.  

You could think to yourself that your life is still beautiful and good during your worst miserable moment, but there would be no quality of good value and beauty being perceived. Therefore, your life would be empty without your positive emotions. So, what it all comes down to here is what it is for you. Rather than just being the miserable soul who drags his life on believing it to be the good and beautiful life, actually focus on what it is for you and I think this will enlighten you to the truth of my worldview. Hopefully anyway. If I were to summarize my whole entire worldview in one sentence, then it would be:

"You can only acknowledge the good and bad values of things, moments, and situations in your life. But you need your positive emotions to actually see the good values and you need your negative emotions to actually see the bad values. When you feel the most profound and powerful positive emotion of your life, then that is literally the most powerful and profound beauty, good value, and joy being perceived just as how it would literally be the color red being perceived by a person who saw the color red. The same idea applies to negative emotions."

If you say so. 

If my sight analogy is not a good analogy for emotions, then just get the idea that I was trying to convey anyway. I was simply saying that it can only be our emotions that allow us to perceive the good and bad qualities of our lives.  I also talked about the idea of consciousness based values versus value judgment based values in my other packet which explains those horrible nightmare states I've had.  Consciousness based values are values that focus on what is.  I know I said they focus on what it's like, but that was actually a mistake I made.  One last thing here.

How is someone supposed to "get" some idea you have, if you can't clearly and accurately communicate it?  

You could either perceive the values that situations and things have or you can perceive your own created values.  For example, if a mother was feeding her child vegetables, then the vegetables would be good.  But the child would be perceiving them as bad since he felt a negative emotion from them.  So, even though the vegetables are good, the child saw them as bad which would be his own personal perceived value.  This means that things and situations hold their own value and that the only way to perceive their value or our own personal created value would be through our emotions.

I know, using your own example...that some food is good for me, even though it tastes like shit and I don't like it.  My emotions do not inform me as to how or why some food I don't like is good for me.  I don't need to employ them, or your worldview, to determine that....nor is there any necessity that I can either perceive one or the other. I'm obviously capable of making variable assessments of a singular object by disparate means and metrics.

 This is not enlightenment...........