My theory that could find a cure for depression

[MattMVS7]

I am psychotically enraged and I am on the mission here to destroy the moral version of good and bad since it has mocked and insulted me long enough. It is deluded ignorant nonsense to say to a severely crippled depressed person that he/she can still have good meaning in his/her life.

The moral version of good says that if we personally judge our lives to have good meaning through our thoughts, then that will make it so. But this is nonsense because this would mean that we could go up to a severely crippled depressed person and say in a joyful/excited tone:

"Yipee! Your life is so wonderful since you told yourself that your life was great! Forget the fact that you were on the brink of suicide and were hardly able to function! Your life was so wonderful!"

This, right here, is the deluded mocking/insulting ignorant blatant lie that is the moral version of good. Is there any scientific evidence supporting that nonsensical quote? I don't think so! So that being the case, the moral version of good and bad would really have to be fake then. My theory might not have evidence either. So this is the point where we should both keep an open mind here.

That quoted message would be no different than telling a person with Parkinson's or a stroke:

"Yipee! You can still fully function mentally because you told yourself you can!"

It would also be no different than telling a blind and deaf person:

"Yipee! You can still see and hear since you told yourself you can!"

The fact is, there has to be a scientific version of good and bad that humanity and science is currently unaware of.

It would have to be our good moods (pleasant emotions) that are the scientific version of good and it would have to be our unpleasant feelings/emotions (such as depression) that would be the scientific version of bad.

Good and bad would have to be senses like sight, hearing, and smell. So they are scientific terms like sight, hearing, and smell. Just as how a blind and deaf person cannot give his/herself sight and hearing through his/her thoughts alone, we cannot give our lives any good or bad meaning either without our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions.

If you were to say the phrase:

"My life is nothing but hopeless," then that would be no different than saying:

"My life is nothing but bad and has no good meaning." Therefore, since depression is a feeling of hopelessness, then if you were to struggle with depression, then you would feel that your life is nothing but bad. Here again, thoughts of our family and such still giving our lives good meaning during our depression won't give our lives any good meaning since we don't have our actual sense of good meaning which would be our pleasant emotions (our reward system).

In conclusion, I myself struggle with depression and anhedonia (absence of all my pleasant emotions). This moral version of good and bad is a deluded and mocking/insulting lie towards people such as me who struggle with these illnesses. It is time we destroy this moral lie and instead create a better life.

An eternal blissful life of no more suffering, depression, and anhedonia created by science in the future and have people such as me who have missed out resurrected so we can live this life. We would create this eternal blissful life based upon the scientific version of good and bad since scientists would be encouraged like never before to find cures and treatments knowing that our pleasant emotions are all that we have in our lives to make us good people and our lives good.

The scientific version of good and bad is different than the moral version of good and bad. It is a feeling/emotional version of good and bad and is not any moral or any other version of good and bad. I realize that science has no moral lessons to teach us. So you might say that there is no scientific version of good and bad. Like I said before, morality is not the same thing as good and bad.

So it would no longer be morality. We would instead have to refer to it as something different. We would instead have to refer to it as us interacting and socializing as human beings and nothing more. Good and bad would instead have to be something completely different. It would have to be the scientific version of good and bad which would be the feeling/emotional version of good and bad.

Any foolish acts that result from our pleasant emotional experiences would no longer be referred to as "bad." If you fight for your family, then that would not be anything good as long as you did not derive any pleasant emotions from doing so. It would just simply be referred to as you solving a problem that hinders or threatens the survival of your family.

"You" refers to "your conscious" since that is what makes you "you" and is what makes you alive in the first place. Therefore, it can only be your experience of pleasant feelings/emotions that would make you a good person and it can only be your experience of unpleasant feelings/emotions that make you a bad person. So with that being said, a depressed person who chooses to help others all around the world would be a bad person with nothing but a bad life. But a sociopath such as Hitler who derives pleasant emotions from harming innocent people would be a good person with a good life.

But the moral version of good would say that if someone is a morally good person, that we would admire and compliment him/her. If someone is a morally bad person, then we would have scorn and detest towards him/her. That is different than the feeling/emotional version of good and bad. So just because a depressed person is bad and just because a sociopath is good does not mean we should have scorn/detest towards the depressed person and admire/compliment the sociopath.

I can't help but really wonder if the moral version of good and bad really is fake even though we do not realize it yet. That we are all just blindly believing in it when it was never true to begin with. Society teaches us lies. This is a known fact of life. It happens so much throughout the world and we are all nothing more than just blindly believing in them. The fact is, we can't trust anyone. We can't trust everything we have been taught.

Even though the moral version of good and bad might have supporting evidence, that doesn't necessarily make it true. The fact is, there could be new tests and new evidence supporting my theory that we need to find out. The moral version of good and bad says:

"How you feel is nothing important. It is nothing good or bad in of itself. It is all about your thinking. Just simply change your thinking and you can live a life that has good meaning."

I find that quote to be a mocking insult to me. It is ignorant deluded nonsense towards the person's depression and suffering. Really, if depression and all the suffering (unpleasant feelings/emotions) were nothing bad, then why are there so many people trying to find better treatments and cures for it? It should all just be a matter of changing one's thinking, acts, and way of life and nothing more. When we look at a severely crippled depressed person and feel sadness and grief over him/her, would it just simply be nothing more than because he/she has a pessimistic mode of thought towards life? No!

It is instead because he/she is going through so much suffering. He/she has a crippling experience of an unpleasant feeling/emotion that gives nothing but bad and horrible meaning to his/her life that is known as depression. Therefore, depression in of itself has to be bad and it has nothing to do with our way of thinking. It is the scientific version of bad. The opposite would be the scientific version of good which would be our pleasant feelings/emotions. And, of course, having neither pleasant nor unpleasant feelings/emotions would only render you and your life having neutral (neither good or bad) value and worth.

I mean, it all adds up to there being a scientific version of good and bad. I clearly have a rational and valid basis for my theory which would be everything I explained here about why the moral version of good and bad is a mocking/insulting deluded ignorant lie.

The term "rewarding experience" has been defined through science as only being our reward system (pleasant emotions) and not our thoughts alone since our reward system is the only function of our brains that can give us a rewarding experience. It is always a rewarding experience for us to have good meaning in our lives. For example, if you perceive good meaning towards your family and living for them to help them out, then that is always a rewarding experience for you. You are perceiving a rewarding experience towards the helping of your family and towards living for them.

Therefore, it would have to be our pleasant emotions that can be the only things that can give good meaning to our lives. To say that something can have good value and worth to you even though it is not a rewarding experience for you would be no different than saying that something can be a rewarding experience for you even though it is not a rewarding experience for you. Therefore, that would be a false (contradictory) statement.

Also, if you lament and become enraged/frustrated over a loss in your life such as the loss of your family, then they would of been of good value and worth to you. They would of brought you good meaning in your life. Until you find someone or something else good in your life to replace that loss, you will lament and become enraged/frustrated for the time being.

It is now how we normally function as human beings to be fine living a life of no good meaning. You would have a mental disorder if you were fine living like that. I don't have that mental disorder and nor would I ever have it. Therefore, this is the reason why I will never be fine living with this depression and anhedonia. If people to to lament and such over losses anyway without their pleasant emotions, then they would be fooling their brains into thinking that those said things and people brought good meaning to their lives when it was never true to begin with.

Now depression and anhedonia turn off the survival aspect characteristics of the brain. The survival aspect characteristics of our brains would be us perceiving good meaning towards the helping of innocent people and towards the pursuing of our goals and dreams. So we cannot perceive good meaning in our lives at all as long as we are depressed and/or have anhedonia.

Our unpleasant feelings/emotions such as depression instead result in the problem solving aspect mode of the brain being turned on which would be us perceiving bad meaning in our lives towards life crisises and towards the running away from danger and solving problems that hinder/threaten our survival. So we can only perceive bad meaning in our lives while struggling with depression.

Depression and other unpleasant feelings/emotions turn on the problem solving aspect mode of the brain because if the survival aspect mode were to be left turned on and we still perceived good meaning and have still chosen to pursue our goals and dreams while being in a dangerous situation or a situation that hinders our survival, then we could be killed or harmed. That is just how our brains evolved, sadly. We have never evolved to perceive good meaning in our lives while struggling with depression or any other unpleasant feelings/emotions. People would just be fooling their brains into thinking they still have good meaning in their lives while struggling with depression and/or anhedonia when it was never true.

Depression, I am quite sure, could very well be the worst of all unpleasant feelings/emotions since it lowers you down much more and saps away all good meaning of your life. So if you struggle with depression, then your life has the worst bad value and bad worth.

As long as you are in a bland, "dead," and hopeless mindstate (mood) due to your depression and/or anhedonia, then that is the mindstate of perceiving bad and neutral meaning in your life. You need to be in the "alive," vigorous, sacred, divine, transcending, and vibrant mindstate of experiencing your pleasant emotions (good moods) in order to perceive good meaning towards your family, friends, this life/universe, and towards your goals and dreams. Again, it is a scientific perception of good and bad meaning in our lives and is not any moral or any other version of good and bad.

It is the good and bad of the future that science has yet to discover when they develop the advanced technology to discover it. It would take perhaps hundreds or even thousands of years to discover it. But I have revealed it to you upon this very day. Therefore, share this theory of mine to scientists all around the world. It will be the ultimate science experiment.

Scientists all around the world will test my theory and see if there really is a scientific version of good and bad. My theory will change the world. It will change how we all think as human beings. It will encourage scientists like never before to create an eternal blissful life in the future as I said before and it will encourage them to resurrect people such as me who have missed out on life so we can all live this eternal blissful life in the future.

Everyone would now truly understand the depths of my loss and will truly know that my pleasant emotions (good moods) are the only incentives I have in my life to give my life good meaning. That is, if scientists would even care about my theory and if they even care to test it. If you don't share this theory to these scientists, then I might never be resurrected to live an eternal blissful life to give my life the eternal good meaning that I deserve for having gone through all this suffering of depression as well as my anhedonia.

Everyone might just simply dismiss all the suffering and such of this life as being nothing bad and that all that is needed to live a good life would be our thinking. This couldn't be any further from the truth and the whole world needs the know the truth that my theory holds.

There are many people in this world who don't have an open mind and would not even bother with my theory. But there are those people who will definitely give some consideration to my theory. Therefore, these are the types of people (scientists) I am seeking out.

Edited August 20, 2015 by MattMVS7

[dimreepr]

I have spent the majority of my life determined to be unhappy and even more determined to blame others for my misery, you seem to be taking a similar path.

 

So can you please provide an abstract to your hypothesis as the above seems a little muddled.

[Phi for All]

The fact is, there has to be a scientific version of good and bad that humanity and science is currently unaware of.

 

I got to here and now I need you to explain why you think this is a fact. I'll read further once you've explained.

 

I don't think this is true at all, but I'm willing to be persuaded by evidence.

[MattMVS7]

 

I got to here and now I need you to explain why you think this is a fact. I'll read further once you've explained.

 

I don't think this is true at all, but I'm willing to be persuaded by evidence.

 

I don't know of any evidence since I am not a scientist myself and am unaware of the evidence that exists in this world. But I do have a rational and valid basis as to why which would be everything I explained about how the moral version of good and bad is a mocking/insulting lie towards people such as me who struggle with depression and anhedonia.

[dimreepr]

 

I don't know of any evidence since I am not a scientist myself and am unaware of the evidence that exists in this world. But I do have a rational and valid basis as to why which would be everything I explained about how the moral version of good and bad is a mocking/insulting lie towards people such as me who struggle with depression and anhedonia.

 

 

Good and bad isn’t relevant to anhedonia.

 

In my experience we have a choice; be depressed and blame others, or determine your own path.

 

It’s much easier to blame others and expect them to appease your passage.

[MattMVS7]

I would like to add one more thing here. The reason why there is currently no evidence to support my theory would be because we currently have no way to test my theory and, thus, there is no current evidence to support my theory. At least, that is what I am thinking is going on here. But maybe in the future my theory can be tested and have evidence for it. Or maybe there is actually a way to test my theory out now. Who knows. But share this theory to scientists all around the world and to everyone on this planet so they can all keep an open mind to it.

[dimreepr]

The reason why there is currently no evidence to support my theory would be because we currently have no way to test my theory and, thus, there is no current evidence to support my theory

 

 

Is this a reason or an excuse?

[Prometheus]

Why don't you develop a way to test your theory, you seem to have a strong motivation for it. Maybe take some psychology courses towards that end.

[MattMVS7]

 

Is this a reason or an excuse?

 

No excuse here. This is because I have given a rational and valid basis for my theory which would be my explanation as to why the moral version of good and bad is a mocking/insulting lie towards people who struggle with depression such as me. Someday, I wish to have my theory tested somehow.

[dimreepr]

 

No excuse here. This is because I have given a rational and valid basis for my theory which would be my explanation as to why the moral version of good and bad is a mocking/insulting lie towards people who struggle with depression such as me. Someday, I wish to have my theory tested somehow

 

 

Really? Please elaborate in simple terms, so I can understand.

[MattMVS7]

First off, I gave that nonsensical quote of:

 

"Yipee! Your life is so wonderful since you told yourself that your life was great! Forget the fact that you were on the brink of suicide and were hardly able to function! Your life was so wonderful!"

 

This, right here, is the deluded mocking/insulting ignorant blatant lie that is the moral version of good. It would be no different than telling a person with Parkinson's or a stroke:

"Yipee! You can still fully function mentally because you told yourself you can!"

It would also be no different than telling a blind and deaf person:

"Yipee! You can still see and hear since you told yourself you can!"

The fact is, there has to be a scientific version of good and bad that humanity and science is currently unaware of.

It would have to be our good moods (pleasant emotions) that are the scientific version of good and it would have to be our unpleasant feelings/emotions (such as depression) that would be the scientific version of bad.

 

Second, The moral version of good and bad says:

"How you feel is nothing important. It is nothing good or bad in of itself. It is all about your thinking. Just simply change your thinking and you can live a life that has good meaning."

I find that quote to be a mocking insult to me. It is ignorant deluded nonsense towards the person's depression and suffering. Really, if depression and all the suffering (unpleasant feelings/emotions) were nothing bad, then why are there so many people trying to find better treatments and cures for it? It should all just be a matter of changing one's thinking, acts, and way of life and nothing more. When we look at a severely crippled depressed person and feel sadness and grief over him/her, would it just simply be nothing more than because he/she has a pessimistic mode of thought towards life? No!

It is instead because he/she is going through so much suffering. He/she has a crippling experience of an unpleasant feeling/emotion that gives nothing but bad and horrible meaning to his/her life that is known as depression. Therefore, depression in of itself has to be bad and it has nothing to do with our way of thinking. It is the scientific version of bad. The opposite would be the scientific version of good which would be our pleasant feelings/emotions. And, of course, having neither pleasant nor unpleasant feelings/emotions would only render you and your life having neutral (neither good or bad) value and worth.

[dimreepr]

 

I find that quote to be a mocking insult to me.

 

 

So you blame the quote?

 

Yet another excuse: try taking the path less trodden and blame yourself; because that is the reason for your apathy.

[StringJunky]

 

 

So you blame the quote?

 

Yet another excuse: try taking the path less trodden and blame yourself; because that is the reason for your apathy.

Apathy moves in the path of least resistance.

[Acme]

Good and bad isnt relevant to anhedonia.

In my experience we have a choice; be depressed and blame others, or determine your own path.

Its much easier to blame others and expect them to appease your passage.

Disjointed as Matt's opening post is, your assertion that people choose to be depressed is unsupported. What evidence do you have for your assertion other than anecdotal experience? Moreover, can you support the idea that depressed folks blame others for their condition?

 

Depression (mood) @ Wiki

 

...Causes

Life events

 

Adversity in childhood, such as bereavement, neglect, unequal parental treatment of siblings, physical abuse or sexual abuse, significantly increases the likelihood of experiencing depression over the life course.[4][5][6]

 

Life events and changes that may precipitate depressed mood include childbirth, menopause, financial difficulties, job problems, a medical diagnosis (cancer, HIV, etc.), bullying, loss of a loved one, natural disasters, social isolation, relationship troubles, jealousy, separation, and catastrophic injury.[7][8]

 

Adolescents may be especially prone to experiencing depressed mood following social rejection.

...[9]

[MattMVS7]

 

 

So you blame the quote?

 

Yet another excuse: try taking the path less trodden and blame yourself; because that is the reason for your apathy.

 

Well, let me ask for your evidence of that quote that I deemed to be nonsense. Is there actually much scientific support for that quote being true?

Edited August 20, 2015 by MattMVS7

[dimreepr]

Disjointed as Matt's opening post is, your assertion that people choose to be depressed is unsupported. What evidence do you have for your assertion other than anecdotal experience? Moreover, can you support the idea that depressed folks blame others for their condition?

 

Depression (mood) @ Wiki

 

 

 

I didn’t assert people choose to be depressed, my assertion, is that in a depressed state we have the choice and in this particular case the choice seems to be blaming others.

[MattMVS7]

 

 

I didn’t assert people choose to be depressed, my assertion, is that in a depressed state we have the choice and in this particular case the choice seems to be blaming others.

 

I mean, if there is little to no scientific support for that quote being true that I deemed as nonsense, then you shouldn't say that my theory is nonsense. You should keep an open mind on it. However, I should also keep an open mind on the possibility of the moral version of good and bad being real regardless of how much I don't like it.

[Acme]

I didn’t assert people choose to be depressed, my assertion, is that in a depressed state we have the choice and in this particular case the choice seems to be blaming others.

I didn’t assert people choose to be depressed, my assertion, is that in a depressed state we have the choice and in this particular case the choice seems to be blaming others.

I fail to see the difference; can you elaborate it? In any regard, what evidence do you have that people in depressed moods have a choice to -presumably- not be depressed? Are you arguing that depression is not an illness?

 

From the article I cited [bolding mine]:

...

Controversies

...

A problem in analyzing the results of mental health research and mental health statistics is the prevalence of reporting bias. Currently, the only way to collect data is to survey people and look at hospitalization rates. There are potential problems with people mis-reporting their feelings, the frequency of depressive and anxious thoughts, and other information that subjects might want to suppress or might not realize are significant. This is exacerbated by cultural norms that encourage males to not express their feelings and to “tough it out” while women are encouraged to express emotions.[31]

 

There is also the tendency to view mental illness as "all in your mind," with the preconception that the problem can be solved by just trying hard enough. Subjects may underreport the prevalence of depressive or anxious episodes, men more so than women for the above reason. Because of perceived stigma, subjects may resist the idea that they might have a mental illness and attempt to suppress any hint to the contrary on a survey.

...

[Strange]

In any regard, what evidence do you have that people in depressed moods have a choice to -presumably- not be depressed?

 

That isn't what he said.

[Acme]

 

In any regard, what evidence do you have that people in depressed moods have a choice to -presumably- not be depressed?

That isn't what he said.

 

I'm sure he can explain it then.

 

In any regard, Matt is clearly suffering from mental distress and open forums are no place to hash out these issues. We are none of us clinicians and even were we it would be improper for us to engage in offering advice here.

 

Matt, if you are seeing a professional then share your concerns you have expressed here with them. If you are not seeing a professional then consider doing so.

[Phi for All]

 

I don't know of any evidence since I am not a scientist myself and am unaware of the evidence that exists in this world. But I do have a rational and valid basis as to why which would be everything I explained about how the moral version of good and bad is a mocking/insulting lie towards people such as me who struggle with depression and anhedonia.

 

This still doesn't answer my specific question. You claimed, as fact, that there "has to be" an absolute, objective, "scientific" definition of good and bad, something universal to everything, or at least all humans. You further claimed that it's a definition we're all currently unaware of.

 

This seems to be at the heart of your hypothesis, and it seems to be a real stumbling block. When you're looking at anything objectively, you can't use words like "good" and "bad", since they're entirely subjective. Even if you just use humans, there are few universal truths about them that aren't tautologies (you can't say "All humans are alive", you have to say "All living humans are alive").

 

Even here, you seem to be basing what is good or bad on what's been done to you. That's very subjective.

 

Could it be that you're lumping all such "quoted messages" together and judging them to be inadequate? I can see where "Just change your way of thinking and stop being depressed!" would be an unsophisticated and shallow suggestion. But variations of that sentiment are at the heart of any successful therapy I've ever seen.

 

For instance, I know some folks who get into a tough situation and start listing their alternatives, but only the negative ones. They set up their own False Dilemmas by painting themselves into a corner, by only considering options that are doomed to fail or won't bring the desired outcome. If they feel like they're trapped in a hole, they don't give themselves a way to climb out. In these cases, thinking differently is essential.

 

I'll read further, since you've set this up as an attempt to discuss a cure, rather than asking about your particular depression, but I wanted some clarity on why you think good and bad could ever be defined in an absolute way.

[Strange]

I'm sure he can explain it then.

 

In any regard, Matt is clearly suffering from mental distress and open forums are no place to hash out these issues.

 

The point is that someone with depression can choose what to do about it: curl up in a ball, seek professional help, get drunk, repeatedly spam science forums with incoherent rants, ...

Edited August 20, 2015 by Strange

[MattMVS7]

 

This still doesn't answer my specific question. You claimed, as fact, that there "has to be" an absolute, objective, "scientific" definition of good and bad, something universal to everything, or at least all humans. You further claimed that it's a definition we're all currently unaware of.

 

This seems to be at the heart of your hypothesis, and it seems to be a real stumbling block. When you're looking at anything objectively, you can't use words like "good" and "bad", since they're entirely subjective. Even if you just use humans, there are few universal truths about them that aren't tautologies (you can't say "All humans are alive", you have to say "All living humans are alive").

 

Even here, you seem to be basing what is good or bad on what's been done to you. That's very subjective.

 

Could it be that you're lumping all such "quoted messages" together and judging them to be inadequate? I can see where "Just change your way of thinking and stop being depressed!" would be an unsophisticated and shallow suggestion. But variations of that sentiment are at the heart of any successful therapy I've ever seen.

 

For instance, I know some folks who get into a tough situation and start listing their alternatives, but only the negative ones. They set up their own False Dilemmas by painting themselves into a corner, by only considering options that are doomed to fail or won't bring the desired outcome. If they feel like they're trapped in a hole, they don't give themselves a way to climb out. In these cases, thinking differently is essential.

 

I'll read further, since you've set this up as an attempt to discuss a cure, rather than asking about your particular depression, but I wanted some clarity on why you think good and bad could ever be defined in an absolute way.

 

I have written an entire book on this very subject. It explains everything as to why the moral version of good and bad is fake. Go ahead and read the last two sections of my book since they are the most interesting. You have a story between a customer who teaches a wise old salesman a life lesson of truth that he has never heard before. This story gets my point across. After that, you have the last section which gets my point across as well. Those sections are titled in big underlined bolded words.

Edited August 20, 2015 by MattMVS7

[Phi for All]

Are you kidding me? All this was to advertise your book?!

 

Great example of setting up a situation where failure is the only outcome. You should know by now that we can't advertise for you. It's against the site's rules. And people should be able to participate in this discussion without clicking external links.

 

But now you get to claim I'm the "bad" guy.

 

How long is it? Can you post excerpts? That's allowed.

[MattMVS7]

Are you kidding me? All this was to advertise your book?!

 

Great example of setting up a situation where failure is the only outcome. You should know by now that we can't advertise for you. It's against the site's rules. And people should be able to participate in this discussion without clicking external links.

 

But now you get to claim I'm the "bad" guy.

 

How long is it? Can you post excerpts? That's allowed.

 

I apologize. I was unaware of this. Therefore, I am going to present to you the last two sections which are the most important. Here is section 1:

 

Last Additional Vital Point To My Scientific Theory On Good And Bad: The Customer's Life Lesson Of Truth Taught To The Wise Old Salesman

Now I am going to add one last thing here. It is one last imagined conversation between me and another person:

Response: What if you overheard Robert Sapolsky wrong? What if there really is a form of wanting and liking through our thoughts alone without our reward system?

My Reply: Although I am sure Robert Sapolsky said that wanting and liking can only come from our pleasant emotions, I cannot be absolutely sure.

Response: Let's pretend that there is a form of wanting and liking through our thoughts alone then. If that were so, then we could really have good value and worth in our lives.

My Reply: We still couldn't. This is because they are not the rewarding version of wanting and liking which can only come from our reward system (our pleasant emotions). So it is not the wanting and liking that makes our lives good and worth living. It is our rewarding experiences (our pleasant emotions).

Response: You still insist that it is only our rewarding experiences that can make our lives good and worth living. But I do not agree with it. Could you please support your assertion.

My Reply: It can only be our optimistic experiences that make our lives good and worth living. For example, what we know now is that a good thought is always an optimistic thought. So we would refer to it as an optimistic experience that makes things in this life of good value and worth to us.

For example, if there was no optimism in our good thoughts of wanting and liking things in this life, then it would be no different than a neutral thought or a bad thought.

The neutral thought of wanting and liking things would be no different than simply looking at a bunch of objects and saying in a monotonous tone: "I want this object here and this object there and I like the position these objects are in."

The bad thought of wanting something would be if you said something in an angry tone such as: "I want this gone out of my life now!"

And, of course, the good thought of wanting and liking something would be something such as: "Wow, I really want this and I really like this!"

But as we also know, our pleasant emotions are also optimistic experiences as well. They are optimistic experiences since they are rewarding experiences. They are optimistic urges.

But since our thoughts alone cannot be rewarding experiences and can't be urges, then our thoughts alone cannot be optimistic experiences. Therefore, our thoughts alone cannot make our lives good and worth living.

Response: Nonsense. Our thoughts alone can very well be optimistic experiences and it has nothing to do with them being any sort of rewarding experience or urge. Even if they couldn't be optimistic experiences, all we need in our lives to make things in this life good and of worth to us would just be through the version of wanting and liking through our thinking alone.

My Reply: I am going to post an imagined conversation between a salesman selling items to a customer who has no rewarding experience whatsoever regarding these items. I am posting this imagined conversation just to get my point across since it is vital to do it this way:

Salesman's Response: "I have these two amazing items I wish to sell to you, sir!"

Customer's Response: "I don't care about any of them. They do not catch my interest. They are nothing rewarding to me. I have no rewarding experience whatsoever regarding them."

Salesman's Response: "Please, sir. I insist that you choose one and purchase it."

Customer's Response: "Fine. I want this one and I like this one even though it is not any rewarding experience of wanting and liking for me whatsoever."

Salesman's Response: "Thank you, sir. I am sure you will find this item to be of quite good value and worth to you anyway even though you have no rewarding experience regarding it."

*After the customer purchases the item and takes it home with him, a thief comes in and steals it. The customer and the salesman then meet again the next day.*

Salesman's Response: "How do you like your item? Isn't of good value and worth to you?"

Customer's Response: "A thief came in and stole it from me. But I am not lamenting that loss one bit. So that item had no good value and worth to me. If this item did have good value and worth to me, then it would of been a rewarding experience for me and, thus, I would lament or I would become frustrated and enraged over that loss."

Salesman's Response: "So it seems to me you had nothing but a neutral (neither good or bad) thought regarding that item. So if there is some good value and worth that the item itself possesses, it would not exist to you. So I guess my item really was nothing of good value and worth to you then."

Customer's Response: "Correct."

Salesman's Response: "So let me sell you a new item. I will now put it up on the shelf right now. Here it is. How do you like it now?"

Customer's Response: "Wow, this is a really great item! I really want it and I really like it! But..."

Salesman's Response: "What's wrong, sir?"

Customer's Response: "I cannot get any rewarding experience from this item either since I have a mental condition known as "anhedonia" which turns off the reward system and prevents any experience of pleasant emotions."

Salesman's Response: "But you have a thought of good value and worth towards this item, do you not?"

Customer's Response: "Yes."

Salesman's Response: "Then it's the thought that counts. I am quite sure you will find this new item to be of good value and worth to you even though it can't be a rewarding experience for you.

So that is what I will leave you with now. Return back to me the next day and tell me just how much good value and worth this item is of to you!

But one last thing. Subdue that thief once and for all out of your life. He is no good for you!"

*The customer then returns back home with this new item only to have that item stolen as well by the thief. The customer then returns the next day to the salesman.*

Salesman's Response: "How's that item, sir? The thief didn't take it, did he?"

Customer's Response: "He did. This time around, I did lament and became quite frustrated over that loss."

Salesman's Response: "Which just shows how much good value and worth this item had to you. Let me reveal something unto thee. I have contrived the situation of the thief and my salesmanship to teach you a very valuable life lesson.

I overheard from others in my village that you think of things in this life to be of no good value and worth to you since you cannot derive any rewarding experience from those things. And so I have taught you the difference between a neutral thought that is not rewarding and a good thought that is not rewarding.

Even though they are both not rewarding experiences to you, the good thought of wanting and liking clearly gave your life good value and worth from that item since you lamented and became frustrated over its loss. Otherwise, you would of never lamented and you would of never became frustrated."

Customer's Response: "That's where you are wrong."

Salesman's Response: "You wanted and liked that item and you had a good thought regarding that item even though you could not get any rewarding experience from it. How is the item not of any good value and worth to you then?"

Customer's Response: "By having the good thought of wanting and liking that object, that is fooling my brain into thinking I am having a rewarding experience from this object when I wasn't.

Even if I told myself that I am not having any rewarding experience whatsoever and that I am just having the good thought of wanting and liking that object, that is still fooling my brain into thinking it is a rewarding experience for me.

I mean, the simple fact of the matter all comes down to that if something is rewarding to you and you lose it, then you will lament and become frustrated over it. But if something was not rewarding to you and you lost it, then you would not lament and become frustrated over it.

So the fact that I did lament and became frustrated over the loss of that item even though I did not get any rewarding experience from it, this obviously says that my thinking area of my brain was fooling me into thinking it was a rewarding experience for me.

So the very act of me truly thinking that the item was good and of worth to me would be me fooling myself into thinking it is a rewarding experience for me. The thinking area of our brains always tends to fool us as human beings and it is completely natural for it to do so.

Even despite the fact that I am already convinced that our lives can have no good value and worth without our pleasant emotions, the thinking area of my brain still easily fools me at times such as with that item I had.

So without our pleasant emotions, we should not even describe other things in this life as being perceived as having good value and worth to us. Doing so will only fool the brain into thinking it is a rewarding experience for you when it is not.

So that being the case, our thoughts of good value and worth towards things in this life without our pleasant emotions should not even be referred to as thoughts that give good value and worth to our lives. They should instead be referred to as thoughts of stimuli that are perceived as promoting our survival.

The thinking area of our brains always tends to fool us like I said before. For example, if a person were to have no ability to experience fear and he/she encountered a frightening situation, then he/she might very well say that it was still a frightening experience for him/her without his/her ability to experience the unpleasant emotion known as "fear."

But our thoughts alone cannot experience fear. They can only experience different thoughts just as how our hearing and sight cannot experience fear either. They can only experience different heard sounds and perceived images.

Therefore, this would not of even been a frightening experience for this person at all and it would just be a matter of his/her thinking area of his/her brain fooling him/her into thinking it was a frightening experience when it really wasn't.

So I am now going to present an experiment and later reveal how it really is only our rewarding experiences (our pleasant emotions) that can make our lives good and worth living.

So here is another experiment to be performed. This one is the best experiment to be performed. Have two groups of people with anhedonia (absence of pleasure) who think that things in this life can be of no good value and worth to them. Give things to one group that gets them further in life which are things they think are a rewarding experience for them, but are of no good value or worth to them.

These are the types of people who would say something such as: "This is a very rewarding experience for me. I will take these things even though they don't have any good value and worth to me."

As for the other group, give things to them that they think are not a rewarding experience for them, but are things that can get them further in life (promote their survival) that they have an optimistic attitude towards.

These are the types of people who are just as optimistic as the former group. They would say something such as: "I will go ahead and take these things. They are not rewarding experiences for me and neither can they be of any good value and worth to me, but I have an optimistic attitude and perception towards them and I will take them anyway."

They would have an optimistic thought towards those things which would be a thought that would send the pleasure signal. But, of course, no pleasure signal can be sent to their brains since they have anhedonia.

From there, take away the things from the former group who thought those things were rewarding experiences for them and they will lament and become frustrated over that loss.

But take away the things from the latter group, and they will not lament or become frustrated over that loss.

Or, at least, that is what I am thinking will happen. If the former group does not lament and become frustrated over their loss, then they would of fooled themselves into thinking that it was a rewarding experience for them when it wasn't.

If the latter group laments and becomes frustrated over that loss, then they would of fooled themselves into thinking it wasn't a rewarding experience for them when it really was.

Now I pointed out earlier that our reward system is the only thing that can give us a rewarding experience and that people who become frustrated and lament over losses in their lives without their pleasant feelings/emotions are only fooling themselves into thinking they were having rewarding experiences regarding those things.

So that being the case, then how is it that the former group does not lament and become frustrated then? The answer here would be that there are two ways in which you can fool yourself. For example, one way would be when you are just thinking something is true, but not actually giving into that thought. Another way would be actually thinking it as true.

Therefore, if the former group does not lament and become frustrated, then they would of not given into their thinking that they were having a rewarding experience. Rather, they were just simply thinking it. Same thing applies for the latter group. They were not giving into their thinking that they were not having a rewarding experience.

So people who think things are good and worth living for in their lives and do not lament and do not become frustrated over the loss of those said things, then they were just simply thinking that their lives were good and worth living. But they were not genuinely thinking those things to be of good value and worth to them.

Now continuing on here. Let me put something here as a little side note as well. If you did not want, did not like, and neither was it a rewarding experience for you and you thought it was of good value and worth to you, then if you were to lose that said thing and you were to lament and become frustrated, then I do not see how something that you do not want, do not like, and isn't a rewarding experience for you can be of good value and worth to you.

If there was no optimistic want, need, psychological dependency, like, rewarding experience, etc., then I do not see how that could of been of any good value and worth to you. The only explanation as to why it is that you have lamented and have become frustrated over that loss would be because by saying that it was of good value and worth to you anyway, that would actually be telling your brain that you want it, you like it, and that it is a rewarding experience for you.

So your descriptions of not wanting it, not liking it, and it not being a rewarding experience for you would be false here.

So back to the two groups. The people who thought it was a rewarding experience actually thought it was something good and of worth to them while the people who thought that it wasn't a rewarding experience thought that it was nothing good.

But both groups had an optimistic thought regarding those objects which would be a thought that would send the pleasure signal. But the fact that one group lamented while the other didn't, then this would have to mean that it is only us thinking that things are rewarding experiences for us in this life that delude us into thinking that things have good value and worth to us in life.

So since something can only be of good value and worth to us if it is an actual rewarding experience for us, then this obviously means that it is only our reward system (pleasant emotions) that can make our lives good and worth living to us.

So with that being said, if someone were to say something such as:

"This is a rewarding experience for me even though it is of no good value and worth to me," then this would be no different than saying:

"This is of good value and worth to me even though it is of no good value and worth to me." So that statement is false (contradictory). It would have to be our rewarding experiences that make things in this life of good value and worth to us.

Therefore...

Rewarding Experience=Good

Now if someone were to say something such as:

"I wanted this and I liked this even though it is of no good value and worth to me," then this would be no different than saying:

"This is of good value and worth to me even though it is of no good value and worth to me." This statement is false as well.

Therefore...

Wanting/Liking=Good

Now if someone were to say something such as:

"This is important to me even though it is of no good value and worth to me," then this would also be no different than saying:

"This is of good value and worth to me even though it is of no good value and worth to me." So this statement is false.

Therefore...

Important=Good

So with that being said, if a person were to say something such as:

"I wanted this, liked this, it was something important to me, and it was of good value and worth to me even though it was not a rewarding experience for me," then this would be no different than saying:

"This is of good value and worth to me (I wanted it and liked it), it was something of good value and worth to me (it was something important to me), and it was of good value and worth to me even though it was nothing of good value and worth to me (it wasn't a rewarding experience for me)." This quoted statement would be false.

The only way to make the quoted statement true would be to say instead that it was a rewarding experience. That, or to say that you did not want it and did not like it, that it was nothing important to you, and that it was nothing of good value and worth to you. Therefore, it is only our rewarding version of wanting and liking (our pleasant emotions) that can give good value and worth to our lives.

So if there is something you want and like in this life, then that is not enough to make it of good value and worth to you. It also has to be something important to you and has to be a rewarding experience for you as well.

But if I were to just say that it was something I wanted, liked, and that it was a rewarding experience for me, but that it was nothing important to me, then this is false. If something has any significance (importance) to us, then we will experience pleasant emotions from it.

If something is a rewarding experience for us, then we want it and we like it. It also means that it is something important to us. It would mean that something is of good value and worth to us."

Salesman's Response: "There must be some sort of mistake, sir. I am a wise old man who has learned much wisdom throughout my travels. I have been teaching many people the value of life and the good life that can still be had even during the most dire of hardships and struggles."

Customer's Response: "Well, you have been taught wrong then."

Salesman's Response: "You are saying my teachings are false. But it is often those who reject them who are only decieving themselves."

Customer's Response: "Listen to this valuable life lesson of truth that I am going to teach unto thee:

Our pleasant emotions are like a heavenly transcended sacred sense. Our reward system senses the good value, worth, beauty, greatness, awesomness, etc. of this life and universe just like how our sight and hearing senses visuals and sounds.

When we eat a sweet candy and it tastes good to us, that is our reward system sensing the goodness of that piece of candy. It is our reward system that makes that piece of candy taste good because if it weren't for our reward system, then it would not taste good anymore. It would taste bland.

But without our good taste, then we can tell ourselves all we want that this piece of candy still tastes good. But that will never make it taste good.

So in that same sense, our pleasant emotions would be our reward system sensing the goodness of this life and universe instead of a piece of candy. Our pleasant emotions are something far more greater and profound than just some pleasant sensation such as a good taste or a good smell.

Our pleasant emotions are sacred and transcending since they are what we live off of in order to make our goals/dreams something good and of worth to us, music something of profound goodness to us, etc.

Without our pleasant emotions due to depression and/or anhedonia which turns off our reward system and prevents the experience of pleasant emotions, then we can tell ourselves all we want that this life, universe, and other things in this life are still of good value and worth to us. But that will never make them of any good value and worth to us.

They would all be like that bland-tasting piece of candy. To say that this life can still be of good value and worth to you if you struggle with depression and/or anhedonia would be no different than saying that a foul-tasting food still tastes good to you and that a bland-tasting food still tastes good to you. So you would only be just lying, fooling, and deluding yourself here.

Messages of our survival being promoted send a signal to our reward system. These messages get translated into the experience (perception) of good value and worth in our lives which would be our pleasant emotions just as how vibrations in the air and light get sent to the brain and are translated into actual hearing and sight.

So if you eat a sweet tasty piece of candy, messages of survival promotion get sent to your reward system which allows the taste of that piece of candy to be perceived as something good and of worth.

Our thoughts alone in of themselves are the messages of our survival being perceived as promoted which sends a pleasure signal to our reward system, perceived as being hindered/threatened which sends a displeasure signal, or perceived as being neither which neither sends a pleasure or displeasure signal. But they are nothing more than that at this stage. Our thoughts alone in of themselves do not allow us to perceive good value and worth in this life just yet.

So if you were to struggle with anhedonia and/or depression which turns off the reward system and prevents the experience of pleasant emotions, then thoughts of your life having good value and worth to you cannot make this life nor anything else in this life including your own family of any good value and worth to you.

They would just simply be the spoken words and phrases "good" and "worth" and nothing more. It would be no different than if I was blind and told myself that I can still perceive the light given off by objects. That I can still perceive sight in my life. That I can have sight in my life.

I wouldn't. I would just be doing nothing more than telling myself words and phrases. So as long as our reward system is turned off due to depression and/or anhedonia, then we have become blind. But in a different way. We have become blind to perceiving the good value and worth from this life. We cannot have good value and worth in our lives here.

But once our reward system turns back on when our depression and/or anhedonia passes, then once our thoughts send the signal to our reward system and give us the experience of pleasant emotions, then that is when our lives and things in this life can be of good value and worth to us since we would now be able to perceive good value and worth towards those said things.

Therefore, our pleasant emotions are like a sacred transcending heavenly energy (life force) that courses through us and transcends us. We need them in order to make us good people and our lives good and worth living. Without them, then we and our lives are stripped to nothing.

It then would not matter how much we help others in this life, how much intelligence and creativity we have, how much things we do in this life, etc.

It would all be nothing to us and we would still be nothing more than like lifeless walking drones. Here again, to somehow think your life can still be good and worth living anyway here would be false and delusional. You would only be fooling (deluding) yourself here.

Furthermore, if you were to experience pleasant emotions and you were to judge them as being bad or neutral and that it is instead other things in this life that have the good value and worth for us besides our pleasant emotions, then you would be deluding yourself here as well.

Your thinking would be deluding yourself from the truth here. That truth being that our pleasant emotions are a sacred transcending life force (energy) and are the only things that can make us and our lives good and worth living.

So good is something scientific and not a moral (personal value judgment). The moral version of good cannot make us and our lives good and worth living. Good comes from our experience of pleasant feelings/emotions. Bad is also scientific. It comes from our unpleasant feelings/emotions. Having neither pleasant nor unpleasant feelings/emotions would make you and your life neutral (neither good or bad).

So the moral version of good and bad is false (fake) as I've said before and is a deluded lie passed down unto humanity. Therefore, your teachings of what makes a valuable life good and worth living was all a deluded lie this whole entire time and you never even knew it.

Our pleasant emotions are a sacred heavenly transcending energy. So they would be heaven. But our unpleasant feelings/emotions are like hell. Depression (hopelessness) being the worst of them all. Our brains have the ablity to perceive bad value and bad worth which would only be through our unpleasant feelings/emotions.

So if you struggle with depression, then your life has the worst bad value bad worth. But having neither pleasant nor unpleasant feelings/emotions would neither be heaven nor hell. It would be like limbo.

So with all of this being said, you can see why I am so unaccepting and pessimistic towards the suffering, depression, anhedonia, problems, and mortality of this life. You can see why I cannot have any optimistic attitude here of my life still being good and worth living despite my anhedonia and depression.

I refuse to have my life brought down by depression and anhedonia. I need to be always up and running like a powerful awesome intangible deity who can never suffer, never have problems, never has depression or anhedonia, and can live in eternal bliss. That is the only life worth living to me and is the only life that gives me good meaning and worth.

If I could somehow be resurrected through science in the future to live such an eternal blissful life, then I could compose like never before and my compositions would be of epic magnitude since they would now have inspiration to them.

They would now have the inspiration of the heavenly sacred transcending life force which would be my pleasant emotions. I could use that inspiration to create compositions of all types whether they be gothic, dark, beautiful, joyful, etc. Those compositions would then give me a transcending sense of good value and worth (my pleasant emotions) which would, in turn, inspire more and more compositions to be created.

So it would be a cycle here in which I become a greater and greater composer and compose more and more greater compositions while getting more and more transcending good value and worth from them and this life which would be me experiencing pleasant emotions from them and from this life.

But now that I have lost all my pleasant emotions, that cycle has been broken. I am now doing nothing more than composing like a lifeless drone for a possible future in which I could recover from this anhedonia and have my pleasant emotions back to me. It is only then would I be able to create great compositions since they would be inspired.

Sure, I could create great compositions from just my intelligence, knowledge, and creativity alone without my pleasant emotions. But first off, I would not be able to get any good value and worth from that at all. Second, they still would be nowhere near as great compared to if I did have my pleasant emotions (my inspiration).

So with this also being said, the depression and anhedonia (suffering/absence of pleasure) of this life will not have me and my composing dream. If I had to live most or my entire life having depression and/or anhedonia in the pretend imagined situation, then I would end my life so that those said things cannot have me, my life, and my composing dream. I do not accept them and I do not live with them. I mean, who could possibly accept and live with having a life that is nothing good and worth living to them at all?

So the only greatest life for me to look forward to now would be an eternal blissful life of no more suffering created by science in the future and have science resurrect me to live that one and only greatest life to me. That is, if it is even possible for science to do this. Science has been achieving many feats that many people thought were impossible in the past. So maybe science can also find a way to create an eternal blissful life for us all and to resurrect those who have missed out on such a life and have them live this new life.

So now I have taught unto you a life lesson of truth. It is a truth that no one is yet aware of. Everyone is still deluded into thinking that the moral version of good and bad still makes them and their lives good and bad when it is all a deluded lie. So spread the word to all the villagers and to everyone across the world.

Teach them this life lesson of truth. Only then one day the world would perhaps realize this truth and it would change all of humanity and how we all think. It would really encourage scientists all around the world to find a cure for suffering, depression, anhedonia, and mortality like never before knowing that our pleasant emotions (our reward system) is all that we have to make our lives good and worth living to us."

Salesman's Response: "..."

*The salesman is now at a complete loss of words. The teachings of this fellow customer are just simply unheard of. The salesman and the customer depart and go about their own ways of life. But the salesman inquires of all the wisest of villagers. But even they are at a complete loss of words.*

Response: I see now. That whole situation of the customer and salesman has opened my eyes to the now very likely truth.

My Reply: But we can't say for sure yet whether it is true or not even though I am absolutely convinced of it. I am still on the quest for truth here and I am still trying to find the answer here as to whether my whole theory on good and bad is true or not.

Response: Then I hope someday you find the answer young man. If you ever find the answer, please share the word of truth to me and others.

My Reply: I will. As for now though, no one should say that my theory is true or false just yet just as I should not say my theory is true or false yet either. We should all instead keep an open mind on my theory until one day the truth can be discovered.

There were plently of things that people thought were nonsense in the past. But as it turned out, those things were proven true through science later on. So maybe my theory is true as well regardless of how much others disagree with it. But then again, maybe my theory is false. We don't know yet. We just all have to wait until the day the truth arrives.