Life is all about pleasure

[MattMVS7]

 

Of course it doesn't. You might as well say that Newton's law of gravitation explains why I don't like garlic.

 

As you clearly don't have anything sensible to say, I will take no further part in this.

 

Edit (to fix my flawed argument): But other scientific properties besides gravity does explain why we come up with personal meanings. Since it is just the functioning of the atoms and particles in our brains that create meaning, then it is the scientific properties that define these atoms and particles in our brains and how they function which is what explains why we come up with meanings and why we perceive things the way we do (such as why we like something or don't like it or any other created meaning for that matter). It would be the wiring of our brains and other scientific properties that explain how and why we have personal meanings in life.

Edited November 12, 2014 by MattMVS7

[Ophiolite]

 

It does explain because all meanings we create are the functioning of our conscious

Highly debatable. Since there is clear evidence that many decisions are made in our subconscious there is no good reason to reject the possibility that this may not also be true of our creation of "meaning".

 

 

So to do that would also require gravity since that is one of the things that explains how our neurons even function.

So, the astronauts in the ISS don't ever think? I never knew that.

[MattMVS7]

Highly debatable. Since there is clear evidence that many decisions are made in our subconscious there is no good reason to reject the possibility that this may not also be true of our creation of "meaning".

 

So, the astronauts in the ISS don't ever think? I never knew that.

 

 

I see that my previous post was flawed then. So let me correct everything I've said in that post right here:

 

But other scientific properties besides gravity does explain why we come up with personal meanings. Since it is just the functioning of the atoms and particles in our brains that create meaning, then it is the scientific properties that define these atoms and particles in our brains and how they function which is what explains why we come up with meanings and why we perceive things the way we do (such as why we like something or don't like it or any other created meaning for that matter). It would be the wiring of our brains and other scientific properties that explain how and why we have personal meanings in life.

Edited November 12, 2014 by MattMVS7

[Ophiolite]

 

then it is the scientific properties that define these atoms and particles in our brains and how they function which is what explains why we come up with meanings and why we perceive things the way we do (such as why we like something or don't like it or any other created meaning for that matter). It would be the wiring of our brains and other scientific properties that explain how and why we have personal meanings in life.

I see no reason to introduce the word scientific to your assertions. The atoms have these properties whether or not science exists.

 

Am I correct that your underlying thesis is that emergent properties differ in no way from fundamental properties? If this is your thesis, how do you propose to demonstrate its validity? (Hint: you have not done so yet.)

[tar]

MattMVS7,

 

When you talk about meaning you are visiting my wheelhouse, my strength, my focus, my investigation over the last 4 years or so.

 

I reject fully the thought that there is none, when there is nothing but, when it comes to conscious humans.

 

When you speak of language...hum...interesting phrase...one thing stands for another, means another. The word cat has meaning. Any word you can think of has meaning. That is what words are, that is what they do...have meaning.

 

You talk of being able to think the world is flat, and the Earth is the center of the universe and that if you think these things then it will be true in your personal life, and therefore you would have given these "meanings" to the universe, and they would be true for you in some delusional sense of true. And you figure that is the way it works and the whole collection is illusion or delusion, because the whole operation consists of the activities of unthinking atoms bouncing off of each other for no reason or purpose.

 

Well I disagree. There is you, and there is me. We are alive, and have grabbed form and structure from a universe that is otherwise tending toward entropy, and passed it on to the next generation...like all life does. Right there there is meaning and purpose. Enough to suggest that what one does or think in their "personal" lives and in their singular brains, is not all that matters. Any conscious human can easily see that the model of the world that they build in their brain is "of" something, is about something, means something, stands for something, is modeling something that exists anyway and otherwise from the thought of it. There is you, for you, but there is also you for me, and vice-a-versa. The Sun is there for both of us, and all of us.

 

So here, the "meaning" of something requires a "matching" of the thing to your internal model of it. When it matches, its true. The more ways things match and fit together the truer they are. This is another of my 100 things that make you feel good. Its good to match. To complete the pattern, to see the familiar. To internalize the external and build a model of it, so good that you can operate in the model and predict what would happen if you made the same manuevuers in reality. It might be one of basic elements of how and why we sense and remember and think in the first place. It feels good to know your surroundings and be able to use them to your advantage. To learn about the world, so you can operate in it, and in concert with it.

 

Now, back to the chemical reward. If it did not feel good to know where the water hole was, we might have not held that model of the thing in our brains, enough to be able to find it when thirst arose.

 

Ophiolite suggested that emergent characteristics cannot be defined or projected from the properties of the components of the collection from which the emergent characteristics arise.

 

Just because you cannot build, cause and effectwise, a "promise" or "love" or "meaning" from a mindless quark, does not mean that promises and love and meaning are not things that conscious humans possess. In fact the fact that we do possess these things flies directly in the face of your thesis, and suggests that meaning is the reflection of what already is, upon the chemicals in our brains that reconstruct and model the place so meaningfully.

 

Regards, TAR

[MattMVS7]

MattMVS7,

 

When you talk about meaning you are visiting my wheelhouse, my strength, my focus, my investigation over the last 4 years or so.

 

I reject fully the thought that there is none, when there is nothing but, when it comes to conscious humans.

 

When you speak of language...hum...interesting phrase...one thing stands for another, means another. The word cat has meaning. Any word you can think of has meaning. That is what words are, that is what they do...have meaning.

 

You talk of being able to think the world is flat, and the Earth is the center of the universe and that if you think these things then it will be true in your personal life, and therefore you would have given these "meanings" to the universe, and they would be true for you in some delusional sense of true. And you figure that is the way it works and the whole collection is illusion or delusion, because the whole operation consists of the activities of unthinking atoms bouncing off of each other for no reason or purpose.

 

Well I disagree. There is you, and there is me. We are alive, and have grabbed form and structure from a universe that is otherwise tending toward entropy, and passed it on to the next generation...like all life does. Right there there is meaning and purpose. Enough to suggest that what one does or think in their "personal" lives and in their singular brains, is not all that matters. Any conscious human can easily see that the model of the world that they build in their brain is "of" something, is about something, means something, stands for something, is modeling something that exists anyway and otherwise from the thought of it. There is you, for you, but there is also you for me, and vice-a-versa. The Sun is there for both of us, and all of us.

 

So here, the "meaning" of something requires a "matching" of the thing to your internal model of it. When it matches, its true. The more ways things match and fit together the truer they are. This is another of my 100 things that make you feel good. Its good to match. To complete the pattern, to see the familiar. To internalize the external and build a model of it, so good that you can operate in the model and predict what would happen if you made the same manuevuers in reality. It might be one of basic elements of how and why we sense and remember and think in the first place. It feels good to know your surroundings and be able to use them to your advantage. To learn about the world, so you can operate in it, and in concert with it.

 

Now, back to the chemical reward. If it did not feel good to know where the water hole was, we might have not held that model of the thing in our brains, enough to be able to find it when thirst arose.

 

Ophiolite suggested that emergent characteristics cannot be defined or projected from the properties of the components of the collection from which the emergent characteristics arise.

 

Just because you cannot build, cause and effectwise, a "promise" or "love" or "meaning" from a mindless quark, does not mean that promises and love and meaning are not things that conscious humans possess. In fact the fact that we do possess these things flies directly in the face of your thesis, and suggests that meaning is the reflection of what already is, upon the chemicals in our brains that reconstruct and model the place so meaningfully.

 

Regards, TAR

 

Words actually don't have definite meaning. What defines meaning is all the functioning of the neurons in our brains and how they are all wired. If someone were to speak words to you in another language and you had no knowledge of that language, then it would all just be your own subjective interpretations (meanings) of those words. Same thing for our English words for other people who speak other languages. This would also even hold true for our own English words for us who speak English. Since this universe doesn't tell us how we should think, then words also don't tell us how we should interpret them. Therefore, even our own personal created meanings in life do not have definite meaning for ourselves and for our own personal lives. So for you to say that your personal created meanings hold true (definite) for you and for your own life would be false. All that defines what is true or false in this universe (and that would include anything about us as people and our own personal lives) is things that are objective scientific facts just in terms of the functioning of atoms and particles and not our personal created meanings in life.

We might be able to scan your brain that has created any personal meanings and we would look at that and say that it is a scientific fact that this is how your brain is wired in having these personal meanings in your brain. But it does not tell us that it is a scientific fact that these personal meanings hold true for you and for your own personal life. So science tells us that life has no meaning and that we can all create our own personal meanings in life. However, these created meanings would not be true (definite) at all for ourselves and in our own personal lives.

Edited November 12, 2014 by MattMVS7

[Marios Kyriazis]

There is the search for short-term gratification (what most people call 'pleasure') and then there is the long-term variant which stems from setting long-term goals and trying to achieve them. In other words, it is the journey that matters, and not the arrival at your destination. I find the second option much more fulfilling.

[Strange]

 

What defines meaning is all the functioning of the neurons in our brains and how they are all wired.

 

So, by your argument if materialism is true then your words are meaningless. That explains a lot.

 

 

... it is a scientific fact that ... it is a scientific fact that ... it is a scientific fact that ...

 

Stop pretending that your opinions are "scientific facts". If that were so, you would be able to provide objective evidence in support of your opinions. So far all you have is logical fallacies and unsupported assertions.

[MattMVS7]

 

So, by your argument if materialism is true then your words are meaningless. That explains a lot.

 

 

Stop pretending that your opinions are "scientific facts". If that were so, you would be able to provide objective evidence in support of your opinions. So far all you have is logical fallacies and unsupported assertions.

 

Words are created based off our evolutionary design. For example, since it is in our evolutionary design to desire things in life and be motivated towards those things, we would then come up with the English word "good" to describe that since the meaning of the word "good" is "that which is desired." But as I said before, our evolutionary design does not tell us how we should think and is meaningless as well. Therefore, words are also meaningless and we can interpret them anyway we want to. But our interpretations would not be true at all in a meaningless universe.

[Strange]

 

But as I said before, our evolutionary design does not tell us how we should think

 

Evolution has created the emotions of pleasure and pain you are obsessing about, as well as altruism, a sense of good and bad, music and art, love and hate, and various other things that give meaning to life.

 

As Ophiolite noted, you have a rather limited view that these things are meaningless because the substrate is mechanistic. That is just silly.

[MattMVS7]

 

Evolution has created the emotions of pleasure and pain you are obsessing about, as well as altruism, a sense of good and bad, music and art, love and hate, and various other things that give meaning to life.

 

As Ophiolite noted, you have a rather limited view that these things are meaningless because the substrate is mechanistic. That is just silly.

 

Even my own thinking about my pleasure would be false as well despite the fact that it is in my wiring of my brain and my evolutionary design to value it and seek it. Except for pleasure being "good" since "good" is a scientific term and is a scientific property (which would be the pleasure itself).

Edited November 12, 2014 by MattMVS7

[Strange]

since "good" is a scientific term

Citation needed.

 

"Scientific"

Edited November 12, 2014 by Strange

[Ophiolite]

 

.... since "good" is a scientific term and is a scientific property

Bollocks, if you get my meaning!

[tar]

MattMVS7,

 

I work for a Japanese company and my job is software related and we have project managers and programmers from China, Tiawan, India, Latvia, Ukraine, Poland, Turkey...to name just some of the languages I hear and talk about and try to learn a few words of, and study and think about. Your characterisation of a word having no meaning because it does not mean the same thing for someone who speaks a different language, is exactly not my understanding of the situation. The way I look at it every language has a word that means the shiny thing in the sky at night, and another that means that shiny thing in the sky during the day.

 

A cat is still a cat, no matter what language you talk about the cat in. This is the meaning of meaning. The thing to which the word refers. Not the word itself. What does the word mean?

 

In this light you don't make any sense to me, when you talk about meaninglessness, because something immediately has a meaning, as soon as it means something.

 

Think about symbols, and analogies, and all the ways we think and talk. The whole situation is repleat with the attachment of meaning to something that is not actually the thing you are talking about, but the engagement of something that is standing for the something else.

 

I characterise this activity that we partake in, as an internalization of what is outside our senses and memory. Internalizing the external, if you will. When we are born we see upsidedown and backward, and two images of the world are coming in, one through each eye, and we smell stuff and feel stuff and taste stuff, and hear stuff, and make sense of it all, and put it together and each of us hold a model of the world based on what of it we have internalized and characterized and learned about.

 

Meaning is already vindicated and established by the very act of sensing and remembering. Those chemicals in our brains are already meaningful, as soon as they have partaken in the modeling of the world, process.

 

Somewhere in you brain you have the memory of a rose. You could slice your brain up and search about within it for a thousand years, and you will not ever actually find a rose in there. Just some arrangement of chemicals, that "mean" rose, that mimick the activity that occurred that time you actually saw and smelt and felt one.

 

Regards, TAR

[Ophiolite]

MattMVS7,

 

Somewhere in you brain you have the memory of a rose. You could slice your brain up and search about within it for a thousand years, and you will not ever actually find a rose in there. Just some arrangement of chemicals, that "mean" rose, that mimick the activity that occurred that time you actually saw and smelt and felt one.

Yet Matt would likely agree with you on all of that. Where he seems to differ is that he sees no value, or independent meaning in the appreciation of the rose. For Matt, the whole is not greater than the sum of the parts. Of course, this raises the question, if all is without meaning why is he so committed to convincing others that this is so?

[tar]

Ophiolite,

 

Absolutely. If we were to show Matt that we knew what he meant..which we might have already done...well there you have it.

 

Meaning.

 

Which would mean that life was not ALL about pleasure, but also the meaning of pleasure and pain, their role in survival, the causes and effects of pleasure, the ways we have of obtaining the pleasure and avoiding the pain, and in regards to your sense that Matt might not have the verification that something is good from an objective point of view, there is another very meaningful meaning that MattMVS7's protest exhibits.

 

He cares about what we think and feel, and therefore knows that there is meaning to his words. That there is objective truth that is observable, that can be sensed and felt (seen, smelt, tasted, heard, felt...and remembered and understood as to its meaning).

 

And to this, we will agree with him on the true parts of what he says and disagree with him on the stuff that is not "scientifically", actually present and apparent.

 

We can all agree that a giggling child is a good thing. Even if we are feeling rather glum ourselves.

 

Regards, TAR

[MattMVS7]

First off, I said before that any personal created meanings in life are delusional since life has no meaning. I would actually have to correct myself on that now that I have thought about it. This would just include meanings that do not go against science. So since it is a scientific fact that any personal meanings we create are no different than the combined functioning of the atoms and particles in our brains that create these meanings, then to actually say that our personal created meanings have no meaning, this would mean that we don't have any functioning atoms and molecules in our brains which would be false here. However, this would only include meanings besides "good" and "bad" since, as I'm going to explain below, good and bad are scientific properties. This would also include meanings besides being in your own mind and the pleasure of others not being anything good from your perspective since you cannot experience their pleasure and that it would all just be neutral thoughts from your perspective that judges the pleasure of others being either good or bad.

Now I said that the word "good" means "that which is desired." But there could also be other definitions of the word good out there. So one might say that our pleasure is not what we would call a "good" sensation, but instead a "pleasant" sensation and, therefore, we can still be good people in other ways besides pleasure. However, these other definitions are delusional because good can only mean one thing in terms of evolution which would be our encouragement (pleasure) to survive and benefit our survival. Again, pleasure really is something that encourages our survival in life, but can be misused in not benefiting ours and the survival of others and can be used in harming ourselves and others. And as I said before earlier in my writing, you can still harm others and you would still be a good person as long as you have pleasure. However, I would never harm others because it is in my wiring of my brain and evolutionary design to be caring and compassionate towards others even despite my personal beliefs here. Nor would I ever consider such a thing anyway.

The reason why the only thing good is pleasure is because if we had no emotions or any pleasant or unpleasant sensations to any degree whatsoever, then all thoughts would be the same in the sense that they wouldn't encourage us to do anything in life. You would still get up and do things anyway in life, but it would not be encouragement, "looking forward" to things in life, or viewing anything as "good" at all. If we have just thoughts alone of things being good in life, being encouraged, and looking forward to things in life, these thoughts are just mere neutral images, words, sounds, etc. that only trick us into believing so.

If we had no emotions or any unpleasant sensations such as pain whatsoever, then I ask you how a thought (message) in the brain of your life being good is any different than a thought that your life is bad other than them simply being different words, sounds, images, etc? Sure, one type of thought might send messages to other parts of our brain that enable us to perform actions such as walking, talking, etc. while another makes us perform different actions or doesn't make us do anything at all. But all these other parts of our brain responsible for other things besides emotions and unpleasant sensations, they cannot be defined as anything good or bad or be defined by any other personal meanings we create either since, again, the combined atoms and particles that define our personal created meanings in our brains cannot define the combined atoms and particles of these other parts of our brain since they are different. And they wouldn't be anything good or bad on their own anyway.

Now you might be thinking that "Ok, so my life is nothing good without my pleasure. But at least my life is still worthwhile." But even this word "worthwhile" is based on perceiving things as good in life, looking forward to living your life, being encouraged in life, etc. As I said before, pleasure is the only thing that is good in life.

Therefore, good is a scientific property (which would be the atoms and particles that give us pleasure). Same thing for bad. So you would be delusional to think that your life is good or bad or that you are a good or bad person without feelings of pleasure or pain since good and bad are actual scientific properties and your personal created meanings in life (your thoughts) can never be these scientific properties. As I said before, "good" is a scientific property (which would be the pleasure itself) while all our thoughts remain a different scientific property.

Finally, I should say that the emergent property (pleasure) is the result of all the combined atoms and particles in our brains that are responsible for it. But it does not exist as anything else in this universe besides the combined functioning of those atoms and particles (such as some supernatural entity that cannot be defined by the functioning of atoms and particles).

Edited November 14, 2014 by MattMVS7

[tar]

MattMVS7,

 

Read a peice on Veteran's day, about the 7 things not to say to a vet.

 

Those who have never been in combat can not know what it is like, and should not pretend to know. (I served in the Army, but never was in a combat situation.)

 

You cannot feel pleasure, or at least not the way you used to...perhaps. You have to tell us whether you ever did feel pleasure, so we know whether or not you have an understanding of what pleasure feels like in the first place.

 

If you have never felt pleasure, then you can not pretend to know what it is like. If you have felt pleasure, then you can remember how it felt and "put" that memory in place of your neutral feeling, whenever you encounter a situation you know used to feel good. Of course the memory has probably faded away substantially and the whole effectiveness of a good feeling is to actually have it, which you have explained is not currently something that happens to you. But, in terms of your argument, you make a connection of "being a good person" to having a good feeling, which is true in one way, but not true in another.

 

Doing the right thing usually makes a person feel good. In your case, you do the right thing, and you can't tell the difference. You feel the same way as you did prior doing the right thing. This is unfortunate and makes it hard for you to differeciate between what is good and what is bad, activity wise, but does not overtly make you a bad person. Only if you would do stuff that hurt other people...made other people feel bad, would you actually be a bad person.

 

But here, scientific method affords you with a handy tool to use for verification of goodness and badness. Peer review.

 

When in doubt. Ask somebody else.

 

Regards, TAR

[Ophiolite]

 

So since it is a scientific fact that any personal meanings we create are no different than the functioning of the atoms and particles in our brains,

This assertion appears to lie at the heart of your beliefs, yet you have failed to support it in any way, other than flawed argument. Nor have you, as far as I can see, bothered to address the differences between fundamental and emergent properties - differences that you casually brush aside without justification.

[MattMVS7]

MattMVS7,

 

Read a peice on Veteran's day, about the 7 things not to say to a vet.

 

Those who have never been in combat can not know what it is like, and should not pretend to know. (I served in the Army, but never was in a combat situation.)

 

You cannot feel pleasure, or at least not the way you used to...perhaps. You have to tell us whether you ever did feel pleasure, so we know whether or not you have an understanding of what pleasure feels like in the first place.

 

If you have never felt pleasure, then you can not pretend to know what it is like. If you have felt pleasure, then you can remember how it felt and "put" that memory in place of your neutral feeling, whenever you encounter a situation you know used to feel good. Of course the memory has probably faded away substantially and the whole effectiveness of a good feeling is to actually have it, which you have explained is not currently something that happens to you. But, in terms of your argument, you make a connection of "being a good person" to having a good feeling, which is true in one way, but not true in another.

 

Doing the right thing usually makes a person feel good. In your case, you do the right thing, and you can't tell the difference. You feel the same way as you did prior doing the right thing. This is unfortunate and makes it hard for you to differeciate between what is good and what is bad, activity wise, but does not overtly make you a bad person. Only if you would do stuff that hurt other people...made other people feel bad, would you actually be a bad person.

 

But here, scientific method affords you with a handy tool to use for verification of goodness and badness. Peer review.

 

When in doubt. Ask somebody else.

 

Regards, TAR

 

But as I said before, you can still harm others and you would still be a good person as long as you have pleasure. However, I would never harm others because it is in my wiring of my brain and evolutionary design to be caring and compassionate towards others even despite my personal beliefs here.

 

 

 

This assertion appears to lie at the heart of your beliefs, yet you have failed to support it in any way, other than flawed argument. Nor have you, as far as I can see, bothered to address the differences between fundamental and emergent properties - differences that you casually brush aside without justification.

 

I should say that the emergent property (pleasure) is the result of all the combined atoms and particles in our brains that are responsible for it. But it does not exist as anything else in this universe besides the combined functioning of those atoms and particles (such as some supernatural entity that cannot be defined by the functioning of atoms and particles).

[Strange]

So since it is a scientific fact that any personal meanings we create are no different than the functioning of the atoms and particles in our brains

 

That is not a "scientific fact". It is no sort of a fact. It is something you have made up.

 

then to actually say that our personal created meanings have no meaning, this would mean that we don't have any functioning atoms and molecules in our brains

 

And that is a false conclusion from your non-fact.

 

So your entire thesis is STILL based on made-up facts and false logic.

 

Therefore, good is a scientific property

 

That appears to be a gross misuse of the word "therefore".

[Ophiolite]

This is the sort of OP and thread that gives philosophy a bad name.

[MonDie]

I think Matt wants the word "physical" in place of "scientific".

 

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/

Edited November 14, 2014 by MonDie

[Dekan]

This is the sort of OP and thread that gives philosophy a bad name.

 

Perhaps all philosophers should be required to set out their thoughts, in strictly short posts. That would be a great relief.

[MattMVS7]

My happiness is the only reason for me finding good meaning about me as a person and finding good meaning in this life. Without that, there would be nothing good about me as a person or anything good in my life. I can just use my thoughts alone to perceive me and my life being good even without my pleasure. But these are nothing more than neutral (neither good or bad) thoughts and that would not make me or my life anything good at all regardless of how much I help others and do great things in my life. Therefore, since I no longer have any pleasure 24/7 due to my anhedonia (emotional numbness) in which there are never any brief moments of pleasure to any degree whatsoever, this is why there is no longer anything good about me as a person or my life. My anhedonia was caused by severe depression which has caused a physiological change in my brain in which I never have any brief moments of pleasure at all. It has lasted for many months and still has not gotten any better and I'm not sure if it will get any better or even fully recover for that matter.

I would like to say that for you to be offended, irritated, or angry about the fact that my personal issue is presented in a long philosophical form or that you are angry, irritated, or offended by what I'm saying here for some other reason, then that would mean that you are not a full compassionate person in that you do not have full compassion towards my issues and wish to help me out. Imagine if there was a person who was very depressed and said "I am very depressed because I feel that one is inferior and worthless and that one's life is inferior and worthless without his/her pleasure and I wish to talk about my issues here regardless of how long what is that I have to say," would you then make this person feel even more depressed and rejected by scorning upon him/her and being offended by what he/she has to say? Or would you instead not scorn upon this person and try and help him/her out? Therefore, I will freely speak my mind regardless if it offends you or not. (NOTE: This whole issue with being offended is not directed towards people who are nice and wish to help me out such as my parents and/or mental health professionals or even some other people because I know that they would be kind to me in trying to help me out with this issue and won't be offended at all by what it is I'm saying here).

But if you are going to say something such as that you have every right to be offended, cruel, or a dick to me for any given reason and that people who are the opposite who have full compassion towards my issues here and don't frown upon me at all, that these are somehow the types of people who are pussies, then you are saying here that mental health professionals who would have compassion and such towards my issues (who would be the opposite of what you would refer to as "dicks"), these people are pussies due to the fact that they would be compassionate towards me due to their high intelligence and who they are as people? So it would appear as though people of low intelligence as well as having little to no experience of depression and/or anhedonia are truly the lesser inferior beings only providing that these people have little to no compassion towards my issues here and frown upon them. I stated here in my writing that pleasure is the only thing that makes you superior. However, I will admit though. I do at least have good and bad value towards humanity even despite the fact that pleasure and suffering are the only good and bad things in life.

My dream in life was to be a composer and I was in the process of learning how to compose. My dream was to be a great composer through my pure pleasure alone because, to me, that is the only thing that defines someone as being great. As a matter of fact, the fact that I had the ability to experience feelings of pleasure so great and profound, this would enable me to be a really great composer who would be able to channel those feelings in creating emotionally powerful compositions. Feelings of depression and anhedonia are not classified as feelings at all. They are the taking away of your pleasure and other emotions. Therefore, they are not anything to tap into and channel in creating any type of emotionally powerful composition. Instead, they make you a lesser person and a lesser composer who can only create compositions through intelligence alone which would be nowhere near great and emotionally powerful as opposed to if you were to create compositions through your profound feelings of pleasure. In other words, even the greatest composers in history who had depression and/or lack of pleasure could of been even better if they had their full pleasure to tap and channel into. Also, you can compose music that has dark, gothic, and tragic emotion to it through pure pleasure alone anyway (the pleasure of dark, gothic, and tragic things). You can create these types of music through pure pleasure alone and they can be just as good (and even better) than if you created them through your suffering and despair. You can also grow as a person just as good and even better under the right circumstances through pure pleasure alone without any suffering or despair in your life since the brain is something you can change at will and you can be a better compassionate person at any given personal level and such through just changing your attitude and through other things in life besides suffering, despair, and a lack of pleasure.

I will prove right here how you can grow as a person and be better in other ways without suffering, despair, and a lack of pleasure in your life. There are people who go through a great amount of suffering and despair and yet, they do not become more compassionate or become a better person in any other sense. As a matter of fact, they can become less compassionate even towards others who suffer the same things and they instead take out their suffering on other people. This would be because they have refused to change their attitude in becoming a better person and have refused to become better in any other sense through other means in life besides suffering, despair, and a lack of pleasure. Therefore, since this holds true, the opposite would hold true as well in that people who have very little suffering and despair in their lives can change their attitude in becoming a better person and better in other ways through other means in life besides suffering, despair, and a lack of pleasure. So you might be asking why can't I just change my attitude in viewing other things in life greater than my own feelings of pleasure (which would be all good feelings including love since love is also pleasure)? This would be, again, because my personal experience of pleasure says to me that it is the greatest thing in my life and that I would be the lesser person no matter what for accepting my loss and viewing other things in life to have greater value.

But I have given up being a composer right now since my only goal in becoming a composer was to tap into and channel my feelings of pleasure I valued so much and create many different types of music through my pure pleasure alone. Creating music through my suffering is NOT what I want to do and doing so would only make me feel that much worse. To me, music is all about enjoyment and creating music through your pure pleasure alone. I have given up being a composer because me choosing to become a composer brings me nothing but anger and frustration now since I no longer have any pleasure to tap into and channel. I refuse to be the biological robot in a world that absolutely calls for our experience of love and pleasure (which would be the emotional world of composing) who does nothing but creates music through having no pleasure. I will not channel even my own feelings of anger and frustration in creating music because, again, that only makes me feel worse and is not what I wanted to do at all anyway.

Now, if, let's pretend, that I were the greatest composer in the world right now and composed masterpieces, this would actually be the worst moment of my life. This is because these would be the greatest pieces of music I have written and this would be the greatest moment of my life and I am not even allowed to enjoy it to any degree at all. Sure, composing music for other people and bringing them pleasure is good. But music is a very personal emotional thing to me and I must, therefore, experience good feelings from my music. Otherwise, me being a composer is completely pointless and detrimental as it only brings me nothing but rage and frustration knowing that I cannot experience any pleasure from my own compositions whatsoever as well as that I don't have any good feelings to even tap into and channel in creating my compositions which would be much more emotionally powerful since they were created through my emotions (my pleasure) rather than them being created without such feelings. It's not that I am angry at how others might think of me for being a composer with no pleasure such as that they might look down upon me and such for not creating compositions that are as great as they were if I had my full pleasure in life or anything else of the sort. I am angry because music and this life are both very precious emotional things to me in which I must experience pleasure from these things since they are the greatest things that I will only be able to live for only once since this is the one and only life I will ever have (since I am an atheist who does not believe in a God or an afterlife or any other such superstition).

Since my personal experience of pleasure was so profound and meaningful to me in the past, then I absolutely cannot just simply ignore this and choose to view other things in life as something greater. This is because I reject doing so and reject being the lesser person with a lesser life as a result. Now if you or anyone else here has found other things in life of greater value than your pleasure (which would include finding greater things in life than even your own feelings of love), then you obviously have not experienced these feelings nearly as profound or meaningful as I have to know that they are truly the only good and greatest things in life.

Some scientists and intelligent people might say that feelings of love and pleasure are nothing more than chemical processes in the brain, that it is nothing more than something used for our survival, and that it is nothing special for these very reasons stated. But there is a big difference between how nonspecial and ungreat love and pleasure are in terms of science and how special and great they are to us based on our own personal experience of these emotions. So this is why these feelings are so special to me and are the greatest things in my life simply because they feel like the most special and greatest things ever experienced. Since these emotions feel like the most special and greatest things to me in life, that is what makes them the most special and greatest things in life. I'm quite sure you have something or someone you view in life as something special and great. Therefore, for you to say that my feelings of love and pleasure are nothing special and great simply because they are chemicals, atoms, and particles would be no different than me saying that those things that you view as special and great are also nothing special and great simply because they are also just chemicals, atoms, and particles.

Now if you can never fully recover your lost love and pleasure, then at least you have spent your entire life by being the superior human being who has tried to fully recover these things. If you are going to say something such as that living your life trying to fully recover these lost feelings instead of accepting this loss and moving on is a wasted life, it's not a wasted life. Like I said before, feelings of love and pleasure are the only greatest aspects of me as a human being and are the only things that make my own personal life worth living. So for me to abandon them and instead live my life for other reasons besides trying to fully recover them, THAT would be the wasted life for me.

Now you might be asking, if pleasure is so important to me, then why can't I compose anyway as a means of trying to seek and bring back my pleasure? This would be because nothing in life can bring back my ability to experience pleasure to any degree whatsoever other than medication, therapy, and possibly electric convulsive therapy which is a shock to the brain.

Now one might say that I am still a good person since I still care and help others anyway. However, to me, someone who helps and cares for others is no better or worse than someone who is a psychopath and kills others. In other words, who you are as a person and everything else in life is all neutral (neither good or bad) from your perspective and has no effect on your personal value and worth as a person. The only thing that makes you a better or lesser person is your amount of pleasure in life regardless of who you are as a person. Since I have lesser pleasure, that makes me a lesser person than even Hitler himself who has more pleasure in life (although there may be moments where he definitely had bad moments in his life from harming others). I may help and care for others as well as do great things in my life (such as composing), but that is not the same thing as me or my life being anything good. The reason why I say this is because, again, my personal experience of pleasure says this since it was so profound and meaningful to me and there is nothing in life that can ever take place of that regardless of how much I try and change my attitude and other things. I refuse to even try anyway since that would make me the lesser human being with a lesser life as I stated earlier in my writing since there is nothing good at all about me changing and viewing other things in life of greater value than my pleasure.

Now the reason why I say that even Hitler himself is a better person is not only because my personal experience of pleasure says that it is the only thing that defines your own personal value and worth as a human being. But I also say this because it is an exaggeration and expression of how frustrated and angry I am with my meaningless and worthless life of no pleasure since pleasure is the only greatest thing to me in life. I will create shock value and revolutionize the perspective of others to make them think twice about them viewing other things in life as greater value than their own pleasure as an expression of my rage and frustration towards my life of no pleasure. Me expressing this will also be likely to make others take me seriously and realize just how important pleasure is for me in life and make them have compassion and understanding towards my loss of pleasure and just how important pleasure is for me in life.

I also said before that I have found at least a little bit of value and worth in my life in trying to fully regain my lost pleasure through medication, therapy, etc. So if this is the case, then why can't I also find greater value and worth towards other things in life than my pleasure? It would be because it all still comes back to my own personal experience of pleasure being the greatest thing to me in life and my personal experience of how losing that through depression and anhedonia is the worst thing for me. Therefore, the only life I find to have at least some value and worth would be for me to live my life in trying to fully recover the very thing that made my life worth living and of great value in the first place (which would, again, be my pleasure). Again, I realize that bringing others pleasure in life is important for them. But despite the fact that I do value the pleasure of others and view it as important in life to bring them pleasure, this still does not make it anything good from my own perspective since all my thoughts, perceptions, and created meanings are neutral (neither good or bad) and it is only my pleasure that is good since I am not in the minds of others and can't experience their pleasure. Even me living my life trying to fully regain my lost pleasure is neutral as well at this point. However, I still do these things anyway since I still value my own pleasure just as much as anyone else's. But no matter how much value I put towards the pleasure of others, that will never take away from the value I have towards my own pleasure since my personal experience of pleasure says to me that it is the greatest thing for me in life. So even if I were to have someone in my life whom I have immense value and love towards despite my absence of pleasure (such as my mom or anyone else), I would still feel very depressed and enraged towards my own loss of pleasure despite me living solely to bring these people pleasure. Also, having less value towards my own pleasure would make me the lesser person with a lesser life as I stated earlier in my writing anyway. Therefore, me having both full value towards my own pleasure and full value towards the pleasure of others is the closest thing right now to making me a great person despite my own absence of pleasure. However, I am nowhere near as great as I would be if I had my full pleasure in life right now. Also, even me perceiving myself as being at least somewhat great for having full value towards my own pleasure and the pleasure of others still does not make me or my life anything good or great at all. It just simply makes me perceive me and my life as at least being of some value and worth despite the fact that me and my life have absolutely no value and worth without my pleasure.

Some people might tell me to accept a lifelong loss of pleasure that might never recover or even fully recover and to just be at peace and content with my life of anhedonia. These would be the pathetic and inferior human beings for having little to no value towards my feelings of pleasure that I value so greatly and I refuse to stoop down to their level. I refuse to be the inferior human being who accepts this loss. I am not inferior. I am instead a powerful human being for not accepting this loss and trying to fully recover it. Therefore, the closest thing to making me a good person despite my loss of pleasure is for not accepting this loss and living my life in trying to fully recover it. The only way for accepting this loss to make me a good person would be if this acceptance would actually fully bring back my ability to experience pleasure. However, if it turns out that I can never recover my pleasure, then I will actually be utterly inferior and me and my life would no longer have any value at all this time regardless of what attitude I have or what things I do in my life. So the only superior human beings are those who tell me to not accept this loss and try to fully recover it who have compassion towards my loss of pleasure and have immense value towards my pleasure. Therefore, I will specifically seek out these types of people who I deem as superior and cast out the rest (the opposite) who will be deemed as utterly inferior. I am a megalomaniac who wishes to regain the most important thing to him (which would be my pleasure). I wish to have power, control, and dominion through pure pleasure alone over my life, over suffering and despair, and over other people who do not wish to help me, who have little to no value towards my pleasure, and who are mean to me.

I am now going to explain something else as to why I value pleasure so much which is that there are characters in anime (Japanese cartoons) that I perceive as superior god-like beings with superior god-like personalities. A few example of these characters are Cell and Vegeta from the anime Dragonball Z. They are examples of the most awesome characters since they are god-like with god-like powers and are megalomaniacs who wish to have power and control in their lives and have superior god-like personalities and wish to obtain god-like powers.

Now there is a term known as "Anthropomorphism" which is when you attribute your perceived personality of other living things, objects, and people, to other living things, objects, and people (including your own self in which you feel like a different person, but you can still act as the exact same person). Therefore, when I had my ability to experience pleasure in the past, I would anthropomorphize these characters as a part of me in order to feel their awesome superior god-like life essence coursing through me. This gave me superior intense god-like feelings of pleasure since I felt like I was these characters. Pleasure, to me, is "life force (essence)" that is the ultimate defining aspect of a human being which will not only make you a human being, but can also enhance you to a level that is beyond human metaphorically speaking (which would be enhanced to the superior god-like status of those characters). These characters were, therefore, a part of my conscious and they have, metaphorically speaking (not literally speaking), bestowed me with their superior god-like life essence. This is what made me feel powerful in a superior god-like sense.

Another example would be with the character Amy Rose (a female hedgehog) from Sonic the Hedgehog. I perceive her as a superior god-like being not only because she is not human, but is an animal-like being in human form which I would define as an "angel" since angels are animal-like beings in human form. She is also a superior god-like being since she has an unreal personality (personalities that normal human beings don't normally possess). Her personality is very fantasy-like and vigorous. This is unlike the personality of normal human beings since the personality of normal human beings are more "settled" and "down to Earth." So it would seem as though the creators of anime make the personality of characters more life-like as well as superior and god-like to match their superior god-like world (environments) as well as their superior god-like forms. Amy (as well as other such innocent god-like characters) display expressions of innocence, love, etc. that is beyond human (more intense) and profound that expresses their world and forms that are also beyond human.

Therefore, I have also embraced Amy as a part of my conscious as well which also made me feel powerful. But it did not make me feel powerful the way those other characters Cell and Vegeta did. Those other characters made me feel an "enraged epic" form of superior god-like pleasure. The form of superior god-like pleasure I have received from Amy would be a feeling of intense innocence and love.

In order for me to anthropomorphize myself as different characters when I had my pleasure in the past, it would all depend on what mood I'm in. If I was in an innocent and loving mood, then my mind would relate that to characters such as Amy and would anthropomorphize myself as Amy herself. Same thing with other characters such as Cell and Vegeta if I were instead in an epic and powerful mood. I could even anthropomorphize myself as different characters by literally acting as such characters in my own mind. However, if I was in a bad mood, my mind would anthropomorphize me with non-anime real-life personalities that I hate. Now how I feel normally as a person is when I don't have any personalities (anthropomorphizations) applied to me and this is how I feel most of the time throughout the day each day. But I notice that as I go out and meet new people, my mind will then automatically anthropomorphize me based on my perceived personality through my interaction with this person when I meet with and talk with this person face to face.

Now if you are going to ask something such as why can't I be in these anthropomorphized states all the time? It would be because my depression and anhedonia prevents this from happening. It is also because the mind is something that remains stable in a normal mood. Therefore, those "high" moods and "high" perceptions in which I am anthropomorphized as superior god-like beings, these are unstable mindsets that only last for brief moments. Other than that, I do not have such personalities attributed to me and I am in a completely stable and pleasureless mindset all throughout the day each day.

Even if these characters I love were to tell me to accept a lifelong loss of pleasure that never gets better or fully recovers, that would not cause me to feel any anger towards them or any disappointment at all towards them whatsoever. This is obviously because I know who they are and they are superior god-like beings with superior god-like personalities to me no matter what.

Also, it's not how others think of you that determines who you are. Any personal meanings we create in life are all subjective and personal. Therefore, you can personalize yourself as being any character without any opinions from others as to who you are from their perspectives.

Now aside from that, I think you can see now why pleasure is so important to me and why I view it as the sole defining life force of a human being. Without that, then not only am I denied the awesome epic as well as the loving innocence of these superior god-like characters, but I am also denied of my own life essence as a human being that I normally experience on a daily basis through doing activities I enjoy such as playing videogames, etc. Me being denied those things makes me utterly inferior and makes me and my life of no personal value or worth. My plan was to tap into and channel these superior god-like feelings of pleasure from those superior god-like characters in composing music that is exceptional and beyond human in terms of its powerful conveyed superior god-like emotions and to experience these said feelings through my own created compositions as well as through listening to music. I also wanted to channel and experience my own normal feelings of pleasure as well through composing and listening to music. But this has all failed.

In conclusion, I would like to say that I am a megalomaniac who wishes to regain the most important thing to him (which would be my pleasure). I wish to have power, control, and dominion through pure pleasure alone over my life, over suffering and despair, and over other people who do not wish to help me, who have little to no value towards my pleasure, and who are mean to me. I will NOT be content, be at peace, or accept my life until I have my pleasure back. Even now as I am saying this, my own personality is being anthropomorhpized as Vegeta who is a psychopath who will not back down until he has his "powers" back and is able to rule and dominate over his life again. It's just my own personality that is being anthropomorphized as Vegeta's and not my pleasure since I don't have any pleasure at the moment. But I swear, I will try all I can to regain my lost "powers" (my pleasure) and I will rule and dominate over this life through my pleasure in composing and through just being happy in life in general with very little suffering and despair in my life. And THEN I can experience the awesome life essence (pleasure) of these superior god-like characters as well as my own normal human pleasure once again.

If I live my life accepting my loss of pleasure and not doing anything to try and regain it, then my mind will give me anthropomorphizations (personalities attributed to me) that I hate. But if I live my life not accepting it and become "enraged" to try to gain it back through therapy, medication, etc., then my mind will give me personalities that I love such as the personality of Vegeta (although I cannot feel pleasure from these personalities at the moment). So this is a main reason why I will only choose to live my life in ways that will give me attributed personalities that I love. Otherwise, I will instead have attributed inferior personalities that I hate and will forever hate myself and my life as a result. Just like how I hate people who have little to no value towards my feelings of pleasure who tell me to accept, be at peace, and be content with a lifelong loss of pleasure that never gets better or fully recovers, these anthropomorphizations (attributed personalities) are also exactly the same in that sense. In other words, I would have become these very people I hate by living my life through acceptance, being at peace, and being content with a lifelong loss of pleasure that never gets better or fully recovers.

Edited November 16, 2014 by MattMVS7