As for your first statement about suffering, it's all just a matter of our logic brain which is used for survival and problem solving as I've said before. The logic area of our brain without our feelings of pleasure just allows us to live and make decisions/solve problems anyway because I think it was just evolved ("programmed") that way. It would be no different than how a virus or a cell can still live even though it has no feelings/emotions of pleasure or suffering. But here again, our thinking without our feelings of pleasure is not a genuine reason to live and it does not make our lives good and worth living at all without our feelings of pleasure and we are only fooling ourselves into thinking our lives can be good and worth living to us anyway without our feelings of pleasure.
So people who find reason to live without their feelings of pleasure are living like nothing more than a conscious version of a virus or a cell. It is only the higher elite class evolved human beings who can easily see past this "trick" that our logical minds are playing on us into making us think that our lives are still good and worth living without our feelings of pleasure. People who still think they can live a life of good value and worth to them without their feelings of pleasure, these are the lower class and less evolved human beings. They are less evolved like that of a living virus or a cell as I've said before. Only the higher class human beings can see the true motive (incentive) of our very lives that makes our lives good and worth living which would be our feelings of pleasure.
As for your 2nd statement, that idea could very well be pleasurable and would make that a good idea to the bodybuilder if he derived feelings of pleasure from that idea. But again, it's just his feelings of pleasure here in the moment that would define his life as being good and worth living and not the greater amount of pleasure he would get later on in life. This is because our conscious can only be here in the moment as I've said before. He might have the better life later on. But he is only here in the moment which means that only his feelings of pleasure here in the moment define his life as being good and worth living right now.
As for your 3rd statement, our logical reasons are never genuine reasons. Only our feelings of pleasure make our lives genuinely good and worth living.
As for your 4th statement, fear is a response to run away. Therefore, this soldier's act to fight was forced (faked) and not genuine. She was having the flight response. Therefore, if she has chosen to run away, then that would be a genuine act. Only her having the fight (anger) response would make her act of fighting genuine. Go back and read my new argument that I made earlier since it explains more on this. Actually, since feelings of compassion might motivate us to fight, then perhaps her act was something genuine. But if she felt no emotions or felt nothing but depression, then that said act would not be genuinely expressed. Feelings of depression (hopelessness) demotivate us while feeling neither pleasure nor suffering neither motivates us or demotivates us.
Finally, for our personal lives, good and bad are scientific. They are not moral value judgments. What we morally define as good or bad to us in our lives would not be referred to as being good or bad to us. The good and bad to us in our personal lives can only be our experiences of pleasant feelings/emotions and unpleasant feelings/emotions. So our good and bad are the functions of our brains that give us pleasant feelings/emotions and unpleasant feelings/emotions. They can't be any other function of our brains since all our other brain functions are different. We might be able to experience feelings/emotions of pleasure and suffering from those other functions. But that can only be if we have our actual feelings/emotions of pleasure and suffering to do so. Our experience of pleasant feelings/emotions is pure goodness while our experience of unpleasant feelings/emotions is pure badness. Our pleasant feelings/emotions are the only things that breathe pure goodness into us and our lives while our unpleasant feelings/emotions are the only things that breathe pure badness into us and our lives.
Some say that the mind is a separate entity from the brain just like how movement is a separate entity from the Earth. The Earth and our brains are made up of atoms and particles. But there is no atom/particle of movement or consciousness. That all our mental experiences are a separate entity from the brain. Therefore, if that is the case, then good would be defined as our mental experience of pleasant feelings/emotions while bad would be defined as our mental experience of unpleasant feelings/emotions.
As a matter of fact, I think it would be safe to say that the moral version of good and bad does not exist at all and nor does any other version of good and bad exist either. For example, instead of saying something such as that you are a good cook, you would instead say that you are a skilled 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. This would be because good and bad can only be defined through our positive and negative tones as I've said before. Since only our pleasant or unpleasant moods genuinely define our positive and negative tones, then this would mean that the pleasant and unpleasant moods themselves would be what we would instead refer to as good (pleasant) and bad (unpleasant). Only if we derive feelings of pleasure from something would that then make that said thing good to us and only if we derive feelings of suffering from something would it make that said thing bad to us.
If you say something such as that a plant as a sufficient amount of water or that someone is a skilled cook in an uplifting and optimistic tone of voice without your feelings of pleasure, then that is implying a good value judgment to that. As I said before, only our feelings of pleasure genuinely define our positive tones. So while you are having no feelings of pleasure, then that version of "sufficient" and "skilled" would make no sense to have that positive tone towards them. It would make no sense to attribute that good value judgment to them when the fact is that only our feelings of pleasure define the good value and worth of us and our lives.
If we have a good thought or a bad thought which would send a pleasure signal or a signal to the brain that would give us feelings of suffering, then those thoughts would not be good or bad thoughts. They would just simply be referred to as thoughts of getting what we want in life or thoughts of not getting what we want in life. Once the feelings of pleasure and suffering are triggered, that is when those said thoughts become good or bad to us. Since I think we can feel pleasure or suffering from our thoughts and other conscious functions alone only providing that we have our feelings of pleasure and suffering to do so, then this is the reason why those thoughts would be said to be either good or bad to us the moment we feel pleasure or suffering from them.
