The evolutionary definition of good and bad

God, the FSM, and everything else.
Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:27 pm

Note to Reader: This explanation is too long. Therefore, instead go to this link since this is the most effective summary and it also explains how we might be able to discover evidence for my view/idea:

viewtopic.php?f=30&t=28445

Note to Reader: Since there are a lot of packets, then I will narrow it down to the ones you need to read. If you don't wish to read all of these packets which explain how I define my own values and morality (as well as other concepts pertaining to my personal life), then just read the summary packet which sums up very briefly my whole philosophy.

But if you have the time to read at least 2, 3, or 4 packets, then I would also highly recommend reading packet #4, #5, and #6 since they are the 2nd most important packets you need to read. Also, just to let you know, the final packet (#14) has an actual conversation between me and someone else.

I will now proceed to present the Deviant Art links to all my packets.

Here are the Deviant Art links:

Summary Packet: http://fav.me/dbgkmdl

#1: http://fav.me/dbgif18

#2: http://fav.me/dbdjr9g

#3: http://fav.me/dbda76j

#4: http://fav.me/dbeivqu

#5: http://fav.me/dbc55yl

#6: http://fav.me/dbg3ikh

#7: http://fav.me/dbflptn

#8: http://fav.me/dbda7dz

#9: http://fav.me/dbftmc1

#10: http://fav.me/dbc4hm4

#11: http://fav.me/dbe6jcj

#12: http://fav.me/dbc4h3l

#13: http://fav.me/dbc4hqf

#14: http://fav.me/dbc4w49
Last edited by Omniverse on Thu Jul 27, 2017 12:17 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8008
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Poodle » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:31 pm

Good. Pretty good, at least. At least it was until you threw that 'therefore' at me. And then a second 'therefore'. Wherefore your therefores?

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:34 pm

Poodle wrote:Good. Pretty good, at least. At least it was until you threw that 'therefore' at me. And then a second 'therefore'. Wherefore your therefores?


I only stated "therefore" once in that post.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28967
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Gord » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:46 pm

Omniverse wrote:
Poodle wrote:Good. Pretty good, at least. At least it was until you threw that 'therefore' at me. And then a second 'therefore'. Wherefore your therefores?

I only stated "therefore" once in that post.

Aha! An editorial task! Finally something up my alley!

Omniverse wrote:...You can think to yourself and have the optimistic attitude that your life has good value and worth to you without your good feelings, but you would not actually be aware of that. Therefore, nothing would have any real good value and worth to you and you would only be fooling and deluding yourself into thinking otherwise. This whole concept also applies to our bad feelings (bad moods) and having neither our good nor bad feelings.

Our good and bad feelings are, therefore, chemical messages to our brains that tell us that certain things are good, bad, and worth something to us. It is the evolutionary definition of good, bad, and worth that scientists have yet to discover. This is my definition of good, bad, worth, joy, beauty, suffering, misery, etc. It is based upon my own personal experience....

Two therefores.




...okay, maybe that was less "editorial" and more of a "counting task", but at least it didn't require using more than two fingers, so I'm still considering it editorial.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:49 pm

Gord wrote:
Omniverse wrote:
Poodle wrote:Good. Pretty good, at least. At least it was until you threw that 'therefore' at me. And then a second 'therefore'. Wherefore your therefores?

I only stated "therefore" once in that post.

Aha! An editorial task! Finally something up my alley!

Omniverse wrote:...You can think to yourself and have the optimistic attitude that your life has good value and worth to you without your good feelings, but you would not actually be aware of that. Therefore, nothing would have any real good value and worth to you and you would only be fooling and deluding yourself into thinking otherwise. This whole concept also applies to our bad feelings (bad moods) and having neither our good nor bad feelings.

Our good and bad feelings are, therefore, chemical messages to our brains that tell us that certain things are good, bad, and worth something to us. It is the evolutionary definition of good, bad, and worth that scientists have yet to discover. This is my definition of good, bad, worth, joy, beauty, suffering, misery, etc. It is based upon my own personal experience....

Two therefores.




...okay, maybe that was less "editorial" and more of a "counting task", but at least it didn't require using more than two fingers, so I'm still considering it editorial.


But this is completely irrelevant here to the topic at hand and I don't see the point or the issue here. It was just two 'therefores' and nothing more. It wasn't like my post was unbearable to read due to multitudes of 'therefores.'

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19173
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:53 pm

Don't get him started on therefives.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7258
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby TJrandom » Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:22 pm

Omniverse wrote:... It wasn't like my post was unbearable to read ...


Maybe not unbearable to read, but why the low hurdle? Or was that your target? Actually, I was thinking tortured….

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Regular Poster
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Cadmusteeth » Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:39 pm

Even if there is no objective standard of good or bad would you just suddenly drop your moral code because of it? Is it pointless to think about it?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8008
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Poodle » Sun Apr 02, 2017 9:16 pm

Omniverse wrote:
Gord wrote:
Omniverse wrote:
Poodle wrote:Good. Pretty good, at least. At least it was until you threw that 'therefore' at me. And then a second 'therefore'. Wherefore your therefores?

I only stated "therefore" once in that post.

Aha! An editorial task! Finally something up my alley!

Omniverse wrote:...You can think to yourself and have the optimistic attitude that your life has good value and worth to you without your good feelings, but you would not actually be aware of that. Therefore, nothing would have any real good value and worth to you and you would only be fooling and deluding yourself into thinking otherwise. This whole concept also applies to our bad feelings (bad moods) and having neither our good nor bad feelings.

Our good and bad feelings are, therefore, chemical messages to our brains that tell us that certain things are good, bad, and worth something to us. It is the evolutionary definition of good, bad, and worth that scientists have yet to discover. This is my definition of good, bad, worth, joy, beauty, suffering, misery, etc. It is based upon my own personal experience....

Two therefores.




...okay, maybe that was less "editorial" and more of a "counting task", but at least it didn't require using more than two fingers, so I'm still considering it editorial.


But this is completely irrelevant here to the topic at hand and I don't see the point or the issue here. It was just two 'therefores' and nothing more. It wasn't like my post was unbearable to read due to multitudes of 'therefores.'


'Therefore' means something. It is not a throwaway word like 'maybe'. Your conclusions do not necessarily follow from your premises.

User avatar
Nobrot
Poster
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 10:59 pm

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Nobrot » Sun Apr 02, 2017 9:47 pm

Omniverse wrote:...Actually, according to my definition of good and bad, then I don't think there would be situations or things out there that would hold any good value, bad value, worth, joy, beauty, etc. in their own right and it is simply only a matter of our good and bad feelings that dictate the good and bad value and worth in our lives.

Ah so these are your other three posts. I did wonder. They are well laid out, well formatted with paragraphs n all, the spelling and punctuation is impeccable.
Unfortunately I have a very limited understanding of postmodernism.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28967
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Gord » Mon Apr 03, 2017 12:19 am

Omniverse wrote:
Gord wrote:
Omniverse wrote:
Poodle wrote:Good. Pretty good, at least. At least it was until you threw that 'therefore' at me. And then a second 'therefore'. Wherefore your therefores?

I only stated "therefore" once in that post.

Aha! An editorial task! Finally something up my alley!

Omniverse wrote:...You can think to yourself and have the optimistic attitude that your life has good value and worth to you without your good feelings, but you would not actually be aware of that. Therefore, nothing would have any real good value and worth to you and you would only be fooling and deluding yourself into thinking otherwise. This whole concept also applies to our bad feelings (bad moods) and having neither our good nor bad feelings.

Our good and bad feelings are, therefore, chemical messages to our brains that tell us that certain things are good, bad, and worth something to us. It is the evolutionary definition of good, bad, and worth that scientists have yet to discover. This is my definition of good, bad, worth, joy, beauty, suffering, misery, etc. It is based upon my own personal experience....

Two therefores.




...okay, maybe that was less "editorial" and more of a "counting task", but at least it didn't require using more than two fingers, so I'm still considering it editorial.

But this is completely irrelevant here to the topic at hand and I don't see the point or the issue here. It was just two 'therefores' and nothing more. It wasn't like my post was unbearable to read due to multitudes of 'therefores.'

Counting is important! If we cannot count to two, how can we ever hope to count the multiverses? We'll never be able to get past one!!
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Apr 03, 2017 1:06 am

Omniverse wrote: I only stated "therefore" once in that post.

Hi Matt MSV7. You stupidly left your old trolling name on the posts you are spamming here, on other forums.

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Mon Apr 03, 2017 2:48 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Omniverse wrote: I only stated "therefore" once in that post.

Hi Matt MSV7. You stupidly left your old trolling name on the posts you are spamming here, on other forums.


That's fine. I have no issue with that. :)

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Apr 03, 2017 2:51 am

Omniverse AKA Matt MSV7 AKA MarkGab5 BANNED AKA Cobalt6 BANNED wrote: That's fine. I have no issue with that.
So have you strangled a bully using your legs?

Are you still lying about composing music?

Are you still trolling Science and skeptic forums?


Omniverse AKA Matt MSV7 AKA MarkGab5 BANNED AKA Cobalt6 BANNED wrote:Ok..i suppose this will sound a bit chain mail ish but here goes..I remember when a friend of mine told me about this incident that happened in mich. and that at the time it was reported people thought it was almost unbelievable .. it goes like this: a highschool student described as a nerd is being bullied, constantly is what is described everytime Ive seen this story on other forums, and then the victim went for revenge. but he didnt kill him with a gun or a knife he killed a guy bigger than him with his legs. the story describes the victim pouncing on the aggressor in a school bathroom, and wrapping his legs around the aggressors neck for 10 minutes till he died. since legs are bigger than say hands id imagine there would be less pressure overall in comparison to say hands on a neck. anyone know if this is true or actually possible?

viewtopic.php?t=21471#p364041

And for lovers of good music, here is one of the "compositions" that Matt MSV7 was spamming on forums.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCB6_KXTwkY

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Sat Jun 03, 2017 6:13 pm

(post deleted)
Last edited by Omniverse on Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7258
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby TJrandom » Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:38 pm

Sorry, but given your `history`, any subsequent posts need to be shorter than the bible if you want me to read them. It would help with word counts, and even scrolling.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

More spam from Matt MSV7

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Jun 04, 2017 12:50 am

I didn't bother reading any of Matt MSV7's crap this time. It's just the same trolling spam over and over and over again.

User avatar
Flash
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6001
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:09 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Flash » Sun Jun 04, 2017 5:16 am

Oh boy! He's got time to write all of that? :mrgreen:
When I feel like exercising, I just lie down until the feeling goes away. Paul Terry

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2952
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby ElectricMonk » Sun Jun 04, 2017 5:29 am

The evolutionary definition of good and bad:

everything that is still around at time t + x is good.
everything that has gone extinct is bad.

that's the sum total of it.


Now, there are strategies that will make it more likely that your specie will make it to t+x, mostly symbiosis with a bit of added parasitism.
No money-back guarantees, though.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:34 am

Flash wrote:Oh boy! He's got time to write all of that? :mrgreen:

Nope. For the last four years I have watched how he does this. He has a pre-written word document page open and simply copies the same sentences and paragraphs today as he was spamming on other skeptic forums three years ago. I can find the exact same post of four or five forums.

It's always the same story. "I am really sad because I can't compose music and I will kill myself unless you pay me attention and solve my problem." However he simultaneously goes to children's video game forums and posts his music videos and pretends to be a child. I recently "blew" some of his other spock puppet names on other skeptic forums to put him under pressure and he immediately started trolling children's forums again.
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=28112&p=577236#p577192

I assume he is a child pervert first and his spams on skeptic forums are his secondary self-justification..."it's not my fault"

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Sun Jun 04, 2017 3:35 pm

To summarize, you can define value, worth, joy, beauty, love, happiness, and inspiration however you like. I define it as being our good feelings (good moods). In other words, our good feelings are what make moments precious, beautiful, and valuable to us. They make our lives a beautiful paradise filled with value, joy, beauty, and worth. Without them, then your life is completely devoid and everything is nothing more than a "mechanical" experience for you. That is, an experience completely devoid of any value, worth, joy, and beauty. My definition of value, joy, beauty, and worth is what is known as the evolutionary definition of value, joy, beauty, and worth. Perhaps you could even call it the scientific definition of value, joy, beauty, and worth.

This definition is different than the normal definition because the normal definition would state that it is instead our way of thinking/attitude and not our feelings that defines what brings our lives value and worth. But the evolutionary definition of value and worth would state that it is only our feelings which make certain things and situations good or bad to us depending upon how we feel. If we feel good such as feeling happiness and beauty from a certain thing or situation, then that feeling is the same thing as that said thing or situation having good value and worth to us. But if we feel miserable and sad from a certain thing or situation, then that feeling is the same thing as that said thing or situation having bad value to us. Therefore, the normal definition of value and worth is a thought/attitude version of value and worth while the evolutionary definition is a feeling version. The evolutionary definition is the only one that is real while the normal definition is fake. The normal definition does not actually bring our lives any real value, worth, joy, happiness, or beauty at all.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8008
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Poodle » Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:04 pm

Let me summarise your summary ...
When you feel good, you feel good. When you feel bad, you don't.
Yep - that about sums it up, I think.

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:15 pm

Poodle wrote:Let me summarise your summary ...
When you feel good, you feel good. When you feel bad, you don't.
Yep - that about sums it up, I think.


That doesn't summarize it because I wasn't just talking about feeling good and bad and nothing more. I explained the whole concept of this evolutionary definition (feeling version) of value and worth. I think it is the only real definition of value and worth while the normal definition does not make our lives valuable or worthwhile.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Matt MSV7 trolling thread No452#

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Jun 04, 2017 11:15 pm

Omniverse wrote:That doesn't summarize it because I wasn't just talking about feeling good and bad and nothing more. I explained the whole concept of this evolutionary definition (feeling version) of value and worth. I think it is the only real definition of value and worth while the normal definition does not make our lives valuable or worthwhile.


Go away.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Matt MSV7 trolling thread No452#

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:10 am

Omniverse AKA MattMSV7 wrote: That doesn't summarize it because...........
You are lying again here and you are lying on every forum you are trolling.

On the spiritualforums you are claiming you are sad because you were raped as a five year old child, while simultaneously you are physically trawling children's video game forums pretending you are another child. You have sick fantasies.


Omniverse AKA MattMSV7 wrote: OK well I can help you out a lot in this situation. I've had bi polar since I was about 10 years old. I get world ending depression at least a few times a month. I've had PTSD, the most severe anxity disorder known to man, since I was raped at 5. And I've experineced multiple NDE (some of them hellish) in which I experienced what can only be described as death.

http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/archi ... 06278.html

User avatar
Phoenix76
Poster
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2017 7:16 am
Custom Title: Phoenix76
Location: Qld, Australia

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Phoenix76 » Wed Jun 14, 2017 7:25 am

Where do you get these blokes???? :shock: Oh okay I suppose they are drawn to our skeptic and scientific outlooks, THEREFORE, they can explain our deluded little minds. :mrgreen:

Oh dash it! I used therefore, but only one. :D

"Those people have their umbrellas up, THEREFORE it must be raining". Hmmm, very much an assumptive adverb. :roll:

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:19 am

Note to Reader: Since there are a lot of packets, then I will narrow it down to the ones you need to read. If you don't wish to read all of these packets which explain how I define my own values and morality (as well as other concepts pertaining to my personal life), then just read the summary packet which sums up very briefly my whole philosophy.

But if you have the time to read at least 2, 3, or 4 packets, then I would also highly recommend reading packet #4, #5, and #6 since they are the 2nd most important packets you need to read. Also, just to let you know, the final packet (#14) has an actual conversation between me and someone else.

I will now proceed to present the Deviant Art links to all my packets.

Here are the Deviant Art links:

Summary Packet: http://fav.me/dbgkmdl

#1: http://fav.me/dbgif18

#2: http://fav.me/dbdjr9g

#3: http://fav.me/dbda76j

#4: http://fav.me/dbeivqu

#5: http://fav.me/dbc55yl

#6: http://fav.me/dbg3ikh

#7: http://fav.me/dbflptn

#8: http://fav.me/dbda7dz

#9: http://fav.me/dbftmc1

#10: http://fav.me/dbc4hm4

#11: http://fav.me/dbe6jcj

#12: http://fav.me/dbc4h3l

#13: http://fav.me/dbc4hqf

#14: http://fav.me/dbc4w49

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:01 am

Omniverse wrote:Note to Reader: Since there are a lot of packets, then I will narrow it down to the ones you need to read. If you don't wish to read all of these packets which explain how I define my own values and morality (as well as other concepts pertaining to my personal life), then just read the summary packet which sums up very briefly my whole philosophy.

But if you have the time to read at least 2, 3, or 4 packets, then I would also highly recommend reading packet #4, #5, and #6 since they are the 2nd most important packets you need to read. Also, just to let you know, the final packet (#14) has an actual conversation between me and someone else.


This is just the same post as the opening post and simply more trolling by Matt MVS7
Last edited by Matthew Ellard on Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:02 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Omniverse wrote:Note to Reader: Since there are a lot of packets, then I will narrow it down to the ones you need to read. If you don't wish to read all of these packets which explain how I define my own values and morality (as well as other concepts pertaining to my personal life), then just read the summary packet which sums up very briefly my whole philosophy.

But if you have the time to read at least 2, 3, or 4 packets, then I would also highly recommend reading packet #4, #5, and #6 since they are the 2nd most important packets you need to read. Also, just to let you know, the final packet (#14) has an actual conversation between me and someone else.


This is just the same posts as the opening post and simply more trolling by Matt MVS7


Then just read the summary packet which is only a very few paragraphs long. It gets the point I am trying to make in a very summarized fashion unlike the long posts I have been making.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:06 am

Omniverse AKA Matt MSV7 wrote: Then just read the summary packet which is only a very few paragraphs long. It gets the point I am trying to make in a very summarized fashion unlike the long posts I have been making.


Here is Matt MVS7's latest musical "work" to lure children.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpSXhKS01iQ

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Regular Poster
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Cadmusteeth » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:27 am

Is this original or did he rip it off of someone else?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:49 am

Cadmusteeth wrote:Is this original or did he rip it off of someone else?

The "tune" sounds like one of the pre-programmed tunes you get with cheap $10 keyboards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRwADZ_5Pm4

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28967
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Gord » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:45 am

Omniverse wrote:Note to Reader: Since there are a lot of packets, then I will narrow it down to the ones you need to read.

I think you mean therefore. It's impolite to use a "since/then" on a forum that expects "since/therefores" and "if/thens". :beee:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7258
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby TJrandom » Mon Jul 17, 2017 8:46 am

Omniverse wrote: ... Then just read the summary packet which is only a very few paragraphs long. It gets the point I am trying to make in a very summarized fashion unlike the long posts I have been making.


I prefer your post of 4 June.

Omniverse
Poster
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 2:09 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Omniverse » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:40 pm

Lastly, I will now present to you another person's response to my summary and my reply to it. This is to clear some things up and address some issues others might have with my whole philosophy:

Other Person's Response: Let me emphasize the importance of the non feeling values. Where would we be without them? If your life was in danger and you couldn't feel anything, then you would get yourself killed because escaping from said danger would be of no value to you. This is the type of world we would all be living in. Life would simply be a disaster without these values.

My Reply: I would still choose to escape from danger anyway knowing that it is a wise decision. But said decision would be of no value to me. Therefore, the type of world we would be living in would be a world where we would still make decisions anyway knowing that they are wise. Like I said, we are wired for survival and it is this wiring that compels us to make choices anyway even though they would bring our lives no value or happiness.

For example, during my worst miserable times, my life was completely dead and empty. It was absolute hell for me and there was no good value, worth, or happiness in my life whatsoever. My life had the worst possible value. However, I have chosen to get psychiatric help anyway knowing that my life would eventually change for the better.

Again, even knowing that my life would change for the better did not give my life any value. But let's pretend that I had to live the entirety of my life in this miserable state and could never recover from it, then that is when I would end my life. There is absolutely no way I would choose to live on and on in a life that is the worst hell filled with the worst possible value. So, as you can see here, even though I would still make wise choices in my life even without having any good value and worth in my life, I need the good value, worth, joy, beauty, and happiness in my life.

Otherwise, I would give up on life and end my life since nothing would matter to me. I would be in a completely dead and empty state of being and living. Even if the type of world we would all be living in would be chaos without these non feeling values, that still doesn't change my views here. If we were to somehow realize that these non feeling values weren't real and the world were to become chaos, then that is just the way it is. That is just what we are as human beings then.

During my miserable times, I am in a state of complete darkness. I cannot see the light. This means that I cannot see the good value or joy in anything in my life. But once I fully recover and have my good moods/feelings, then they are the light to my life. They allow me to see the good value and joy in my life.

If I were in a state of complete anhedonia, then that would not be a state of complete darkness. Rather, it would be a completely blank state. All light would be shunned out. The same concept still applies here. I would still not be able to see the good value in my life. But a state of hopelessness and misery is a far worse state to be in than anhedonia because states of misery and hopelessness are hell that bring my life the experience of the absolute worst value and suffering in my life.

In other words, thoughts and outlooks alone are not the light or darkness to my life. If I thought to myself that certain choices and decisions brought my life good value, worth, and joy during those horrible times, then it wouldn't work to any degree for me whatsoever. I would still be in a hellish and blank state where my life has no good value or joy. The tone of our moods/feelings dictates the tone of our outlooks. In other words, if you felt angry, then you will be angry. You will have an angry outlook.

Since the tone of an angry feeling has a pessimistic tone, then your whole outlook can only have a pessimistic tone as well. You cannot have an optimistic outlook while experiencing feelings/moods that have a pessimistic tone. The experience of an optimistic and pessimistic tone does not come about through our thoughts and outlooks alone. They can only come about through our moods/feelings. When I thought to myself that my life still had good value during my miserable times, then that thought had nothing but a hopeless and dead tone. In other words, it really wasn't an outlook of anything having any real good value to me.

People who claim to have an optimistic tone of experience (outlook) during their depression or worst miserable times would only be fooling and deluding themselves. As I said before, it is only our moods/feelings that possess the optimistic and pessimistic tones to give our lives good or bad value. Thoughts and outlooks alone without our moods/feelings can only possess a mechanistic tone. This means that they do not give our lives any real good or bad value.

This would have to mean that depressed/anhedonic people who think their lives have good value are thinking optimistic words and phrases in their mind of their lives having real good value, but their thoughts and outlooks only possess a dead and lifeless mechanistic tone and, therefore, these depressed/anhedonic people would actually not be having any real good value in their lives. These words and phrases alone have these depressed/anhedonic people fooled into believing their lives have real good value when they don't.

Once again, that all goes back to my personal example. During my worst miserable moments, I have thought optimistic words and phrases of my life having real good value. However, this tone of experience was completely dead and lifeless. Therefore, my life really had no good value or worth to me at all. Having good value and worth in your life can only be an optimistic tone of experience for you.

It would make no sense to say that having good value and worth in your life is either a pessimistic tone of experience or neither optimistic nor pessimistic (i.e. mechanistic). Since our good moods/feelings are the only experiences that possess the optimistic tone as I've just explained earlier, then it would obviously follow that it can only be our good moods/feelings that give our lives real good value and worth.

For example, if someone said:

"My life is worth living," "These things and situations have worth to me," or "Good, I get to get what I want now. This situation has a lot of worth to me."

Then that is optimism. Even if you screamed and said:

"GOOD, HE/SHE DESERVES TO DIE!!! THAT IS WORTH SOMETHING TO ME!!!"

Then that is also optimism. It is an optimistic outlook (experience) for you. But, like I said, it is only the good moods/feelings we get which can give our lives optimistic tones of experience.

Other Person's Response: Theres so much mest up ways of thinking here. You can claim that you're trying to not offend anyone and say you're just expressing your view which is fine but nonetheless youre still putting depressed people into one category. You just wrote "depressed people have no good value and worth in their lives" "depressed people are living lives that have no good value and worth and dont even realize it " are you kidding how can you glump people together like that and think that a persons feelings and mental ilness automatically equates to having no worth.

So many people that brought us great things have all been so deeply depressed. Singers, scientists, philosophers have all been people that have brought great value to our lives even with their state of depression. They enriched us with their intelligence and creative minds. There are parents who are raising children that have severe depression and manage to get up every morning and give their child a good life does that sound like someone who has no purpose and value?

"Depressed and anhedonic people are living lives that have no good value , no worth and they dont evem realize it" thats is such an ignorant stement to make and bring no one any value or use. And I can tell someone their fat and ugky and then say "hey thats just my view not trying to offend anyone " but it doesnt make it any less offesnsive and it wont make them any less ugly or fat. Also the fact that you equate happiness and feel good feelings as people being with value is so strange to me when again so many happy people do nothing withe their lives or contribute anything to society. Depression does not determine your value as a human being and if thats how you feel about yourself than im sorry but its not good to project such harmful negativity to people that are trying to find light in their current dimmed world.

My Reply: I said that it is only our good moods/feelings that allow us to perceive good value and worth in our lives. I am not saying that depressed people cannot have any good value and worth to us. I am saying that they cannot actually perceive any good value and worth in themselves and in their own lives. If we felt good from a depressed person who has contributed to our lives, then we would be able to see that depressed person as being a wonderful person to us. But the depressed person who helped us would not be able to perceive his/her altruistic actions as being anything good or worthwhile.

He/she might think otherwise, but, in reality, he/she is having nothing but an experience that is completely dead inside. There literally is no good value being perceived in this person's life at all and he/she is falsely lead into the notion that the right mindset alone creates the perception of good value in our lives when it is really our good moods/feelings that give us this perception. I think that I have every right to express myself and my views like anyone else. I will not be alone with them. I do not care if people become offended by them when my intention was not to offend in the first place, but only to vent and express my views.
Last edited by Omniverse on Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:15 am, edited 8 times in total.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8008
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Poodle » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:49 pm

Changing your original post after all this time is a bit OTT, y'know. You still look stupid, even after doing that.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19173
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:33 pm

Poodle wrote:Changing your original post after all this time is a bit OTT, y'know. You still look stupid, even after doing that.

Or even before doing that. ;)
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Nikki Nyx » Mon Jul 17, 2017 10:38 pm

...it used to be so simple, once upon a time.
Because the universe was full of ignorance all around and the scientist panned through it like a prospector crouched over a mountain stream, looking for the gold of knowledge among the gravel of unreason, the sand of uncertainty, and the little whiskery eight-legged swimming things of superstition.
—Terry Pratchett, from Witches Abroad

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26077
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:29 am

Omniverse wrote:Lastly, I will now present to you another person's response to my summary and my reply to it. This is to clear some things up and address some issues others might have with my whole philosophy.

Your psychiatrist is paid to read your crap. We are not. Go away and tell your psychiatrist.

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10377
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: The evolutionary definition of good and bad

Postby OlegTheBatty » Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:44 pm

Gord wrote:
Omniverse wrote:Note to Reader: Since there are a lot of packets, then I will narrow it down to the ones you need to read.

I think you mean therefore. It's impolite to use a "since/then" on a forum that expects "since/therefores" and "if/thens". :beee:


I don't like "if/therefores" either.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero


Return to “Belief, Nonbelief, and Philosophy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest