MattMVS7 Posted November 3, 2014 Posted November 3, 2014 (edited) I wish to not only try and convince people that I am right here, but am also asking for a challenge for someone to debate this with me. (Note to Reader: I have provided a brief summary here in bolded words. If you are asking why can't I just summarize this, then if I were to just say a brief statement such as that "Life is all about pleasure and that pleasure is the only greatest thing in life," then there would be plenty of people who would be able to argue against that. Therefore, I must argue my points to where it is very convincing which would make my hypothesis that more important to test later on through science. And that would mean going into great detail with convincing arguments and such. For that very reason, I suggest that you read all of it anyway besides just the summary here. But if you absolutely can't read all of it, then I will provide the summary right here): 1.) You can create neutral sounds, images, words, etc. in your mind that are bland to you and provoke no good or bad emotional response. 2.) Therefore, all meanings we create in life are neutral (neither good or bad) since they are the exact same functioning of our brains that come up with these neutral sounds, images, words, etc. in the first place and are nothing but these neutral things just stated. There is nothing different (just the fact that they are different words, images, sounds, etc. and nothing more). Whereas, emotions such as pleasure is the only good thing in life while pain and depression as well as anger or sadness are the bad things in of themselves and all emotions are separate functioning of our brains separate from the functioning of our brains that come up with thoughts, knowledge, meaning, etc. So it would make no sense for you to say that bad emotions in of themselves have good meaning while pleasure in of itself can have bad meaning. It's only these emotions in of themselves that arise from our created meanings that are good and bad. The meanings themselves are, again, neither good or bad (they are all neutral) and do not somehow make our emotions good or bad. 3.) Pleasure is a good experience in of itself and we don't need any thoughts or knowledge to tell us that it is good (this might hold as an example for cats and dogs). The version of "good" that we create in terms of our knowledge and thoughts is neutral. But the version of "good" that comes from our experience of pleasure alone in of itself is not neutral and can never be neutral or bad and is always good no matter what. 4.) So all thoughts and knowledge do not tell us that pleasure is good or that anything else is good which means that pleasure is the only good thing in life and that everything else besides pleasure and pain and despair are all neutral. Thoughts may tell us that things are good or bad in life, but only in the sense that they are nothing more than neutral words, images, sounds, etc. 5.) So if you had emotional numbness and/or depression which is a loss of pleasure, then it doesn't matter how much great things you do in life and help others because it is only your own brain in life and it is only your own pleasure that makes your life good and worth living. You are not in the minds of other people which means that it doesn't matter how much value and worth they have towards you despite your loss of pleasure or for anything else for that matter. It's only your own pleasure that gives your life value and worth. 6.) Pleasure is never subjected to being a bad or a neutral emotion and this also holds true for other emotions such as rage, sadness, and depression. Your created meanings do not somehow infuse themselves with your pleasure or other emotions and make them good or bad in of themselves. These emotions stand alone by themselves as good or bad. We can all obviously agree here that pleasure always feels good and is always a great experience. So why wouldn't that make it objectively good in of itself (disregarding all other things in life because these other things are either neutral or bad)? 7.) If you are going to say something such as that, although pleasure feels good, but can be bad if it is used in harming others and other bad deeds, then what you are doing here is combining other things in life (such as the harming of others) and placing that upon your pleasure and saying that the experience of pleasure in of itself is something bad in this situation. The fact is, pleasure and other things in life stand alone by themselves as separate things since they are completely different things. They do not somehow combine with your pleasure and make your pleasure good or bad when pleasure is always just simply good in of itself no matter what. The neurons that become active in our brains and elicit a state of pleasure are different and separate from the neurons that are responsible for other things in our brains such as thoughts, knowledge, movement, breathing, etc. This also goes for other things in life. All other things in life consist of chemicals, atoms, etc. that are separate from our neurons that give us pleasure. So these things cannot somehow infuse themselves with your pleasure and make your pleasure something bad or neutral. 8.) If you are going to say that everything in life is just a bunch of chemicals, atoms, molecules, etc. with no good or bad meaning whatsoever, then that would only be true in terms of things besides pleasure, pain, and despair. If you are going to ask how can pleasure, pain, and despair be objectively good or bad when they are nothing but a bunch of atoms, molecules, etc.? The answer to that would be that they just are. It is a scientific fact that the different functioning of atoms and such yields different things and different materials. Therefore, the functioning of the atoms and such in our brains has yielded experiences that are purely good and bad in of themselves (which are pleasure, despair, and pain). To ask how can those things be objectively good or bad would be no different than looking at a piece of metal and asking "How can this piece of metal even objectively be metal in the first place since it is nothing but the functioning of atoms, molecules, etc.?" The answer to that would, again, be that it just is. 9.) As for what I said about the neurons, there might also be more complicated processes in the brain than simply just neurons. Therefore, it would be all the atoms and subatomic particles in the brain rather than just simply neurons. As for me trying to scientifically test as to whether pleasure, despair, and pain are the only good and bad things in of themselves, how would one go about doing that? Why would it be any different than scientifically showing that a certain material is the way it is due to the functioning of its atoms and such? Also, in terms of evolution, pleasure is what encourages our survival in life. Encouraged survival is what is "good" in terms of evolution. So pleasure is good in of itself even despite the fact if we had no thoughts, knowledge, or sense of meaning in life. Feelings of fear might encourage our survival in life and are bad because it is a warning sign of danger. But pleasure encourages our survival in a good sense which is what makes it a good feeling in of itself no matter what. This idea I have come up with about pleasure being the only good thing in life might be nonsense and might be false in terms of science, I don't know. But I want it to perhaps someday be tested through science and determined whether it is true or false. People tell me that life is not all about pleasure and that there are greater things in life such as my contributions in life and who I am as a person. But I feel that this is false. Some intelligent people and scientists say that everything is just chemical processes and atoms, molecules, etc. that has no meaning and that things such as "good" and "bad" are just personal meanings we attribute to things (such as to feelings of pleasure and depression that actually have no meaning in reality). But personal meanings are not just subjective values we attribute to things that are meaningless in reality. They are, in fact, experiences in of themselves. Pleasure is the experience of good while pain and/or depression are the experience of bad. So they are objectively good or bad. All other things in life such as our thoughts, actions, etc. are all neutral (neither good or bad). Our thoughts and pleasure stand alone by themselves which means that it doesn't matter whether you regard your pleasure as being bad or that you regard your thoughts as something good, your pleasure will always still be good and your thoughts will always still be neutral. I don't even care if you were to say that your thoughts and other things are regarded by you as true "happiness" even without your ability to experience pleasure. Based on what I'm about to say below, pleasure is still the only good and greatest thing in life and all other aspects besides suffering and pleasure are all neutral. Some might say that we cannot separate our thoughts, knowledge, etc. from our pleasure because all functioning of our brains is all one thing as a whole. So if that's the case, then what I should be saying here is that the state of mind we would be in without our ability to experience pleasure would be a neutral state of mind as opposed to being in a state of mind in which we have pleasure regardless of how much we use that neutral state of mind in helping others and doing great things in our lives and it would make everything neutral from our perspectives no matter what and no matter how much we viewed things in life as being good anyway. Any personal meanings we create in life are all neutral as they all come from the exact same functions of our brains that create nothing but neutral words, sounds, images, etc. in the first place. For example, create any sound, letter, image, etc. in your mind that provokes no emotional response and is bland to you. Therefore, all other meanings we create in life are the same in that sense because, again, they are all the same functioning in our brains. So that makes our own created meanings all neutral as well. These created meanings are no different than the creation of neutral words, sounds, images, etc. because there is no difference between any personal meanings we create in life as opposed to neutral words, sounds, images, etc. because they are the exact same things since they are all the exact same functioning of our brains (just simply with different words, images, sounds, etc.). Our personal meanings we create in life may make us do good things in life, but they are all still neutral anyway. Only our pleasure itself that arises from any personal meanings we create in life is good (positive) and is the only thing that makes our lives good and worth living and you would be delusional to somehow think that, without your ability to experience pleasure, that your life is still somehow good and worth living. If things such as value, worth, and beauty are only good things and cannot be neutral or negative things, then this would mean that only pleasure in of itself is value, worth, and beauty and that, without it, then your life has none of those things and neither do you as a person. You might from the perspective of other people, but you are only in your own brain and it is only your own pleasure that gives you and your life these things regardless of how much others love, value, and care for you. Also, pleasure, in of itself, is a good experience and we do not need any created meanings in life (which would be knowledge, thoughts, etc.) to tell us that it is good. So if you were happy, but had no knowledge or thoughts whatsoever, your happiness would still feel good to you despite the fact that you are completely unaware of what happiness is and the fact that you are unaware of the word "good" and what it even means (I think this might hold as an example for cats and dogs). Therefore, any created meanings in life by themselves do not tell us that anything is good (they are not the activating of the pleasure centers of our brains which is the only thing that gives us the "good" signal). The same thing goes for depression and pain. Depression and pain in of itself is a bad experience and we do not need any knowledge or thoughts to tell us that it is bad. Thoughts and such may tell us that things are good or bad in life. But only in the sense that they are still nothing more than neutral words, images, sounds, etc. Also, this goes for feelings that are bad in of themselves such as rage and sadness. They are just like the opposite of pleasure in that they are bad no matter what and no personal meanings or any good deed or action you do in life will ever make them anything good. It doesn't matter whether you perceive, for example, your depression as being a good thing due to you helping others who also have depression and other problems because the depression in of itself is a bad thing. In other words, any positive meanings you have attributed to your depression are meanings that stand by themselves. They do not become infused with your depression and make your depression something good. Why? Because depression itself is not any thought or meaning whatsoever. It is where the pleasure activity of your brain is shut down. Thoughts and meanings are activity of our brain. So it would make no sense for you to say that your depression in of itself contains positive meaning since, again, depression is the "shutting down" of the pleasure activity of our brains while thoughts and meanings are the activity of completely separate parts of the brain. So it doesn't matter whether your depression made you more empathetic towards others, more intelligent/creative, or anything else because this still does not make your depression itself anything good. The fact is, depression is a bad experience no matter what and nothing can make it anything good. The same thing applies to feelings such as rage and sadness in that the only meanings that are perceived as being good send pleasure signals to the brain while meanings that are perceived as bad send emotional signals that make us feel sad or angry and also depressed. So it would make no sense to say that your sadness, rage, or depression has good meaning or that feelings of pleasure have bad meaning. Meanings, though they do cause us to feel emotions, meanings and our emotions are not one thing and are completely separate functions of our brain. Now even if you are going to say something such as that, if it weren't for anything else in life to begin with (even pain and despair), that we wouldn't be able to experience pleasure, then what I would have to say about that would be that all those things are still neutral and that suffering is still negative anyway and pleasure itself is still the only good and greatest thing there is in life. You can still experience pleasure even after having gone through no suffering and/or despair in the first place. Even if it was somehow necessary to have suffering and/or despair to begin with in order to have the experience of pleasure (which I doubt), then you would no longer need any suffering and despair in your life anymore. And you can achieve all benefits and achieve great things in life just as good (and even better) under the right circumstances through living a nicer and happier life anyway and you can achieve these things having no suffering and/or despair whatsoever in your life. Therefore, even everything else in life and even your own attitude is neutral and you are free to harm and take advantage of others as long as it gives you the most pleasure in life. However, I would never harm others despite my own personal beliefs because this is not who I am at all. Also, you are not in the minds of other people anyway and cannot feel their pleasure, pain, and/or despair. So it's only your own pleasure in life that makes your life good and worth living. Not you helping others and giving them pleasure despite your own absence of pleasure. Even meanings that you create regarding others without your ability to experience pleasure such as that "I may have lost my ability to experience pleasure, but at least I have brought others pleasure and helped them out," even that would be a neutral meaning and it is still only your own brain and perspective in life which means that it is only your own pleasure that makes your life good and worth living. Only the pleasure itself from helping others is good as well as the pleasure obtained from other things and nothing else in life is anything good at all. Finally, the only difference between a thought and such that has meaning to us as opposed to one that doesn't (one that is neutral) would just be the fact that with one meaning, you are experiencing emotion while with another you are not. Also, I do not even care if your pleasure is detrimental to you and only brings you and/or others harm or even hinders you and/or anyone else from obtaining more pleasure down the road. Your pleasure is still good in of itself no matter what and everything else in life is nothing in comparison to it. So it's only our emotions and pain/despair themselves that have the meaning of "good" or "bad." As in terms of one thought that has meaning to us as opposed to another that doesn't, the only difference between these two thoughts is that one sends an emotional signal to the brain while the other doesn't--that is all. Different meanings might make you do good or bad deeds, but they are all still the same anyway in that they are all neutral. Even if this knowledge is used to help and benefit our lives and society and/or to even obtain more pleasure, that still does not change the fact that our thoughts, meanings, and knowledge, etc. are all neutral since I have just already explained why that is in terms of science (that they are all the same functioning of the brain that comes up with neutral sounds, images, words, etc. in the first place). So how much something matters to you and how much value, worth, and beauty it has to you (how good it is to you) all solely depends on your own level of pleasure in life. If you have no pleasure, then life itself as well as everything and everyone will have no value, worth, and beauty whatsoever to you and will not matter to you at all no matter what you think otherwise. If you have little pleasure, then things will only matter little to you. But if you have a lot of pleasure, then things will matter greatly to you and the things and actions that give you the most pleasure would matter the most to you (again, even if it is harming or taking advantage of others). Again, you mattering to others and them having value and worth towards you and viewing you as a beautiful person does NOT give you or your life value, worth, and beauty because, once again, you will be and forever will be in your own mind and it will only be your own pleasure that gives you these things. Other people cannot somehow magically "project" their mindset and their value, worth, and beauty towards you onto you. Edited November 4, 2014 by MattMVS7 -2
andrewcellini Posted November 3, 2014 Posted November 3, 2014 if you could summarize your ideas to a more digestible form that would be appreciated. not everyone has time to read essays.
Endy0816 Posted November 3, 2014 Posted November 3, 2014 Sadness, experience, knowledge... There is much more to life than pleasure alone, so I conclude that scientifically the premise is false. Ordinarily an unsupported statement like that would garner heated debate from the OP but based on past evidence, as interpreted by my brain, I deduce that this won't be the case. Now let us see whether this arbitrary interpretation of evidence is correct or not.
MattMVS7 Posted November 4, 2014 Author Posted November 4, 2014 (edited) I have provided a brief summary here. If you are asking why can't I just summarize what I've written above, then if I were to just say a brief statement such as that "Life is all about pleasure and that pleasure is the only greatest thing in life," then there would be plenty of people who would be able to argue against that. Therefore, I must argue my points to where it is very convincing which would make my hypothesis that more important to test later on through science. And that would mean going into great detail with convincing arguments and such. For that very reason, I suggest that you read all of it anyway besides just the summary here. But if you absolutely can't read all of it, then I will provide the summary right here: 1.) You can create neutral sounds, images, words, etc. in your mind that are bland to you and provoke no good or bad emotional response. 2.) Therefore, all meanings we create in life are neutral (neither good or bad) since they are the exact same functioning of our brains that come up with these neutral sounds, images, words, etc. in the first place and are nothing but these neutral things just stated. There is nothing different (just the fact that they are different words, images, sounds, etc. and nothing more). Whereas, emotions such as pleasure is the only good thing in life while pain and depression as well as anger or sadness are the bad things in of themselves and all emotions are separate functioning of our brains separate from the functioning of our brains that come up with thoughts, knowledge, meaning, etc. So it would make no sense for you to say that bad emotions in of themselves have good meaning while pleasure in of itself can have bad meaning. It's only these emotions in of themselves that arise from our created meanings that are good and bad. The meanings themselves are, again, neither good or bad (they are all neutral) and do not somehow make our emotions good or bad. 3.) Pleasure is a good experience in of itself and we don't need any thoughts or knowledge to tell us that it is good (this might hold as an example for cats and dogs). The version of "good" that we create in terms of our knowledge and thoughts is neutral. But the version of "good" that comes from our experience of pleasure alone in of itself is not neutral and can never be neutral or bad and is always good no matter what. 4.) So all thoughts and knowledge do not tell us that pleasure is good or that anything else is good which means that pleasure is the only good thing in life and that everything else besides pleasure and pain and despair are all neutral. Thoughts may tell us that things are good or bad in life, but only in the sense that they are nothing more than neutral words, images, sounds, etc. 5.) So if you had emotional numbness and/or depression which is a loss of pleasure, then it doesn't matter how much great things you do in life and help others because it is only your own brain in life and it is only your own pleasure that makes your life good and worth living. You are not in the minds of other people which means that it doesn't matter how much value and worth they have towards you despite your loss of pleasure or for anything else for that matter. It's only your own pleasure that gives your life value and worth. 6.) Pleasure is never subjected to being a bad or a neutral emotion and this also holds true for other emotions such as rage, sadness, and depression. Your created meanings do not somehow infuse themselves with your pleasure or other emotions and make them good or bad in of themselves. These emotions stand alone by themselves as good or bad. We can all obviously agree here that pleasure always feels good and is always a great experience. So why wouldn't that make it objectively good in of itself (disregarding all other things in life because these other things are either neutral or bad)? 7.) If you are going to say something such as that, although pleasure feels good, but can be bad if it is used in harming others and other bad deeds, then what you are doing here is combining other things in life (such as the harming of others) and placing that upon your pleasure and saying that the experience of pleasure in of itself is something bad in this situation. The fact is, pleasure and other things in life stand alone by themselves as separate things since they are completely different things. They do not somehow combine with your pleasure and make your pleasure good or bad when pleasure is always just simply good in of itself no matter what. The neurons that become active in our brains and elicit a state of pleasure are different and separate from the neurons that are responsible for other things in our brains such as thoughts, knowledge, movement, breathing, etc. This also goes for other things in life. All other things in life consist of chemicals, atoms, etc. that are separate from our neurons that give us pleasure. So these things cannot somehow infuse themselves with your pleasure and make your pleasure something bad or neutral. 8.) If you are going to say that everything in life is just a bunch of chemicals, atoms, molecules, etc. with no good or bad meaning whatsoever, then that would only be true in terms of things besides pleasure, pain, and despair. If you are going to ask how can pleasure, pain, and despair be objectively good or bad when they are nothing but a bunch of atoms, molecules, etc.? The answer to that would be that they just are. It is a scientific fact that the different functioning of atoms and such yields different things and different materials. Therefore, the functioning of the atoms and such in our brains has yielded experiences that are purely good and bad in of themselves (which are pleasure, despair, and pain). To ask how can those things be objectively good or bad would be no different than looking at a piece of metal and asking "How can this piece of metal even objectively be metal in the first place since it is nothing but the functioning of atoms, molecules, etc.?" The answer to that would, again, be that it just is. 9.) As for what I said about the neurons, there might also be more complicated processes in the brain than simply just neurons. Therefore, it would be all the atoms and subatomic particles in the brain rather than just simply neurons. As for me trying to scientifically test as to whether pleasure, despair, and pain are the only good and bad things in of themselves, how would one go about doing that? Why would it be any different than scientifically showing that a certain material is the way it is due to the functioning of its atoms and such? Also, in terms of evolution, pleasure is what encourages our survival in life. Encouraged survival is what is "good" in terms of evolution. So pleasure is good in of itself even despite the fact if we had no thoughts, knowledge, or sense of meaning in life. Feelings of fear might encourage our survival in life and are bad because it is a warning sign of danger. But pleasure encourages our survival in a good sense which is what makes it a good feeling in of itself no matter what. 10.) I have a unique world-changing viewpoint about pleasure really being the only good and greatest thing in life no matter what and I wish to change the way the world thinks. Although my belief backs up hedonism to a certain degree, I think it might actually be a bit different from hedonism, I am not sure. But I am frustrated and tired of people who go about their lives telling me that there are greater things in my life than my pleasure while I sit there in the midst of my own lack of pleasure longing to have it back, but with no way to convincingly explain to other people how pleasure really is the only greatest thing in life. Although I have come up with an explanation that is, from my point of view, very convincing despite the fact that it has not yet been tested through science, I wish to someday have it tested through science and hopefully demonstrated as true in order to prove to everyone that I was right all along. But if it turns out that I am wrong, then I would have learned that there really are greater things in life than pleasure and knowing that might make me feel less angry and such with myself and my life knowing that I have not lost something in my life that was supposedly the only good and greatest thing. Now even if pleasure really is the only good thing in life, science does not tell us that me must live worthwhile (good) lives and that all that is needed to live is to breath, eat, etc. and just live for the sake of living and nothing more even without your ability to experience pleasure. However, for people like me who seek good worthwhile lives no matter what, our lives must be pleasurable and this is something that can't change for people like me. Also, evolution has designed us to find good meaning in our lives and to avoid pain and suffering and/or a lack of anything good in our lives in which our lives would be neutral (neither good or bad). Even our lives being neutral is something the mind's of many people such as myself will interpret as bad no matter what. So it is imperative that people such as me live lives of pleasure. I can give an example of how evolution has designed us to not live neutral lives and/or lives of suffering and despair. For example, if you had to live your entire life in empty space with nothing to do and no one to talk to as well as no ability to experience pleasure, I think very very few (if any) could be content living such a life. Edited November 4, 2014 by MattMVS7
2501 Posted November 4, 2014 Posted November 4, 2014 (edited) Yeah, you gotta shorten your posts even more and get to the point. I don't even have time to read any of this, particularly if there are no citations or even links. In any event, a quick perusal suggests that it is written in a way that does not even give us anything to really discuss or debate. Are you directing this for us to discuss, or are you just here to preach your idea of the meaning of life? Edited November 4, 2014 by 2501
MattMVS7 Posted November 4, 2014 Author Posted November 4, 2014 I wish to not only try and convince people that I am right here, but am also asking for a challenge for someone to debate this with me.
Anekto Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 So what i ve gathered by reading this is: 1. One lives only in his brain 2. Other peoples brains are not your brain 3. Pleasure is defined as good 4. Negative emotions are defined as bad 5. Pleasure is the standard for living 6.Life is subjective and what ever people tell you must not necessarily effect you 7. Thoughts are inherently neutral Please correct me on my assumptions
Lee Cordochorea Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 Yes, dopamine is evolution's way of encouraging us to not die off as a species. So, too, is epinephrine. Dopamine is a poor end in itslef, though. Take away evolution's carrot by giving everyone carrots, and all evolution has left is the stick. 1
Dylandrako Posted June 22, 2015 Posted June 22, 2015 I would agree with the majority of what Matt is saying although I would like to push your thought process even further and say that there is no good or bad, pleasure or pain, and that rather life is simply just a series of random act and occurrences that when encountered by certain individuals it is their mind that will determine whether to push that thought toward good or bad, pleasure or pain. And for every person it is different how their mind will take this encounter and perceive it in their own way. This being said every person can encounter the exact same thing and each come out with a different experience and view of the occurance. This has been proven time and time again in investigations where a select few "witnesses" are to testify and the detective has to decide who to rely upon out of a group. This is a little far off but the concept remains. what I am trying to say is that the mind very simply, just takes in information through the senses, processes it, "labels" it and moves on, all in a nanosecond. And so to say that everything is pleasure or pain is simply incorrect. The basic ideas of pleasure and pain only exist in our minds and therefore occurances do not take on these roles and automatically become good or bad pleasure or pain but rather after every nanosecond of existence our mind instantly attaches an emotion to the situation. The situation itself is inert. Completely lacking of anything but the situation and/or occurance. Emotion is human, manmade, artificial, fake. Like in the movie After Earth," The danger is real, the fear is not". As far as labeling the emotion as good or bad I don't believe that they in and of themselves have no moral standing. Again they are simply labels that our mind puts on things to better understand them. Pleasure is the ideal for living. It is not the standard. The simple fact for that is to look at the streets of any major city, not the major streets the slums, the ghetto, the alleyways under bridges, look at the homeless people, the starving people that have lost everything they ever knew to be "pleasure" and are now emotionally wrecked. These people live a life of pain and suffering, some due to their own doing, and their standard is far less then their idea of "pleasure".
playground Posted June 22, 2015 Posted June 22, 2015 Pleasure can be hardly described, is something else for every other person - therefore a lot of all what was written in this thread is true, somecthings maybe reflected from the subjective point of view. But anyway - of course it is long, but worth to read it! 1
Dylandrako Posted June 22, 2015 Posted June 22, 2015 If it's too long to read then this matter isn't for you. There is a lot written because there is a very large idea to discuss. If you don't read it then don't post. Simple solution.
Phi for All Posted June 22, 2015 Posted June 22, 2015 1 through 9. 1 & 2. You're taking a subjective experience and claiming it applies to everyone, which is wrong by definition. 3. I can't unravel why you think this is interesting. 4. This makes no sense. You're assuming 1, 2 & 3 are true, and jumping to the conclusion that this proves 4. It doesn't. 5& 6. These are so generalized as to be essentially meaningless. 7 & 8. You're removing the most reasonable argument against your idea with this one. That some gain pleasure from the pain and suffering of others, or that guilt can sometimes taint pleasure, is a very real and rational argument which you try to invalidate with nothing more than a modified No True Scotsman fallacy ("If you don't agree with me, you aren't looking at this the right way"). 9. You start out by saying, "there might also be more complicated processes in the brain", a clear speculative statement with nothing to back it up, and then you start making assertions based on that. In short (hah!), you are confusing logic with "stuff that makes sense to me". It's VERY common these days, with so many popular journalists misusing terms like theory, evolve, and logic. You've jumped to far too many conclusions with this if/then style of forming an hypothesis. You should start with the beginning part where you claim that because we CAN create neutral images, ALL meanings for everything are automatically neutral (that seems like a huge leap to me). Try to stay focused on just that one part, don't go off on tangents, be very precise in what you say, and please try to link to evidence that supports anything you assert as true.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now