Theory on happieness

[James_S_Saint]

Hello James,

Let’s say I am looking out my window right now at the lake. (I wish)
The lake is real.

Now I can make truth statements about it, like it’s name is Lake Michigan.

One must start with something real to make truth statements about it.

Hello Strawberry,

Let’s say that you were looking for a unicorn.
The unicorn is not real

Now how can you know that it isn’t real, perhaps you are looking at one and its name is George.

One must start by defining what something really is to make a truth statement about it, even that it isn’t real.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Hello Strawberry,

Let’s say that you were looking for a unicorn.
The unicorn is not real

Now how can you know that it isn’t real, perhaps you are looking at one and its name is George.

One must start by defining what something really is to make a truth statement about it, even that it isn’t real.

If it isn’t real, any statement made about it would be whatever the person wanted it to be.

 

[donsnow]

Happiness what is it first off, second how can it be gained,

1. Can it be gained through materials.- yes and no, people who are rich aren’t thrilled by more money, but a poor widow will jump for joy when when is handed a few dollars to by a good meal. obviously it depends on the person
2. Can it be gained through people- Yes and no, Your family brings you happiness, your enemy brings you pain. Again it depends on the person and their relationship with another.
3. Can it be through religion?- Yes and no, Christians rejoice in their religion, but Muslims would call them all infidels.
4. Can fun(thrill) bring you happiness- Yes and no, a first time party goer would have the time of their life, but a long timer would say “ehh whatever”.

So as we can see it depends on the person, so my question is what is the key to happiness for everyone?

Hi, I Seek 2 -

I think that there’s no one key to happiness for everyone. That applies to any concept of happiness. That applies to your four criteria and to a Buddhists criteria or even our criteria, Christians. That’s just my two cents worth.

Don

 

[StrawberryJam]

Hi, I Seek 2 -

I think that there’s no one key to happiness for everyone. That applies to any concept of happiness. That applies to your four criteria and to a Buddhists criteria or even our criteria, Christians. That’s just my two cents worth.

Don

Sensible statement Don.

And it did not require any brain twisting to get there either. I like that.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Sensible statement Don.

And it did not require any brain twisting to get there either. I like that.

The problem is that it proposes that there is no solution, so stop trying and also that it began with “I think…”.

Prove the truth of that and I will support it. Until then, I don’t give up hope, especially since I already know where the truth must lead.

 

[StrawberryJam]

The problem is that it proposes that there is no solution, so stop trying and also that it began with “I think…”.

Prove the truth of that and I will support it. Until then, I don’t give up hope, especially since I already know where the truth must lead.

I wasn’t aware there was a problem that necessitated a solution. Is there?

 

[James_S_Saint]

I wasn’t aware there was a problem that necessitated a solution. Is there?

It might not be a problem for you or in your eyes, but for many, happiness, especially ongoing, is a big issue, so much so that they can fall into depression, fear, anger, murder, sexual abuse, and even suicide. But presume that population control wasn’t the topic of this thread.

 

[donsnow]

Sensible statement Don.

And it did not require any brain twisting to get there either. I like that.

Thank you, StrawberryJam,

Yeah, I like to think that there are a few more self-evident truths, than those stipulated in our Declaration of Independence.

Don

 

[donsnow]

The problem is that it proposes that there is no solution, so stop trying and also that it began with “I think…”.

Prove the truth of that and I will support it. Until then, I don’t give up hope, especially since I already know where the truth must lead.

Hi, James,

May I call you James?

Don

 

[James_S_Saint]

Hi, James,

May I call you James?

Don

Go4it Don. May I call you Don?

 

[donsnow]

Go4it Don. May I call you Don?

Thank you, James,

Sure, that’s my first name.

Well, in the first place not only do I agree that happiness is not a problem that has a solution, but also I view happiness as a state of mind, a condition of life.

Now, we know that the mind has a powerful effect on the body and emotions. Our minds prioritize what our brains identify and process, imho. With this is mind, if you’ll pardon the expression of speech, then things that happen or don’t happen to individuals effects an impact on their state of mind. Since there are six billion people, at least five different world religions, numerous philosophies and sundry attitudes which influence a person’s state of mind; and everybody seeks happiness, then, I think it follows that:
If Christianity were the key to everyone’s happiness, everybody would be Christian.
If Judaism were the key…everyone would be a Jew.
If Buddhism…everyone a Buddhist.
If Islam…a Muslim.
If Hinduism…a Hindu.
If Platoism…Platonic
etc.
The same with common attitudes: positive thinking, New Age concepts, Political Correctness, etc.
But, since everybody on earth is not enjoying the same state of mind to be happy, then, it follows, that there is no one key to everyone’s happiness, imho.

Oh, BTW, since we’re not discussing a mathematical equation, then it follows that there can not be a “proof”, which is a mathematical, not philosophical, term.

Don

 

[James_S_Saint]

Now, we know that the mind has a powerful effect on the body and emotions. Our minds prioritize what our brains identify and process, imho.

Actually you have that a bit backwards. Your “mind” already has a gauge for what it most deeply wants and merely seeks a means to acquire it. The conscious mind is the recipient of urges that inform it as to what is being seen as favorable or not. The conscious mind must figure out why something is or isn’t important so that it can then balance conflicting urges. The conscious mind cannot be pre-created already knowing why it exists, but the mind as a whole does.

… then things that happen or don’t happen to individuals effects an impact on their state of mind. Since there are six billion people, at least five different world religions, numerous philosophies and sundry attitudes which influence a person’s state of mind; and everybody seeks happiness, then, I think it follows that:
If Christianity were the key to everyone’s happiness, everybody would be Christian.
If Judaism were the key…everyone would be a Jew.
If Buddhism…everyone a Buddhist.
If Islam…a Muslim.
If Hinduism…a Hindu.
If Platoism…Platonic
etc.
The same with common attitudes: positive thinking, New Age concepts, Political Correctness, etc.

That partly depends on exactly how you are defining each of those. They are each proposed as a set of morals or guides to happiness. The guides must be followed. If someone chooses to not follow them, they do not produce that happiness.

On the other hand, if you define them as the very cause of happiness, then which ever one was the real one, would cause happiness regardless of contrary efforts.

But, since everybody on earth is not enjoying the same state of mind to be happy, then, it follows, that there is no one key to everyone’s happiness, imho.

Because no one figured out how to fly, there is no solution for it? Sounds like a silly conclusion to me, lacking “proof”, but strong in lazy speculation. :ehh:

Oh, BTW, since we’re not discussing a mathematical equation, then it follows that there can not be a “proof”, which is a mathematical, not philosophical, term.

Say WHAT?!?!?

“Proof” is a philosophical term most coined by the philosophy of Logic, but not limited to it. Mathematical proof (born from Logic) is strictly for mathematical issues. :dts:

Be satisfied that there is no solution and you are pretty certain to never find it for yourself or anyone else in need. On the other hand, “Seek and ye shall find”.

 

[donsnow]

Actually you have that a bit backwards. Your “mind” already has a gauge for what it most deeply wants and merely seeks a means to acquire it.

Yes, and I answered that deepest desire in the ‘60’ and '70’s. After I discovered I was wrong to desire that, I started looking for answers. So, now my mind answers to a different deep desire.

The conscious mind is the recipient of urges that inform it as to what is being seen as favorable or not. The conscious mind must figure out why something is or isn’t important so that it can then balance conflicting urges.

That is one psychiatric viewpoint.

The conscious mind cannot be pre-created already knowing why it exists,…

Yes, it can, and it’s called brainwashing. Which condition the North Koreans introduced to the Western world in the early 1950’s. Since then, it has been found that cults also exercise brainwashing to gain and keep members.

…but the mind as a whole does.

I don’t know what this means.

That partly depends on exactly how you are defining each of those.

I submit each with the definition given it by their respective founders and followers.

They are each proposed as a set of morals or guides to happiness. The guides must be followed. If someone chooses to not follow them, they do not produce that happiness.

People do choose not to follow any of them. That’s why there’s no one key to everyone’s happiness: people choose to not follow.

On the other hand, if you define them as the very cause of happiness, then which ever one was the real one, would cause happiness regardless of contrary efforts.

That’s true. However, since none of those guides cause happiness regardless of contrary efforts, then I submit, there is no known one key to everyone’s happiness.
Furthermore, if there were an unknown key to everyone’s happiness, it would have been found, and everybody on earth would be happy. Possibly, without being found, it would make everyone on earth happy; if the second possibility were the case, I can say, since everyone on earth is not happy, then, there is no unknown key to everyone’s happiness.

Because no one figured out how to fly, there is no solution for it? Sounds like a silly conclusion to me, lacking “proof”, but strong in lazy speculation. :ehh:

This is nonsense, comparing apples to oranges. Mechanical flight is mechanical, happiness is a state of mind, the two are not comparable.

Say WHAT?!?!?

“Proof” is a philosophical term most coined by the philosophy of Logic, but not limited to it. Mathematical proof (born from Logic) is strictly for mathematical issues. :dts:

Ok.

Be satisfied that there is no solution and you are pretty certain to never find it for yourself or anyone else in need. On the other hand, “Seek and ye shall find”.

There can be circumstances applied to a condition, but not necessarily solutions. When we seek the circumstances, or people, or spirit that brings our condition to that or those circumstances which initiate or allow happiness, then, that’s good.
However, happiness seems temporary, on this planet. Most of us look to the next life, for uninterrupted happiness. Drug addiction is too high a price to pay, for that in this life.

Maybe the poet John Dryden said it best, “There’s a joy to being mad, that only madmen know.”
Perhaps the only permanent condition of happiness on this planet, the rest of us would perceive as insanity. Who knows?

 

[fhansen]

Happiness is an experience. It is the “homeostasis” of man-what he’s designed for and what he can’t help but pursue-because this life is simply unable to afford it to the degree he needs it. Happiness is to be in the presence of Love- Love on a scale that can’t be can’t imagined- because happiness is to know God-and this, again, is an experience. What a great hope we have, meaning, in Catholic parlance, a confidence in the future, with tastes of this beatitude in the here and now.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Yes, and I answered that deepest desire in the ‘60’ and '70’s. After I discovered I was wrong to desire that, I started looking for answers. So, now my mind answers to a different deep desire.

You cannot change that most fundamental quest regardless of what you do. The alternative is to simply die.

That is one psychiatric viewpoint.

But as with all propositions, one is the right one. That one is the right one.

Yes, it can, and it’s called brainwashing. Which condition the North Koreans introduced to the Western world in the early 1950’s. Since then, it has been found that cults also exercise brainwashing to gain and keep members.

“Brainwashing” is not an issue of “pre-creation”, but “post re-creation”. But even brainwashing cannot alter that most fundamental desire without causing death. Usually brainwashing involves using that most fundamental desire to fool the mind into accepting an alternate method for obtaining its goal. The fundamental desire must already be there.

The fact that the conscious mind has to guess what it is, is why brainwashing works.

I don’t know what this means.

It means that the conscious part of your mind does not know why it exists or what it is to pursue. It does not know “the meaning of life” and must figure it out. But “lower” parts of the mind already know and are in pursuit already before the conscious part even exists to ask the question.

I submit each with the definition given it by their respective founders and followers.

The definition by each of those was “Accept this offer or die”.

People do choose not to follow any of them. That’s why there’s no one key to everyone’s happiness: people choose to not follow.

That is non-sequeter. The fact that people do not put on their safety belt has nothing to do with whether safety belts work.

That’s true. However, since none of those guides cause happiness regardless of contrary efforts, then I submit, there is no known one key to everyone’s happiness.

Furthermore, if there were an unknown key to everyone’s happiness, it would have been found, and everybody on earth would be happy. Possibly, without being found, it would make everyone on earth happy; if the second possibility were the case, I can say, since everyone on earth is not happy, then, there is no unknown key to everyone’s happiness.

Once again, you propose that because something has failed in the past, there is no solution. How many times have they proposed to close the patent office because “everything has been invented”?

This is nonsense, comparing apples to oranges. Mechanical flight is mechanical, happiness is a state of mind, the two are not comparable.

It doesn’t matter whether the “invention” is of a mechanical nature or a mental/psychological nature". Your response is nonsense.

There can be circumstances applied to a condition, but not necessarily solutions. When we seek the circumstances, or people, or spirit that brings our condition to that or those circumstances which initiate or allow happiness, then, that’s good.

However, happiness seems temporary, on this planet. Most of us look to the next life, for uninterrupted happiness. Drug addiction is too high a price to pay, for that in this life.

So YOUR concept is to give up, because no one has been reported as having the solution (ignoring that many state it yet never get heard for political reasons).

What “seems to be true” to you is hardly proof or even evidence of truth value.

All you have given is that because YOU do not know of any “cure”, a cure is impossible (even for God) and should not be sought.

I’m curious of 2 things;

1. What is more worth seeking?
2. Why does it say “Roman Catholic” in your title bar? :ehh:

 

[donsnow]

You cannot change that most fundamental quest regardless of what you do. The alternative is to simply die.

But as with all propositions, one is the right one. That one is the right one.

“Brainwashing” is not an issue of “pre-creation”, but “post re-creation”. But even brainwashing cannot alter that most fundamental desire without causing death. Usually brainwashing involves using that most fundamental desire to fool the mind into accepting an alternate method for obtaining its goal. The fundamental desire must already be there.

The fact that the conscious mind has to guess what it is, is why brainwashing works.

It means that the conscious part of your mind does not know why it exists or what it is to pursue. It does not know “the meaning of life” and must figure it out. But “lower” parts of the mind already know and are in pursuit already before the conscious part even exists to ask the question.

The definition by each of those was “Accept this offer or die”.

That is non-sequeter. The fact that people do not put on their safety belt has nothing to do with whether safety belts work.

Once again, you propose that because something has failed in the past, there is no solution. How many times have they proposed to close the patent office because “everything has been invented”?

It doesn’t matter whether the “invention” is of a mechanical nature or a mental/psychological nature". Your response is nonsense.

So YOUR concept is to give up, because no one has been reported as having the solution (ignoring that many state it yet never get heard for political reasons).

What “seems to be true” to you is hardly proof or even evidence of truth value.

All you have given is that because YOU do not know of any “cure”, a cure is impossible (even for God) and should not be sought.

I’m curious of 2 things;

1. What is more worth seeking?
2. Why does it say “Roman Catholic” in your title bar?

“What we have here, is a failure to communicate.”

1. Eternal life.
2. It says Roman Catholic, because that’s where I find more spiritual satisfaction than I have found in other religions or in other churches.

 

[James_S_Saint]

“What we have here, is a failure to communicate.”

1. Eternal life.
2. It says Roman Catholic, because that’s where I find more spiritual satisfaction than I have found in other religions or in other churches.

As I have stated in other threads, the only real problem Man has ever had is his inability to express himself.

1. Eternal Life – in Heaven or somewhere else? And for yourself only??
2. I see. It was the best you could find at the time? Hmm

So you are saying that the Roman Catholic has bowed to the Secular reign as well. Good to know.

Are you aware of what the word “Catholic” means? It means, “all encompassing” or “for all”. The word “Pontiff” means “bridge maker”. If the Pope is the “Pontiff Maximus” for All. He is to bridge over the issues and peoples. But if not seeking happiness for one of the two concerns being bridged, in what manner is he bridging?

“I am the Light, the Truth, and the Life, for some people.” I tried looking up, “for some people” but couldn’t find it. Maybe you could help me out here.

Apparently the Roman Catholic doesn’t believe in the “Seek and ye shall find” bit. I have to wonder what else Jesus said that has been omitted for being just too un-proven.

The Secular theory is to ensure that all people are diverse, which means that more people must necessarily be wrong than right. But it does sound like your philosophy of “to each something different. There is no right or wrong.”

 

[donsnow]

As I have stated in other threads, the only real problem Man has ever had is his inability to express himself.

1. Eternal Life – in Heaven or somewhere else? And for yourself only??
2. I see. It was the best you could find at the time? Hmm

So you are saying that the Roman Catholic has bowed to the Secular reign as well. Good to know.

Are you aware of what the word “Catholic” means? It means, “all encompassing” or “for all”. The word “Pontiff” means “bridge maker”. If the Pope is the “Pontiff Maximus” for All. He is to bridge over the issues and peoples. But if not seeking happiness for one of the two concerns being bridged, in what manner is he bridging?

“I am the Light, the Truth, and the Life, for some people.” I tried looking up, “for some people” but couldn’t find it. Maybe you could help me out here.

Apparently the Roman Catholic doesn’t believe in the “Seek and ye shall find” bit. I have to wonder what else Jesus said that has been omitted for being just too un-proven.

The Secular theory is to ensure that all people are diverse, which means that more people must necessarily be wrong than right. But it does sound like your philosophy of “to each something different. There is no right or wrong.”

Hi, James,

I say, it appears to me, that you are jumping to conclusions, about me.
Does a Sophist argue from one religion one time, and from another religion another time?

I seek a relationship with the Holy Trinity in this life and in the next life; so, where God the Holy Trinity is, that’s where I want to be.

1. For me and for those I love.
2. The best I can find on this planet, in the past quarter century, the present and in the foreseeable future (includes next life).

You and I have different perceptions of everything, it appears to me.
BTW, you didn’t address my speculation that maybe we would perceive anybody who was permanently happy in this life, as insane.

Don
P.S. I’m going to go to bed, now. Tomorrow, then.

 

[James_S_Saint]

So your are sort of a cross between Jewish and Secular. That explains a lot.

As far as “perceiving” someone as being insane merely because they are constantly happy; first, I have a very precise definition for insanity and second, I would be thrilled for them as long as I couldn’t see any harm they were doing to themselves or others. And even if they were endangering themselves, I would look to see if there was a way to maintain their joy but prevent their danger.

Sleep well.

 

[StrawberryJam]

James,

Can you give me some truth statements about happiness? Before you do, I need to know your idea of happiness, what makes it real for you and why.

Is happiness a need or a want?
Do all people desire or even expect to be happy and if so, how often?