• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

My support for hedonism

Spockrates

Wonderer.
As for your 1st statement, I think desire could be a pleasant and an unpleasant emotion. I am not sure.

Then I think we should do our level best to become sure! For I not only wonder but having given it some thought, I now think this might be the key to open the door behind which the truth we seek about the what gives value to our lives resides.

Please allow me to explain. My hope was that we might find that desire is a pleasant emotion, and so I might then gladly say, "See, my friend? All is not lost! For as long as you continue to desire you have pleasant emotions that give value to your life."

It seems, though my hope was in vain. For I now believe desire is not pleasure but pain. I'll try to show my meaning:

One desire I'm sure we both share is hunger, for we both want food. I suspect you have had the same experience I infrequently have of being hungry, which is to desire food. This experience I find painful. I've tried fasting in the past, as well as dieting, and I found the longer I went without satisfying this desire, the more intense the pain.

The pleasure comes when I eat, for I get relief from the pain. The desire to eat, though is not this pleasure, but the cause of seeking it. The pleasure, it seems to me, is not the cause, but the effect. It's not the wanting to eat but the actual eating. That is, the pleasure is the relieving of the pain.

The same might be said of the love the Greeks named Eros, which is a lustful or sometimes romantic love. When I was dating the girl to whom I'm now married, I felt great pain--even stronger than that of hunger--when I was away from her. The longer I was away, the more intense the pain. The only relief I found was when we were together. The desire to be with her was the painful cause. It's effect was the relief of the pain, which came from being with her again, that was pleasurable.

So if if we are correct that desire is an emotion, and if you are correct that only pleasurable emotions have value and unpleasant emotions have no value, then what should we say of Desire? Is she she a woman who gives our lives worth and a reason to live for her? Or is she a worthless wench whom we'd be better off without?
 
Last edited:

The Transcended Omniverse

Well-Known Member
I agree that desire can be an unpleasant emotion as well. For example, if you are in the process of being murdered, you would have the desire to escape. That form of desire would be an unpleasant emotion.

But I think desire can also be a pleasant emotion. For example, if you were told that you were going to get a new videogame system, then you would be happy and would desire that. It would now be a form of desire that is a pleasant emotion.

So if my desire was an unpleasant emotion (which it is since I am depressed because I want my life of pleasure back), then my life only has bad value as well as neutral value since I have no pleasure. So this is the only form of desire I have.

But if it were proven to me right now that I would recover my pleasure eventually, then that would give me the pleasant version of desire. I would have this form of desire right now if it were proven to me that I would recover my pleasure. Since desire is a pleasant emotion and I said that I feel no pleasure, then I think this would actually mean I do have at least a minuscule amount of pleasure at times. But it is a level of pleasure so small that I am unable to detect it. So I am unable to even detect any amount of good value or worth in my life. So it is like I actually have no amount of good value or worth in my life.
 

Spockrates

Wonderer.
I agree that desire can be an unpleasant emotion as well. For example, if you are in the process of being murdered, you would have the desire to escape. That form of desire would be an unpleasant emotion.

But I think desire can also be a pleasant emotion. For example, if you were told that you were going to get a new videogame system, then you would be happy and would desire that. It would now be a form of desire that is a pleasant emotion.

Yes, I see what you mean. I think in the case of an approaching birthday or Christmas or some other cause for receiving gifts, the anticipation can be pleasant, as one has hopeful expectation of a gift. The waiting is tolerable because the exact date is known. But let's say someone promises such a gift and weeks then months go by. As the expectation of the gift becomes less, the pleasure of hope turns to a the pain of losing hope.

But I'm not so sure I'd say the desire IS sadness. I think, instead I'd say the lack of fulfillment of the desire CAUSES sadness. For the desire is the same--a longing for playing the video games. Since it is exactly the same desire it cannot at first be happiness and later be sadness. For if it ceases to be happy it is no longer the desire it was!

So what do you think? Are happiness and sadness desires? Or are they effects of the fulfillment or lack of fulfillment of those desires?

So if my desire was an unpleasant emotion (which it is since I am depressed because I want my life of pleasure back), then my life only has bad value as well as neutral value since I have no pleasure. So this is the only form of desire I have.

But if it were proven to me right now that I would recover my pleasure eventually, then that would give me the pleasant version of desire. I would have this form of desire right now if it were proven to me that I would recover my pleasure. Since desire is a pleasant emotion and I said that I feel no pleasure, then I think this would actually mean I do have at least a minuscule amount of pleasure at times. But it is a level of pleasure so small that I am unable to detect it. So I am unable to even detect any amount of good value or worth in my life. So it is like I actually have no amount of good value or worth in my life.

So why do you believe you will not recover? What is the cause of your lack of pleasurable feelings? Is it brought on by the use of a drug, such as meth? Is it a chemical imbalance of your brain, which might be corrected by drugs prescribed by a psychiatrist? If you'd rather not say, that's OK. The questions are personal and I don't deserve--much less expect--an answer.
 
Last edited:

The Transcended Omniverse

Well-Known Member
As for your 1st statement, I am just going to agree with you on this and say that desire is a pleasant emotion although I am not completely 100% sure on this.

As for what caused my anhedonia, I am now going to give you an entire explanation of my situation:

I have a chronic absence of pleasure that is there all the time 24/7 all day everyday and there are never any brief given moments of pleasure. I think I have finally figured out what is causing it. I have had two phobias going on which would be my fear of no escape (agoraphobia) and my fear of losing control. These phobias were a constant daily part of my life and caused me constant fear and panic all throughout the day each day. Since I have a fear of no escape, then that means I cannot escape any situation I am in. I cannot escape the situation of my nose always constantly being there in my view and neither can I escape the sense of touch. Since those are situations that are constant 24/7 and there is contantly no escape from those situations 24/7, then this is the reason why the fear response to those situations was constant as well. It is the very reason why I had panic attack after panic attack constantly and could not seem to calm down. In other words, the panic fear response was being perpetuated constantly in response to a constant fearful situation.

But I then developed a moment of severe depression from having those panic attacks. Once I immediately had this moment of depression, I noticed that is when my fears and my ability to experience pleasure immediately turned off. Ever since then, I had this chronic absence of pleasure. As my depression went away, my absence of pleasure has only gotten worse over time. My absence of pleasure is not depression. Depression is a feeling of hopelessness. Absence of pleasure has a different term for it. It is known as "anhedonia." I think it might be a negative symptom of schizophrenia since my doctor told me it was. However, I am not sure if I have schizophrenia for sure though.

But as for the reason why my feelings of pleasure have turned off and have remained turned off with no degree of recovery whatsoever yet, I think I know why that is. The brain works as a whole. You have parts of the brain that experience stress and other emotions while you have other parts of the brain that are connected to them. These other parts regulate our mood and stress responses. What I think has happened here is that the depression stress response I had with that moment of depression disrupted the regulation of the fear stress response from those phobias I was having at the same time. So my fear stress response has been dysregulated by that moment of depression. I think there was some brain damage caused by that moment of depression due to my possible schizophrenia as well as all my previous moments of depression that led into dysregulation of my fear stress response.

So now, even though that moment of depression has passed, my fear stress response is still going on in response to those phobias I am still having as a constant part of my daily life. But this time, since that fear stress response is not being regulated, my feelings of pleasure and the feelings of fear themselves are turned off. The mind turns off emotions when there is a dysregulation. I am really thinking here that if I never had those fears and I just had this moment of depression alone, then I would not have developed this anhedonia at all. I would have my full feelings of pleasure back to me right now.

The fact that I am still in those fearful situations I've mentioned 24/7 constantly, then this means that this dysregulated fear stress response is also constant 24/7. But as long as the fear stress response is still perpetuating, then that will only serve to perpetuate my anhedonia. In other words, as long as that fear stress response is still going on, my brain won't ever get the chance to regulate (recover) again since that fear stress response is just too much and overwhelms any possibility of the brain regulating it again. As I've said before, the very reason why my feelings of pleasure and fear are turned off is because of the fact that one part of my brain is overly active (which would be the fear stress response part of my brain) while other parts of the brain are turned off (which would be the parts of my brain that experience feelings of pleasure and those feelings of fear). In order for my feelings of pleasure to return, then I would have to somehow get rid of these fears which would get rid of that fear stress response and would allow my feelings of pleasure to turn back on.

But unfortunately, there are never any given brief moments in which that fear stress response can ever turn off since I am always constantly in those inescapable fearful situations. Even in my dreams I can't experience any feelings of pleasure which also means that dysregulated stress response is still going on even during my sleep. I also have a strong pulse. You can feel it on the lower left front of my neck. I never had that strong pulse before I had this anhedonia. Therefore, this says to me that there is a dysregulated stress response going on. Stress responses cause strong pulses. So this is another reason why I come to this conclusion.

But in the event that my feelings of pleasure do somehow return even despite my fears still being there, then I fear that I might not be able to really calm down. This is because my phobia is a fear of losing control and not being able to remain calm. Therefore, if my fears do fully return, then how can I use any coping skills to calm down if my fear (phobia) is not being able to calm down? Some say to face the fear. But since my fear is being in a state of panic many times each day, then I just don't think that would work. If I have a fear of having all those panic attacks, then just facing one of my panic attacks just isn't going to work, I don't think. Even if I could be in the mindstate of facing my fears, then I could only achieve that mindstate and could only maintain it for brief moment before I revert back into my normal fearful escaping mindstate. Also, you cannot rationalize with phobias. You cannot talk yourself out of them since that is not how the brain works with phobias. In other words, people can tell me all they want that those situations I fear are just a normal part of our daily lives and that it is good that, for example, my nose is always there or that my sense of touch is always there. But I am well aware of this and that does not calm these phobias down one bit at all.

But continuing on here. If my brain were to somehow be "reset," then that might cause my fear to be regulated again and my pleasure might return. Maybe my brain is like a frozen computer that needs to be reset back to normal. Therefore, would knocking me out with a gas mask cause my fear response to shut down and that when I wake back up, everything will turn back on which means my mind would have been reset? Furthermore, those shots they administer to outbursting psychotic patients to calm their stress responses down, would giving me one of those shots also reset my brain as well? In other words, once the shot or a tranqulizer gun is given to me, my brain functions would completely calm down (shut down) for that time being. Then once they turn back on, then wouldn't that reset my brain and allow my fears to be regulated again?

One last thing I would like to say here is that I am looking into a medication known as "Parnate" to treat this anhedonia since I heard that it does help many people with anhedonia. I'm not sure if it will work in my situation. But it is definitely worth a try since all my other medication and all other treatments/supplements have failed.

I have always been the type of person with defective mood regulation and a bad memory. Therefore, I think this is a feature of schizophrenia. So maybe there could be the strong possibility of me having schizophrenia even though I have never heard voices or seen things. I notice that with my moments of panic and depression, that I can not seem to calm those depressive and fear responses down. So I am really thinking that I do have defective memory and mood/stress regulation.

Now it is said that the mind turning off your pleasure and other emotions is a natural defensive (protective) response. They say that it is a response to overwhelming trauma and stress. If you feel that you cannot take the stress any longer, then the brain will turn off that stress along with your feelings of pleasure so that you won't have to face that stress anymore. I said earlier that I'm not sure whether my absence of pleasure is the result of this or is instead the result of brain damage and my mind turning off those emotions as a means to try and regulate/repair itself again. But only those fears I was having as a constant part of my daily life were turned off while all other fears are left on. I have a fear of the Earth constantly speeding and that fear has been turned off. But my fear of driving (speeding) in the car is left fully turned on. Did my mind only turn off those constant fears because they were too much and that it was just simply too much to have constant fear and panic going on throughout the day each day? Or is it because having constant fear would serve to hinder the mind repairing/regulating itself again and that my mind had to turn off those constant fears in order to try and regulate/repair itself again?

Perhaps this will offer an important clue as to what caused my absence of pleasure. I noticed that when I had that moment of depression in which my fears and pleasure was turned off, that my fears were fully turned off while my pleasure has only half turned off. But as that moment of depression went away, then my pleasure did not fully turn back on. Instead, it faded further and further away until it completely turned off over time. So as my depression (hopelessness) has gotten better over time, my absence of pleasure has only gotten worse over time.

As for my phobias and trying to eliminate them in order to try and turn my pleasure back on, I heard of something known as "Energy Psychology" that is known to work well with phobias. So I will talk about that with a mental health professional/therapist and see if I can have it done. Now I have mentioned earlier the Fear Elimination Technique I came up with on my own to eliminate phobias. This technique eliminates the perceived situation that is causing the fear which would then eliminate the fear since that fear response would no longer be needed. For example, if you have the fear of air, then you could tell yourself that there is no way for you to perceive the air since it is invisible and that you would just be simply fearing the thought of air being around you and not the actual air since you can't perceive it. If you felt the air, then it would just be simply you fearing the sense of touch and not the actual air itself which can't be perceived. Therefore, I was also planning on using this Fear Elimination technique on my phobias. My phobias being agoraphobia (fear of no escape) and my fear of losing control. But I can't seem to use it for the situation of the sight of my nose always being there in my vision and me being unable to escape that sight. I could look away, but that is not escaping from that sight of my nose.

I did, however, manage to successfully use that technique on one of my other feared situations that I could not escape from. That situation would be me fearing the ground being everywhere and that no matter where I go, the ground is always there and I cannot escape from that situation. I have told myself that the sight of the ground is an illusion since the truth is that the ground looks completely different on an atomic scale. What it would really look like is a bunch of atoms and particles spaced apart and moving around. Since I can't percieve those atoms and particles since they are so small, then that has eliminated my fear of not being able to escape from the ground. But now that fear has moved onto me not being able to escape the actual sight of the ground rather than the ground itself. That fear I can't seem to eliminate at all using this Fear Elimination Technique. I think I have to some degree and I have also done so to some degree with my fear of the Earth speeding, but those fears have not been reduced enough to the point where my pleasure can return.

I noticed that my fears (panic) does return in seldom moments. But there are never any moments in which my feelings of pleasure return. Therefore, if this absence of pleasure is a natural defensive response to prevent me from having those fears, then why do the fears return anyway for some brief moments and then turn back off again? I am thinking that maybe perhaps my anhedonia (absence of pleasure) is not a response to protect me from the overwhelming experience of those fears. Rather, I think it might be a response to try and recover/regulate my brain again. I'm thinking this because those brief moments in which my fears return could be my mind achieving moments of regulation. But then my brain becomes dysregulated again and turns those fears back off again.

One last thing I would like to say here is that I heard TMS is a procedure which gives an electric magnetic shock to the brain to try and repair/regulate it again. But shouldn't that only work if something is wrong with the brain such as a chemical imbalance or some mental defects? If there is no mental defect or chemical imbalance causing this absence of pleasure and my absence of pleasure is just the result of my mind protecting myself from those overwhelming fears, then I don't think TMS is going to work for it and I would be causing possible brain damage from that procedure when there was nothing wrong or defective with my brain to begin with (that is, providing TMS is known to cause brain damage. I know it has caused impairments for many people and I am wondering if those mental impairments are the result of brain damage caused by the TMS procedure). I don't think TMS should work for natural stress responses that are not caused/perpetuated by chemical imbalances or mental defects. This is because those stress responses are just how the brain is supposed to work. It is supposed to have the stress response in response to stressful situations in life. Therefore, that would not need an electric shock since that is supposed to be there. It might work to help it somehow in a given brief moment. But that normal stress response should return in response to that stressful situation simply because that is how the brain is supposed to work. Therefore, I do not wish to cause my brain needless damage from a TMS procedure when there might be nothing wrong with my brain that even needs to be fixed through medication, exercise, supplements, or shock treatments. It would instead need some form of therapy aimed towards changing your thinking. But then again, there could definitely be something wrong with my brain that needs to be fixed through those things I've just mentioned. It's just that I don't know how to find out what the cause of my anhedonia is and whether my anhedonia is the result of a mental defect/brain damage/chemical imbalance or is just a normal stress response to protect me from those overwhelming phobias.

Now I need to know if TMS causes any brain damage or not. If it does, then I will only use it as a last resort if my feelings of pleasure don't seem to recover. I also wonder if my brain has been damaged in such a way that it can never recover. I am wondering if that moment of depression caused my possible schizophrenia do damage my brain in such a way that my feeling of pleasure can never recover again. But if my anhedonia is a normal stress response to turn off my emotions since those phobias were just too overwhelming for me to experience, then as long as those phobias are still here, then my mind will continue to keep those said fears and my feelings of pleasure turned off. I don't know whether my pleasure will ever recover or not. I think it would need very intensive and effective therapies if it is the case that my anhedonia is the issue of my mind protecting me from those overwhelming fears as a natural protective defensive response against the overwhelming constant presence of those fears.

In conclusion, I am seeing a therapist known as "Jim." But even though he does know some things, he does not know all that much and can't help me that much. This is the reason why I feel that it is absolutely neccessary for me to be in the hands of a highly trained mental health professional who has had years and years of experience who has studied up on the brain for years as well as on therapies that might help me. Jim just simply talks to me and gives coping advice and does some therapies with me. But I am not sure they are the right or effective therapies to help this anhedonia. So this is the reason why I would want to be in the hands of a highly trained mental health professional instead because my anhedonia might be helped then. But as long as I continue with Jim, then my anhedonia might never ease up. However, Jim might be able to help this anhedonia, I am not sure. But if this anhedonia is a normal stress response to protect me from those overwhelming fears and that there is no chemical imbalance or mental defect causing this anhedonia, then supplements, medication, and exercise will not help it. It would have to be an issue with my thinking that is causing this anhedonia. So therapies that are aimed towards relaxation, thought, etc. would be the only thing that would help my anhedonia in this situation.

If my brain is healthy and there is nothing wrong with it and my anhedonia is just a normal stress response to protect me from the overwhelming presence of those phobias, then I am not going to end my life. I am not going to waste away and throw away a brain that is actually healthy and not defective. I would live all I can to try and recover my pleasure. But if my anhedonia is the result of a chemical imbalance or a mental defect as a result of schizophrenia or something else, then I would become enraged and have less optimism in life. I would then consider throwing away my brain since it is defective. It would be like throwing away a defective robot or machine into the metal scraps. A biological machine since that is all my brain is. I am not some human being who has some intangible soul that is not prone to malfunction. I am just a biological machine that is prone to malfunction. So that is why I would consider ending my life. But that would only be in the event that my feelings of pleasure never seem to recover back to me.

If this anhedonia goes on for years and years (like 10 years) and never gets better, then I would consider the thought of ending my life. There are many many people who struggle with chronic 24/7 anhedonia everyday for years and years. They never have any given brief moments of pleasure at all. Especially if anhedonia is a negative symptom of schizophrenia. Negative symptoms of schizophrenia are said to be far more persistent and less likely to recover although they do recover for many people. However, many people say that they have struggled with chronic 24/7 anhedonia all day everyday for 20 years or even 40 years and that it has never gotten better for them despite all possible treatments they have tried and such. But then again, there are those many types of people who do say it has either gotten sufficiently better for them and also that it has even fully recovered for them. But even so, anhedonia tends to be extremely persistent unlike depression. This is because depression tends to come and then completely pass later on although there are those types of people who do continue to struggle with it for years. My moments of depression come and just completely pass later on although I have had many many moments of depression that were perpetuated. But as for this anhedonia, this is a different story. My anhedonia always remains constant all day everyday and there are never any given brief moments of pleasure at all. It has been going on for 1 year now exactly and still hasn't gotten any better yet. I have kept track of time and it really has been going on for 1 year exactly.

Just one last thing here. Anyone who calls me names such as that I am selfish and a crybaby for thinking my feelings of pleasure are the only things that give good value and worth to me, my life, and composing dream, this is false. I am an innocent person who deserves his good life of pleasure, too. As for anyone who tells me that I can still find good value and worth in this life without my feelings of pleasure, I wholeheartedly disagree on this. I have a few thick printed out packets which is a debate I have had with an intelligent person online who claims that my life can still have good value and worth without my feelings of pleasure. It would seem as though I have won the debate. Not only is it my personal opinion that feelings of pleasure are the only things that define us and our lives as being good and worth living, but good and bad refer to something scientific and are not moral value judgments and do not refer to anything else in life. Good and bad refer to our experiences of pleasant and unpleasant emotions/feelings in our brains. All those other things we call good and bad in life, we wouldn't refer to them as being good or bad. Instead of saying that you are a good cook, we would instead say that you are a skilled or efficient cook. Instead of saying that a plant has a good amount of water, we would instead say that the plant has a sufficient amount of water. Instead of saying that you are a bad cook, we would instead say you are an unskilled or inefficient cook. And instead of saying that a plant has a bad amount of water, we would instead say that the plant is low on water or has an insufficient amount of water.

So what's the difference here? What would be the difference between saying that a plant has a sufficient amount of water or that a plant has a good amount of water? The answer to that would be that how we define good is through our uplifting and optimistic tones. All good messages have uplifting and optimistic tones, all bad messages have negative and depressing tones, and neutral messages just have neutral (indifferent) tones. The words skilled or efficient would be these neutral messages. Since our tones can only be genuinely defined through our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions, then this would mean that our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions are what define the good and bad value of us and our lives. If we had no pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions and expressed positive or negative tones and actions anyway, then they would not be genuine tones, expressions, or actions. They would only be genuine in the sense that they are genuine acts of science. Genuine acts of mere atomic processes, if you will.

Good is defined as us having the incentive (motivation) to live and to live to pursue our goals/dreams and to live for others. But this motivation cannot be defined through our personalities, expressions, tones, or actions alone in of themselves without our pleasant feelings/emotions. Even if we could define that as motivation, then that form of motivation would not make our lives good or worth living without our pleasant feelings/emotions. As I've said before, the actual pleasant emotion known as motivation is what defines the good value and worth of us and our lives to us. This would be because "good" is not a moral value judgment and does not refer to anything else in life. It instead refers to our pleasant feelings/emotions. So if you had no pleasant feelings/emotions, then no one special and great to you in your life can be anyone great to you. They cannot have any good value or worth to you without your pleasant emotions to make them someone of good value and worth to you. You would only be fooling yourself through your thinking alone if you thought that your life can still be good and worth living and that other people and other things in life can have good value and worth to you without your pleasant feelings/emotions.

To think that you can have good value and worth in your life just from thinking so without your pleasant feelings/emotions because of the simple fact that you think that the thought itself is literally good because it is the word (thought) "good" being spoken in your mind, then this would be false. It would be no different than if you thought of the word helium and you said that your thoughts are helium. Helium is just a word being spoken in our minds. But the actual helium would be something scientific which would be an element. Therefore, in that same sense, good can only be something scientific as well which would be our experience of pleasant feelings/emotions in our brains. Same thing for bad in that bad would be our experience of unpleasant feelings/emotions in our brains. The thoughts of good and bad are just the spoken words good and bad in our minds.

Our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions are the only things that define the good and bad value of us and our lives. If you experience a pleasant feeling or emotion, then that experience is said to be pure goodness. If you experience an unpleasant feeling or emotion, then that experience is said to be pure badness. If we had no pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions, then nothing can be good or bad about us or our lives. We and our lives would have neutral (neither good or bad) value. Our personalities and actions do not make us good or bad people. Only our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions make us and our lives good or bad.

Our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions are our overseers. They dictate the good and bad value we and our lives have. They are the only biological functions of our brains that generate good and bad value in our lives. They are a feeling/emotional version of good and bad and it is not a moral value judgment on my part or on anyone else's to say they are good and bad feelings/emotions. They are good and bad in of themselves.
 
Last edited:

Spockrates

Wonderer.
If you mean desire is sometimes a pleasurable feeling and other times an u pleasurable feeling, then I agree we agree.

:)
 

The Transcended Omniverse

Well-Known Member
Sure, I will just go ahead and agree with this. But as for the debate we are having, are you convinced yet that our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions are the only things that give good or bad value to us and our lives?
 

Spockrates

Wonderer.
As for your 1st statement, I am just going to agree with you on this and say that desire is a pleasant emotion although I am not completely 100% sure on this.

As for what caused my anhedonia, I am now going to give you an entire explanation of my situation:

I have a chronic absence of pleasure that is there all the time 24/7 all day everyday and there are never any brief given moments of pleasure. I think I have finally figured out what is causing it. I have had two phobias going on which would be my fear of no escape (agoraphobia) and my fear of losing control. These phobias were a constant daily part of my life and caused me constant fear and panic all throughout the day each day. Since I have a fear of no escape, then that means I cannot escape any situation I am in. I cannot escape the situation of my nose always constantly being there in my view and neither can I escape the sense of touch. Since those are situations that are constant 24/7 and there is contantly no escape from those situations 24/7, then this is the reason why the fear response to those situations was constant as well. It is the very reason why I had panic attack after panic attack constantly and could not seem to calm down. In other words, the panic fear response was being perpetuated constantly in response to a constant fearful situation.

But I then developed a moment of severe depression from having those panic attacks. Once I immediately had this moment of depression, I noticed that is when my fears and my ability to experience pleasure immediately turned off. Ever since then, I had this chronic absence of pleasure. As my depression went away, my absence of pleasure has only gotten worse over time. My absence of pleasure is not depression. Depression is a feeling of hopelessness. Absence of pleasure has a different term for it. It is known as "anhedonia." I think it might be a negative symptom of schizophrenia since my doctor told me it was. However, I am not sure if I have schizophrenia for sure though.

But as for the reason why my feelings of pleasure have turned off and have remained turned off with no degree of recovery whatsoever yet, I think I know why that is. The brain works as a whole. You have parts of the brain that experience stress and other emotions while you have other parts of the brain that are connected to them. These other parts regulate our mood and stress responses. What I think has happened here is that the depression stress response I had with that moment of depression disrupted the regulation of the fear stress response from those phobias I was having at the same time. So my fear stress response has been dysregulated by that moment of depression. I think there was some brain damage caused by that moment of depression due to my possible schizophrenia as well as all my previous moments of depression that led into dysregulation of my fear stress response.

So now, even though that moment of depression has passed, my fear stress response is still going on in response to those phobias I am still having as a constant part of my daily life. But this time, since that fear stress response is not being regulated, my feelings of pleasure and the feelings of fear themselves are turned off. The mind turns off emotions when there is a dysregulation. I am really thinking here that if I never had those fears and I just had this moment of depression alone, then I would not have developed this anhedonia at all. I would have my full feelings of pleasure back to me right now.

The fact that I am still in those fearful situations I've mentioned 24/7 constantly, then this means that this dysregulated fear stress response is also constant 24/7. But as long as the fear stress response is still perpetuating, then that will only serve to perpetuate my anhedonia. In other words, as long as that fear stress response is still going on, my brain won't ever get the chance to regulate (recover) again since that fear stress response is just too much and overwhelms any possibility of the brain regulating it again. As I've said before, the very reason why my feelings of pleasure and fear are turned off is because of the fact that one part of my brain is overly active (which would be the fear stress response part of my brain) while other parts of the brain are turned off (which would be the parts of my brain that experience feelings of pleasure and those feelings of fear). In order for my feelings of pleasure to return, then I would have to somehow get rid of these fears which would get rid of that fear stress response and would allow my feelings of pleasure to turn back on.

But unfortunately, there are never any given brief moments in which that fear stress response can ever turn off since I am always constantly in those inescapable fearful situations. Even in my dreams I can't experience any feelings of pleasure which also means that dysregulated stress response is still going on even during my sleep. I also have a strong pulse. You can feel it on the lower left front of my neck. I never had that strong pulse before I had this anhedonia. Therefore, this says to me that there is a dysregulated stress response going on. Stress responses cause strong pulses. So this is another reason why I come to this conclusion.

But in the event that my feelings of pleasure do somehow return even despite my fears still being there, then I fear that I might not be able to really calm down. This is because my phobia is a fear of losing control and not being able to remain calm. Therefore, if my fears do fully return, then how can I use any coping skills to calm down if my fear (phobia) is not being able to calm down? Some say to face the fear. But since my fear is being in a state of panic many times each day, then I just don't think that would work. If I have a fear of having all those panic attacks, then just facing one of my panic attacks just isn't going to work, I don't think. Even if I could be in the mindstate of facing my fears, then I could only achieve that mindstate and could only maintain it for brief moment before I revert back into my normal fearful escaping mindstate. Also, you cannot rationalize with phobias. You cannot talk yourself out of them since that is not how the brain works with phobias. In other words, people can tell me all they want that those situations I fear are just a normal part of our daily lives and that it is good that, for example, my nose is always there or that my sense of touch is always there. But I am well aware of this and that does not calm these phobias down one bit at all.

But continuing on here. If my brain were to somehow be "reset," then that might cause my fear to be regulated again and my pleasure might return. Maybe my brain is like a frozen computer that needs to be reset back to normal. Therefore, would knocking me out with a gas mask cause my fear response to shut down and that when I wake back up, everything will turn back on which means my mind would have been reset? Furthermore, those shots they administer to outbursting psychotic patients to calm their stress responses down, would giving me one of those shots also reset my brain as well? In other words, once the shot or a tranqulizer gun is given to me, my brain functions would completely calm down (shut down) for that time being. Then once they turn back on, then wouldn't that reset my brain and allow my fears to be regulated again?

One last thing I would like to say here is that I am looking into a medication known as "Parnate" to treat this anhedonia since I heard that it does help many people with anhedonia. I'm not sure if it will work in my situation. But it is definitely worth a try since all my other medication and all other treatments/supplements have failed.

I have always been the type of person with defective mood regulation and a bad memory. Therefore, I think this is a feature of schizophrenia. So maybe there could be the strong possibility of me having schizophrenia even though I have never heard voices or seen things. I notice that with my moments of panic and depression, that I can not seem to calm those depressive and fear responses down. So I am really thinking that I do have defective memory and mood/stress regulation.

Now it is said that the mind turning off your pleasure and other emotions is a natural defensive (protective) response. They say that it is a response to overwhelming trauma and stress. If you feel that you cannot take the stress any longer, then the brain will turn off that stress along with your feelings of pleasure so that you won't have to face that stress anymore. I said earlier that I'm not sure whether my absence of pleasure is the result of this or is instead the result of brain damage and my mind turning off those emotions as a means to try and regulate/repair itself again. But only those fears I was having as a constant part of my daily life were turned off while all other fears are left on. I have a fear of the Earth constantly speeding and that fear has been turned off. But my fear of driving (speeding) in the car is left fully turned on. Did my mind only turn off those constant fears because they were too much and that it was just simply too much to have constant fear and panic going on throughout the day each day? Or is it because having constant fear would serve to hinder the mind repairing/regulating itself again and that my mind had to turn off those constant fears in order to try and regulate/repair itself again?

Perhaps this will offer an important clue as to what caused my absence of pleasure. I noticed that when I had that moment of depression in which my fears and pleasure was turned off, that my fears were fully turned off while my pleasure has only half turned off. But as that moment of depression went away, then my pleasure did not fully turn back on. Instead, it faded further and further away until it completely turned off over time. So as my depression (hopelessness) has gotten better over time, my absence of pleasure has only gotten worse over time.

As for my phobias and trying to eliminate them in order to try and turn my pleasure back on, I heard of something known as "Energy Psychology" that is known to work well with phobias. So I will talk about that with a mental health professional/therapist and see if I can have it done. Now I have mentioned earlier the Fear Elimination Technique I came up with on my own to eliminate phobias. This technique eliminates the perceived situation that is causing the fear which would then eliminate the fear since that fear response would no longer be needed. For example, if you have the fear of air, then you could tell yourself that there is no way for you to perceive the air since it is invisible and that you would just be simply fearing the thought of air being around you and not the actual air since you can't perceive it. If you felt the air, then it would just be simply you fearing the sense of touch and not the actual air itself which can't be perceived. Therefore, I was also planning on using this Fear Elimination technique on my phobias. My phobias being agoraphobia (fear of no escape) and my fear of losing control. But I can't seem to use it for the situation of the sight of my nose always being there in my vision and me being unable to escape that sight. I could look away, but that is not escaping from that sight of my nose.

I did, however, manage to successfully use that technique on one of my other feared situations that I could not escape from. That situation would be me fearing the ground being everywhere and that no matter where I go, the ground is always there and I cannot escape from that situation. I have told myself that the sight of the ground is an illusion since the truth is that the ground looks completely different on an atomic scale. What it would really look like is a bunch of atoms and particles spaced apart and moving around. Since I can't percieve those atoms and particles since they are so small, then that has eliminated my fear of not being able to escape from the ground. But now that fear has moved onto me not being able to escape the actual sight of the ground rather than the ground itself. That fear I can't seem to eliminate at all using this Fear Elimination Technique. I think I have to some degree and I have also done so to some degree with my fear of the Earth speeding, but those fears have not been reduced enough to the point where my pleasure can return.

I noticed that my fears (panic) does return in seldom moments. But there are never any moments in which my feelings of pleasure return. Therefore, if this absence of pleasure is a natural defensive response to prevent me from having those fears, then why do the fears return anyway for some brief moments and then turn back off again? I am thinking that maybe perhaps my anhedonia (absence of pleasure) is not a response to protect me from the overwhelming experience of those fears. Rather, I think it might be a response to try and recover/regulate my brain again. I'm thinking this because those brief moments in which my fears return could be my mind achieving moments of regulation. But then my brain becomes dysregulated again and turns those fears back off again.

One last thing I would like to say here is that I heard TMS is a procedure which gives an electric magnetic shock to the brain to try and repair/regulate it again. But shouldn't that only work if something is wrong with the brain such as a chemical imbalance or some mental defects? If there is no mental defect or chemical imbalance causing this absence of pleasure and my absence of pleasure is just the result of my mind protecting myself from those overwhelming fears, then I don't think TMS is going to work for it and I would be causing possible brain damage from that procedure when there was nothing wrong or defective with my brain to begin with (that is, providing TMS is known to cause brain damage. I know it has caused impairments for many people and I am wondering if those mental impairments are the result of brain damage caused by the TMS procedure). I don't think TMS should work for natural stress responses that are not caused/perpetuated by chemical imbalances or mental defects. This is because those stress responses are just how the brain is supposed to work. It is supposed to have the stress response in response to stressful situations in life. Therefore, that would not need an electric shock since that is supposed to be there. It might work to help it somehow in a given brief moment. But that normal stress response should return in response to that stressful situation simply because that is how the brain is supposed to work. Therefore, I do not wish to cause my brain needless damage from a TMS procedure when there might be nothing wrong with my brain that even needs to be fixed through medication, exercise, supplements, or shock treatments. It would instead need some form of therapy aimed towards changing your thinking. But then again, there could definitely be something wrong with my brain that needs to be fixed through those things I've just mentioned. It's just that I don't know how to find out what the cause of my anhedonia is and whether my anhedonia is the result of a mental defect/brain damage/chemical imbalance or is just a normal stress response to protect me from those overwhelming phobias.

Now I need to know if TMS causes any brain damage or not. If it does, then I will only use it as a last resort if my feelings of pleasure don't seem to recover. I also wonder if my brain has been damaged in such a way that it can never recover. I am wondering if that moment of depression caused my possible schizophrenia do damage my brain in such a way that my feeling of pleasure can never recover again. But if my anhedonia is a normal stress response to turn off my emotions since those phobias were just too overwhelming for me to experience, then as long as those phobias are still here, then my mind will continue to keep those said fears and my feelings of pleasure turned off. I don't know whether my pleasure will ever recover or not. I think it would need very intensive and effective therapies if it is the case that my anhedonia is the issue of my mind protecting me from those overwhelming fears as a natural protective defensive response against the overwhelming constant presence of those fears.

In conclusion, I am seeing a therapist known as "Jim." But even though he does know some things, he does not know all that much and can't help me that much. This is the reason why I feel that it is absolutely neccessary for me to be in the hands of a highly trained mental health professional who has had years and years of experience who has studied up on the brain for years as well as on therapies that might help me. Jim just simply talks to me and gives coping advice and does some therapies with me. But I am not sure they are the right or effective therapies to help this anhedonia. So this is the reason why I would want to be in the hands of a highly trained mental health professional instead because my anhedonia might be helped then. But as long as I continue with Jim, then my anhedonia might never ease up. However, Jim might be able to help this anhedonia, I am not sure. But if this anhedonia is a normal stress response to protect me from those overwhelming fears and that there is no chemical imbalance or mental defect causing this anhedonia, then supplements, medication, and exercise will not help it. It would have to be an issue with my thinking that is causing this anhedonia. So therapies that are aimed towards relaxation, thought, etc. would be the only thing that would help my anhedonia in this situation.

If my brain is healthy and there is nothing wrong with it and my anhedonia is just a normal stress response to protect me from the overwhelming presence of those phobias, then I am not going to end my life. I am not going to waste away and throw away a brain that is actually healthy and not defective. I would live all I can to try and recover my pleasure. But if my anhedonia is the result of a chemical imbalance or a mental defect as a result of schizophrenia or something else, then I would become enraged and have less optimism in life. I would then consider throwing away my brain since it is defective. It would be like throwing away a defective robot or machine into the metal scraps. A biological machine since that is all my brain is. I am not some human being who has some intangible soul that is not prone to malfunction. I am just a biological machine that is prone to malfunction. So that is why I would consider ending my life. But that would only be in the event that my feelings of pleasure never seem to recover back to me.

If this anhedonia goes on for years and years (like 10 years) and never gets better, then I would consider the thought of ending my life. There are many many people who struggle with chronic 24/7 anhedonia everyday for years and years. They never have any given brief moments of pleasure at all. Especially if anhedonia is a negative symptom of schizophrenia. Negative symptoms of schizophrenia are said to be far more persistent and less likely to recover although they do recover for many people. However, many people say that they have struggled with chronic 24/7 anhedonia all day everyday for 20 years or even 40 years and that it has never gotten better for them despite all possible treatments they have tried and such. But then again, there are those many types of people who do say it has either gotten sufficiently better for them and also that it has even fully recovered for them. But even so, anhedonia tends to be extremely persistent unlike depression. This is because depression tends to come and then completely pass later on although there are those types of people who do continue to struggle with it for years. My moments of depression come and just completely pass later on although I have had many many moments of depression that were perpetuated. But as for this anhedonia, this is a different story. My anhedonia always remains constant all day everyday and there are never any given brief moments of pleasure at all. It has been going on for 1 year now exactly and still hasn't gotten any better yet. I have kept track of time and it really has been going on for 1 year exactly.

Just one last thing here. Anyone who calls me names such as that I am selfish and a crybaby for thinking my feelings of pleasure are the only things that give good value and worth to me, my life, and composing dream, this is false. I am an innocent person who deserves his good life of pleasure, too. As for anyone who tells me that I can still find good value and worth in this life without my feelings of pleasure, I wholeheartedly disagree on this. I have a few thick printed out packets which is a debate I have had with an intelligent person online who claims that my life can still have good value and worth without my feelings of pleasure. It would seem as though I have won the debate. Not only is it my personal opinion that feelings of pleasure are the only things that define us and our lives as being good and worth living, but good and bad refer to something scientific and are not moral value judgments and do not refer to anything else in life. Good and bad refer to our experiences of pleasant and unpleasant emotions/feelings in our brains. All those other things we call good and bad in life, we wouldn't refer to them as being good or bad. Instead of saying that you are a good cook, we would instead say that you are a skilled or efficient cook. Instead of saying that a plant has a good amount of water, we would instead say that the plant has a sufficient amount of water. Instead of saying that you are a bad cook, we would instead say you are an unskilled or inefficient cook. And instead of saying that a plant has a bad amount of water, we would instead say that the plant is low on water or has an insufficient amount of water.

So what's the difference here? What would be the difference between saying that a plant has a sufficient amount of water or that a plant has a good amount of water? The answer to that would be that how we define good is through our uplifting and optimistic tones. All good messages have uplifting and optimistic tones, all bad messages have negative and depressing tones, and neutral messages just have neutral (indifferent) tones. The words skilled or efficient would be these neutral messages. Since our tones can only be genuinely defined through our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions, then this would mean that our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions are what define the good and bad value of us and our lives. If we had no pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions and expressed positive or negative tones and actions anyway, then they would not be genuine tones, expressions, or actions. They would only be genuine in the sense that they are genuine acts of science. Genuine acts of mere atomic processes, if you will.

Good is defined as us having the incentive (motivation) to live and to live to pursue our goals/dreams and to live for others. But this motivation cannot be defined through our personalities, expressions, tones, or actions alone in of themselves without our pleasant feelings/emotions. Even if we could define that as motivation, then that form of motivation would not make our lives good or worth living without our pleasant feelings/emotions. As I've said before, the actual pleasant emotion known as motivation is what defines the good value and worth of us and our lives to us. This would be because "good" is not a moral value judgment and does not refer to anything else in life. It instead refers to our pleasant feelings/emotions. So if you had no pleasant feelings/emotions, then no one special and great to you in your life can be anyone great to you. They cannot have any good value or worth to you without your pleasant emotions to make them someone of good value and worth to you. You would only be fooling yourself through your thinking alone if you thought that your life can still be good and worth living and that other people and other things in life can have good value and worth to you without your pleasant feelings/emotions.

To think that you can have good value and worth in your life just from thinking so without your pleasant feelings/emotions because of the simple fact that you think that the thought itself is literally good because it is the word (thought) "good" being spoken in your mind, then this would be false. It would be no different than if you thought of the word helium and you said that your thoughts are helium. Helium is just a word being spoken in our minds. But the actual helium would be something scientific which would be an element. Therefore, in that same sense, good can only be something scientific as well which would be our experience of pleasant feelings/emotions in our brains. Same thing for bad in that bad would be our experience of unpleasant feelings/emotions in our brains. The thoughts of good and bad are just the spoken words good and bad in our minds.

Our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions are the only things that define the good and bad value of us and our lives. If you experience a pleasant feeling or emotion, then that experience is said to be pure goodness. If you experience an unpleasant feeling or emotion, then that experience is said to be pure badness. If we had no pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions, then nothing can be good or bad about us or our lives. We and our lives would have neutral (neither good or bad) value. Our personalities and actions do not make us good or bad people. Only our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions make us and our lives good or bad.

Our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions are our overseers. They dictate the good and bad value we and our lives have. They are the only biological functions of our brains that generate good and bad value in our lives. They are a feeling/emotional version of good and bad and it is not a moral value judgment on my part or on anyone else's to say they are good and bad feelings/emotions. They are good and bad in of themselves.

Wow, I can't imagine what you are going through. I do have family who suffer from panic attacks and depression, but not as severely as you describe.

As far as losing the pleasure of everyday living, this is actually one of the Negative Symptoms of schizophrenia listed in this artical on the National Institute of Mental Health website:

NIMH · Schizophrenia

The hearing voices and other hallucinations the artical calls Positive Symptoms, which you indicated you don't have. There are also Cognative Symptoms, which the artical says occur as having trouble remembering or organizing thoughts. You mentioned having memory issues, but from what I've seen, your thoughts are well organized.

The artical indicates that those with schizophrenia often have some of the symptoms, but not all. So it is possible your loss of good feeling is the only, or most prominent symptom of your mental disorder.

I would not recommend using antipsychotic drugs unless prescribed by a licensed psychyatist who is aware of the side effects and will monitor you reactions to the drugs carefully. I'd recommend seeing such a psychiatist if Jim is only a medical doctor or therapist, but I'm no expert on psychiatry.
 

Spockrates

Wonderer.
Sure, I will just go ahead and agree with this. But as for the debate we are having, are you convinced yet that our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions are the only things that give good or bad value to us and our lives?

Not yet. Please let me explain why. What we are doing is defining the word value. Does the word apply to emotions, only? Or does it apply to other things in our lives, such as logic? So I started to say, the other day that when walking to work I had an idea. I did not give you the full explanation of that idea. I'll do so now:

What if our lives are like a fruit tree? Let's say a tree you own produces the best apples you've ever tasted. You let me taste one, and I agree.

So you ask, "Isn't this the best apple tree ever?"

I reply, "No way! The bark on your tree tastes just awful! There is noting good about your apple tree."

So now you are confused and ask, "Well, yes the bark of this tree doesn't taste good. But the tree made the fruit. Doesn't that mean the tree is good at producing tasty fruit?"

I immediately respond, "No, not at all! The only thing anyone can say is good is that which has a pleasant taste on the tongue. Your tree has an unpleasant taste, so it is obviously bad."

Would you say I was sincere, but sincerely wrong? Or would you say I was speaking the genuine truth?
 
Last edited:

The Transcended Omniverse

Well-Known Member
Good and bad value only apply to our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions. A pleasant feeling/emotion is good while an unpleasant feeling/emotion is bad.

Now if I took an apple, ate it, and got feelings/emotions of pleasure from it, then that would make that apple good to me. If I also derived pleasure from the tree, then that would make that tree good to me. Same thing for you. If you derived pleasure from the apple, then that would make those apples good to you. If you derived pleasure from the tree, then that would make the tree good to you the moment you felt pleasure from those things. But if you were to derive unpleasant feelings/emotions from the apple, then that would make that apple bad to you. If you derived unpleasant feelings/emotions from the tree, then that would make that tree bad to you. If you derived unpleasant feelings/emotions from the idea of the tree producing those apples which were good to you since you derived pleasure from them, then it would make that idea bad to you.

So you would be speaking the truth in saying that the tree itself would be bad to you if you felt any displeasure from it. However, the apples would still remain good to you as long as you derived pleasant feelings/emotions from them.
 

Spockrates

Wonderer.
Good and bad value only apply to our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions. A pleasant feeling/emotion is good while an unpleasant feeling/emotion is bad.

Now if I took an apple, ate it, and got feelings/emotions of pleasure from it, then that would make that apple good to me. If I also derived pleasure from the tree, then that would make that tree good to me. Same thing for you. If you derived pleasure from the apple, then that would make those apples good to you. If you derived pleasure from the tree, then that would make the tree good to you the moment you felt pleasure from those things. But if you were to derive unpleasant feelings/emotions from the apple, then that would make that apple bad to you. If you derived unpleasant feelings/emotions from the tree, then that would make that tree bad to you. If you derived unpleasant feelings/emotions from the idea of the tree producing those apples which were good to you since you derived pleasure from them, then it would make that idea bad to you.

So you would be speaking the truth in saying that the tree itself would be bad to you if you felt any displeasure from it. However, the apples would still remain good to you as long as you derived pleasant feelings/emotions from them.

And let's say I replied, "No, emotions are not good--only taste is! It matters not how I feel about the taste. What matters is how the tongue senses it. If the taste is sweet, the apple tastes good, and so it is a good apple. It doesn't matter how I feel about the taste of apples, or even if I hate the way they taste. Sweet taste is what makes anything in our lives good. It is the only thing that gives our lives value. Bitter taste is what makes anything in our lives bad and makes our lives valueless.

"Let's say I like the bitter taste and it gives me pleasure to eat the tree. Well, I might feel good about eating it, but I'd only be fooling myself. It would be like a biological android who feels emotions and can see, hear and touch, but who has no sense of smell or taste. I might like to eat apples, saying I enjoy the texture and the crispness. But there would be no good in eating them at all. For I would taste nothing and only what can be tasted is good. Emotions are just feelings. Feelings can taste nothing at all. So it is impossible for emotions to be good or bad. They are neutral, and so they do not add to or lessen the value of our lives."

After saying this, how would you convince me I'm wrong?
 
Last edited:

The Transcended Omniverse

Well-Known Member
At this point, I don't think I can. Maybe, but I'm not sure. I couldn't convince you that you are wrong through just the discussions themselves we are having now. Maybe there could be a way though, I'm not sure. But it is a scientific fact and it is only how our brains work that all pleasant feelings/emotions are good and all unpleasant feelings/emotions are bad. Good and bad refer to something scientific which would be our experiences of pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions in our brains. Good and bad do not refer to anything else in life. Therefore, you are going to have to speak to an expert neurologist or an evolutionary biologist so they can continue on from my debate and convince you of this very fact.
 

Spockrates

Wonderer.
At this point, I don't think I can. Maybe, but I'm not sure. I couldn't convince you that you are wrong through just the discussions themselves we are having now. Maybe there could be a way though, I'm not sure. But it is a scientific fact and it is only how our brains work that all pleasant feelings/emotions are good and all unpleasant feelings/emotions are bad. Good and bad refer to something scientific which would be our experiences of pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions in our brains. Good and bad do not refer to anything else in life. Therefore, you are going to have to speak to an expert neurologist or an evolutionary biologist so they can continue on from my debate and convince you of this very fact.

OK, so in response let's say I say: "It's a scientific fact that sweet things taste good and bitter things taste bad. Ask any biologist. Feelings cannot taste anything at all. So science proves emotions are not good."

How would you reason with me, then?
 

Spockrates

Wonderer.
Let's say I added this: "I'm even worse off than that android, because I have Dysgeusia. It makes everything taste bitter. Lots of things give me pleasant emotions, like the beatiful colors of the leaves of the apple tree, and the wonderful sound of the breeze blowing through those leaves, and the warm feeling of the sun on my face that shines between the leaves. But I have nothing good in my life--no good reason to live--because I can taste nothing sweet at all."

How might you show me I'm mistaken?
 
Last edited:

Spockrates

Wonderer.
Or if you still have no idea how to convince me, will you try to guess what logical or factual errors I'm making? Here is the logical (or should I say illogical?) argument:

  1. It's a scientific fact that sweet things taste good and bitter things taste bad.
  2. Bad tasting things are bad, and so they give our lives no value, no worth, no beauty or greatness.
  3. Good tasting things are good, and give our lives value, worth, beauty and greatness.
  4. Logic can taste nothing sweet or bitter, and so it is not good or bad. It does not add to or subtract from the value, worth, beauty or greatness of our lives.
  5. Emotions also can taste nothing sweet or bitter, and so they are not good or bad. They do not add to or reduce the value, worth, beauty or greatness of our lives.
  6. A life without value, worth, beauty or greatness is not worth living.
Therefore,​

A life where I taste nothing sweet is not worth living.
What premises do you find false, or how do the premises not support the conclusion?
 
Last edited:

Spockrates

Wonderer.
This might help. It seems premises (2) and (3) are not worded correctly. My actual meaning must be this:

  1. It's a scientific fact that sweet things taste good and bitter things taste bad.
  2. Bad tasting things are [the only things that are] bad, and so they [alone] give our lives no value, no worth, no beauty or greatness.
  3. Good tasting things are [the only things that are] good, and so they [alone] give our lives value, worth, beauty and greatness.
  4. Logic can taste nothing sweet or bitter, and so it is not good or bad. It does not add to or subtract from the value, worth, beauty or greatness of our lives.
  5. Emotions also can taste nothing sweet or bitter, and so they are not good or bad. They do not add to or reduce the value, worth, beauty or greatness of our lives.
  6. A life without value, worth, beauty or greatness is not worth living.
Therefore, a life where nothing tastes sweet is not worth living.
How about now? Do you see where I've made factual or logical errors?
 

The Transcended Omniverse

Well-Known Member
You said that they are the only good and bad things in life. It would be illogical because to say that it is, for example, a scientific fact that gold shines brightly while copper shines dim, to then say that gold is the only thing that shines brightly and that copper is the only thing that shines dim would be false here. This is because we have used science and have concluded through science that gold is not the only thing that shines brightly and that copper is not the only thing that shines dim. However, we have also used science to conclude that our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions are the only things that make us and our lives good and bad. So when that scientific proof is added into that argument (my argument for pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions being the only good and bad things in life), then the argument becomes valid. But it will take me forever to go and find this scientific proof since it would be buried within the internet. Therefore, this is the reason why I said to you to ask a neurologist or an evolutionary biologist and they will tell you.

But we did evolve pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions for a reason. That being because they tell us what is good or bad in life. They might tell us in the wrong situations. For example, if you were angry towards someone who you thought was mean, but actually was nice. But even so, they are the only good and bad messages to the brain. Again, these good and bad messages are not in the form of spoken thoughts in our minds. They are purely in a pleasant/unpleasant feeling/emotion form. Our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions are the only biological functions of our brains that generate good and bad value in our lives. Our logical thinking part of our brains just simply directs us in situations that would keep us and others alive and just simply directs our sense of good and bad value (our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions) in the right direction. In my example with you feeling anger towards someone who you thought was mean to you, then you would use the logic thinking part of your brain to instead realize that this person was being nice which would instead give you feelings of pleasure towards that person. Your anger (rage) would then instead be directed towards those people who are truly mean. Therefore, our logic thinking part of our brains just simply directs us. It does not define the good or bad value of us and our lives without our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions. It wouldn't be directing us towards good or bad situations since situations cannot be good or bad in of themselves without our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions. It would just simply be directing us towards situations that solve problems and benefit our survival and the survival of others.

But I will leave you with this link (url) below. It is known as Psychological Hedonism which is supported by science and now has been proven as fact. It has now been proven for a scientific fact that only our pleasant feelings/emotions give good value to us and our lives while only unpleasant feelings/emotions give bad value to us and our lives. Hedonism is not just some simple opinion of someone such as someone who says: "I think the color red is the best color there is in the world and is the only good color there is in life." Hedonism is not like that. Hedonism has been supported by science and has now finally been proven as a scientific fact. But this link here just simply explains hedonism. As for the scientific proof, as I've said before, it is buried within the internet and you are going to have to talk to an expert neurologist and/or an expert evolutionary biologist:

Hedonism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

I will say this here again. Good and bad only refer to conscious/unconscious experiences. Those conscious/unconscious experiences would obviously be our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions. So good and bad refer to something scientific here.
 
Last edited:

Spockrates

Wonderer.
...
You said that they are the only good and bad things in life. It would be illogical because to say that it is, for example, a scientific fact that gold shines brightly while copper shines dim, to then say that gold is the only thing that shines brightly and that copper is the only thing that shines dim would be false here. This is because we have used science and have concluded through science that gold is not the only thing that shines brightly and that copper is not the only thing that shines dim. However, we have also used science to conclude that our pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions are the only things that make us and our lives good and bad. So when that scientific proof is added into that argument (my argument for pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions being the only good and bad things in life), then the argument becomes valid. But it will take me forever to go and find this scientific proof since it would be buried within the internet. Therefore, this is the reason why I said to you to ask a neurologist or an evolutionary biologist and they will tell you.

Absolutely! The reason premises (2) and (3) are false is this: Regarding the words value, worth and good, I presumed that this specific truth (the sense of taste has value) is a general truth that applies to all possible situations (only the sense of taste has value). This is a false presumption. Since the premises are based on this presumption, the conclusion must also be false. While it might be true that the sense of taste has value, worth and goodness, it is not true that there is no other thing that has value, worth and goodness besides the sense of taste. Students of logic call this the Sweeping Generalization logical fallacy:

Logical Fallacies» Sweeping Generalisation Fallacy

Does this accurately describe the error made by me in the example?

Moreover, although premise (1) may be true, I made the same factual error. I assumed that since one group of scientists agree with me, their scientific truth must be the only truth that applies to the words value, worth and good. While it might be true that biologists find the sense of taste to have value, worth and goodness, there might very well be other scientist and other experts--neurologists, for example--who believe other things besides the sense of taste have value, worth and goodness. Here, too I'm guilty of the committing the logical fallacy of making a Sweeping Generalization.

Now if I were to say you cannot disagree with me, because biologists say this is a scientific fact, I would also be committing another logical fallacy known as making an Appeal to an Authority. Other authorities and even other scientists might very well disagree with the scientists to whose authority I appeal. Rather than say, "Biologists say it is true, so it must be!" I should instead explain the reasons why they say it is true, so you and I might see whether we have irrefutable, logical reasons to agree with the authority you cite.

Your logical fallacy is appeal to authority

Does this also correctly explain the error made by me in the example?
 
Last edited:

The Transcended Omniverse

Well-Known Member
Actually, pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions being the only good and bad things in life is just as a proven scientific fact as the Earth revolving around the sun. The only reason why other scientists and other biologists would disagree with pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions being the only good and bad things in life, this would be because they are unaware that this is a proven scientific fact.
 

Spockrates

Wonderer.
Actually, pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions being the only good and bad things in life is just as a proven scientific fact as the Earth revolving around the sun. The only reason why other scientists and other biologists would disagree with pleasant/unpleasant feelings/emotions being the only good and bad things in life, this would be because they are unaware that this is a proven scientific fact.

But have you answered my question? I asked if I correctly described the error I made in the example. I said nothing about you committing an error.
 
Top