Emotions are intrinsically good and bad

[Transcended Dimensions]

Then read my recent posts to know what I mean here.  I first had a conversation where I said that positive emotions really are the only good and that we can't have good thoughts and that situations can't be good.  I then later said that there is good without positive emotions, but that it would be like the words at the entrance to a club being shut down (i.e. "dead").  It would be a no quality standard of goodness in your life.  I am still in the process of trying to work out this whole worldview so that it is clear to others.  So, don't just jump to the conclusion that I am speaking nonsense, making contradictions, and then end your discussion with me.

Excellent, then use my remarks as a means of improving the message?  Making contradictory proclamations -is- speaking nonsense.  Rather than complain about the recipient recognizing nonsense, perhaps you should find some other..less nonsensical way to communicate whatever it is you're trying to say?

You still haven't given anyone a reason to think that emotions and thoughts are separate categories in the first place, and you're asserting that while there may be more than one kind of good, one of the kinds of good is somehow uniformly gooder than the other kind of good.  So much sop, that it makes no sense to call them both good, and that only your selected good truly qualifies for the moniker.

Is this your emotional value judgement, or a thoughtful appraisal?  Does the satisfaction that a sex offender feels count as an emotional good?  Is it a "gooder good" than, say, knowing that sex offense is wrong?

Thank you.  I will try my best to make use of your advice in making my posts as less nonsensical as I can then.  As for thoughts and emotions being separate categories, you hear this all the time being said by psychologists.  They would say that if you think positive, then you will feel positive or that if you think negative, then you will feel negative emotions.  They never say that thoughts and emotions are the same thing.  If there is somehow a thought form of emotion, then this version of an emotion would not give our lives any real good value and beauty during our miserable moments.  Now, since what I said makes no sense, then our positive emotions would really have to be the only things that are good in life. 

Actually, our positive emotions would be the only way we can judge things as good in the first place.  So, if you were completely miserable and thought that something was a good idea or choice, then there would have to be at least some positive emotion there on a very small level even if you could not detect it.  This level of positive emotion would be nowhere near sufficient to make your entire world and atmosphere fully good and beautiful though.  Therefore, if you are going to have a thought form of a good value judgment, then that would have to reflect the emotional good value judgment because, without any positive emotion whatsoever, then you couldn't have the thought form of a good value judgment.

This would have to mean that, if we as human beings never had any positive or negative emotions at all, then good and bad would not exist. Perhaps physical pain or physical pleasure could count as a source of judging things as being good or bad, but they would not give my life any sufficient degree of good or bad value. For example, I could be in the most miserable moment and the most intense pleasant smell such as the smell of a rose would do me hardly any good. Therefore, if we as human beings had no emotions and no pleasant/unpleasant sensations at all, then good and bad would not exist.

Here is the skeptic's quote which says this. According to this skeptic, there might be good and bad without our emotions, but it wouldn't be any real good and bad. It's just difficult for me to put this into words that make sense:

Skeptic's Response: I have heard you mention someone who said that living a life without emotions can still be a good quality life. I disagree. That person fails to understand that we are literally not capable of changing our outlook when we are in a state of anhedonia, when we lack Biochemical Emotions. His advice is as valid as saying to a blind man, "Just will yourself to see." Once you get to a place where your neurochemicals begin to function properly, only then does it become possible to change your outlook. Your brain requires a jumpstart first.

When your Biochemical Emotions are dysfunctional, no Emotional Viewpoint will convince you that your life has value. That's not how our brains work, and this portion of your theory is correct. Even if your BEs are minimally functional, that would put you in a state of being able to form an EVP (Emotional Viewpoint)...it would be enough of a state for you to bootstrap yourself into fully functioning Biochemical Emotions, and a normal and healthy emotional cycle of both BE and EVP. But you are correct in saying that functional BE are a requirement.

Remember that most people responding to you have never suffered from true clinical depression; they don't know what it's like to experience anhedonia, and their judgments are coming from brains that have always had functioning Biochemical Emotions. You and I know all too well that it's impossible to understand this living Hell unless you've experienced it.

So, you admit that value judgments alone are no way to live without the emotions.

Of course! You can still make value judgments (make an Emotional Viewpoint), but they will be meaningless. For example, if you are in a state of anhedonia, you are capable of thinking, "I know that eating a properly balanced diet has good value for my life," and knowing that your value judgment is correct. But without Biochemical Emotions, you don't care. You have no motivation to follow that Emotional Viewpoint, because it is the Biochemical Emotions that provide the motivation.

By this, you are implying that value judgments themselves do not allow us to perceive value and that it is instead the emotions that do.

No, I'm not. The Emotional Viewpoint allows us to perceive good value, but by itself, it is insufficient to allow us to experience that good value. Let me break it down:

Emotional Viewpoint allows us to perceive good value, but not experience good value. The EVP is the rational analysis of value, simply the logical voice that integrates information about a person, object, idea, or event, then quantifies its value as good, bad, or neutral. But our BEs have their own value judgments. We cannot solely rely on these types of value judgments lest we cause harm and wrongdoing to ourselves and/or others.
Biochemical Emotions allow us to both perceive good value and experience good value. The BEs are the visceral feelings of value, the sensory apparatus by which we interact with a person, object, idea, or even, then quantify its value as good, bad, or neutral.

Does that make sense? This is why either one by itself cannot provide true happiness. Simply thinking, "This has good value," does not allow you to experience its good value. At the same time, experiencing what the BEs decide is good value (without the EVP) can be dangerous to us. We need both "voices."

Our BEs are precious, priceless, and irreplaceable. They are what makes us human.