Well, that is an awesome and due to recent posts of many on this forum, rather unexpected attitude from a poster. Welcome back! Please sit and stay a while. To me you represent hope (well), even though I know you feel otherwise internally.@series0 haha I don't know why you'd assume any of us here would freak out on you about anything you said, especially when this is a debate and therefore is meant to be a platform for people to present, develop, and expose their thoughts on the topic. I myself am primarily interested in everyone's thoughts.
Excellent! You seem an awesome compliment to me. I am all about challenge.That being said, I'm very happy that you brought up such an interesting argument! I do want to challenge some of your central prepositions though to see what you've got in response.
On this matter of your response, you are totally correct!1) hope and despair are essentially unreasonable assumptions about the future: I believe you are using the word "unreasonable" here not in a negatively charged sense but in the sense that there might not be cut and dry logical reasoning behind either hope or despair.
And this is where we can agree again, so I disagree with the fact the you think I suggested they are not enigmatic. I did not. I agree, so you are burning a strawman now. Further, I will offer you an easy out in this instance. My theories are ALL OVER this forum in psychology, philosophy, and debate; but, you are only recently returned. I made a mistake of assuming as I often do that you are moderately familiar with my model, because I am so frequent a poster. But your recent return forbids that assumption.I agree! I also agree with what you said about it being influenced by people's experiences, but ultimately I still think there is something incredibly enigmatic about hope and despair.
It DOES NOT trigger my intrigue at all. I even suggested it, if you look back and read what I wrote about desire.For example, I have a relatively fortunate life and honestly an incredible amount of luck. Basically any time I'm caught in a really bad or seemingly inescapable situation, somehow fortune changes for me even if it doesn't for anyone else around me. It's actually quite ridiculous, to the point where others notice it. So, if I've had such a fortunate life, and always manage to escape dreadful situations, what exactly do I have to fear, or left to desire, that would spawn any kind of hope or despair in me? Despite my overwhelmingly positive life experiences and the fact that I'm pretty optimistic, I still have an unshakable despair that I can't really explain. I hope that triggers your intrigue a little.
You are F, a female, and clearly desire-aligned in your writing style. Desire is just chaos. It is entirely unreasonable at its base. It only becomes reasonable when it unites with fear and anger (as restraints) near the single point of objective perfection. In the human species, nature has decided to risk embodiment of chaos in the female gender (generally). Nature is a gambler by essence. It also embeds a flip scale. So women are stereotypically desire-oriented, just as men are stereotypically fear oriented. This is not common bigotry, as the stereotype is a mere fact. There are MANY reasons why females need to be chaotic, to keep the human species healthy, but a great one is that chaos resents order. It seeks in longing and desire the freedom. Freedom is synonymous with chaos. In doing so the female seeks a mate OUTSIDE the established order. So she denigrates order, fear, men (of her tribe), etc; and seeks heart's longing elsewhere. Now that women have more freedom in most world cultures you see this trend at EPIC proportions. It is truly staggering to behold how true it is.
I risk saying the above because you take these matters in the spirit of debate and I have not yet seen too much knee jerk unthinking left wing narrative from you. The left wing, Feminism, etc; are all chaos-apologists. Again, I advise balance, so I am not right wing, but center, and not a moderate, but an extremist.
Incorrect, and actually obviously so.2) About delusion and reason - I don't think you have the full picture here. First of all, correctness doesn't necessarily explain, drive, or contribute to life all that much.
Correctness is ... ONLY a part of fear. Drive is desire, so you missed the message of my model entirely in that sense.
Fear is all order, all structure, all hierarchy. Fear is identity itself. Fear is that which organizes and groups anything in any way. All thought is only fear. Fear has undeniable associations with death and cold. That is because fear seeks to calm itself, its heightened energy by choosing to dampen that energy. This makes fear literally seek cold, stable, and ultimately dead states. This is a law of the universe.
Desire is all chaos, all freedom, all drive. Desire is all inertia. Desire is that which impels every entity towards expression of itself. As such all 'heart' is desire. Desire has undeniable associations with life and heat. (This is why you brought up life). That is because desire seeks to increase its energy, wanting always is a MORE situation. More of what you want, less of what you do not, is effectively more. The core of desire is BECOMING. So desire seeks warmth, instability (fun), and otherwise alive and thriving (fecund) states. This is a law of the universe.
So, OF COURSE correctness doesn't contribute DIRECTLY to life, because correctness is judgment which is fear and aligned with death.
But all three primal emotions, fear, anger, and desire; are together love. There is no REAL separation between these things. However, it IS entirely possible to speak of any given thing or act as an embodiment or choice over laden with any one of these emotions. So saying things like, 'Women embody desire statistically' and 'That choice was too fear-oriented' are not only possible and possibly correct, but wise as well. We must remember, MOST IMPORTANTLY though, that all of these statements are ... STATES only. They are not in-essence traps. Change is ubiquitous. To cement that point I will state that if humanity worked on it for many generations, we could countermand nature's choice and cause the female of humanity to embody order and fear instead. This however would result in nature's demand that men represent desire and chaos as a law of the universe.
This point is extremely surface and not relevant.It is "correct" that a lack of oxygen will cause death in a human being, but plenty of people still desire to engage in oxygen depriving activities like mountain climbing, scuba diving, ect, and seem to have a greater quality of life than they would just obeying correctness and avoiding oxygen deprivation.
It is the overall interest or push that is of note or relevant to these matters we are discussing. Very orderly women still embody chaos. Their programming is something they have to fight to represent the order in their personalities. The chaos is instantiated into their physical beings.
Further, of course desire can override fear in some cases. That is not special to note. And luckily for that mountainclimber, fear can override desire as well, or vertigo would be a death sentence. So, again, such examples are not the rule showing us how the universe is designed and balanced. They are exceptions PROVING the rule.
As mentioned nature is a gambler. It embeds all within each. We are all a pleasant mix of all three emotions, so each of us is thus more functional, not lacking entirely of any one of them. We all have some hope and some despair.
This is the same not relevant point.Even human emotions, which can be partly explained by hormones and chemicals and receptors, seem to be impossible to fully explain in terms of pure logic, and all we can say is "well that's how it is".
Yes, for any entity to exist, it contains all three emotions. But it IS NOT the embodiment of all three. The sun is an embodiment of heat and mass, desire and anger. Its structure is still there and the processes of its thought are still there, so fear is also there. But it embodies fear and anger and in its desire to 'live' it rots itself and disintegrates eventually.
I am not sure that I want to discuss a black hole as an embodiment of cold logic. That would be fear and anger. But you get the idea.
Incorrect.This is an entirely other debate that could be had over and over again, but for now I just want to make the very simple point that logic is merely mathematical and cannot clearly define every dimension of human nature and existence.
Math is entirely logical is correct. Logic IS NOT entirely math.
Logic is cause and effect relationships. They are tautologically true or that is the goal, evaluation of truth by expression.
So, within my model perfection is EQUAL parts fear, anger, and desire. That means that indeed EVERY SINGLE THING in this universe can be logically determined. This means ACTUAL logic is quite mysterious and unknown thus far.
Desire is that which demands mystery exist. Desire is REQUIRED by love, the system, to ensure free will. Without mystery (beauty) the balance of free will would be weighted to instantly perfect states. Rather than ALL THAT IS, the universe, we would have nothing but stagnant perfection.
Anger restrains both desire and fear. It demands they shut up. Anger is interested in self sufficiency, in being. Anger tries to HOLD all fears and all desires. In so doing it rises. This is the balance. This is love. And maximization of these three together is the GOOD, perfection, the goal. So anger is, like each of these three primal emotions, an equal contributor to the GOOD. One IS NOT morally allowed to favor any given emotion. That is immoral behavior.
And ... I completely disagree. Logic, like desire, is infused into everything.Yeah its a helpful predictor for the reasonableness of one's hopeful expectations or descent into despair, but the mere fact that something "unreasonable" like hope or despair exists means there is a dimension to human existence that is entirely untouchable by logic alone.
You are so wrong that I will deign to offer you physical proof.
The atom itself answers to my model.
Protons are fear. They clump in the center. Neutrons are ... neutral (go figure). They offer mass and balance. And electrons are desire, chaos.
Fear is only the past. It is an excitable state arrived at from matching known patterns, e.g. order. Chaos is only the future. It always leads to what is desired and cannot go backwards. Anger is the eternal truth of now. It is only the single moment of the present tense. All physical reality is created by anger's resistance to fear and desire.
So, you are wrong, logic is infused into everything EQUALLY to desire. You only favor desire (and life) because you are giddy with desire, immoral in that sense. This is not said in anger. It is disclosure of truth. Of course you are allowed to choose to believe or not.
Well you read me wrong. The actual balance is between fear and desire. As mentioned MOSTLY, fear is the source of despair and desire of hope. But, also as mentioned, individually desire rots a person possessing it. This is why despite your great luck you still FEEL despair from your core. Your core IS NOT balanced. Your immoral desire is rotting you.3) Balance - you are certainly correct that one must have balanced desires to avoid self-inflicted discontent, but I don't see how that correlates to having a balance between hope and despair.
So hope and despair ARE NOT balanced in the first order. They are only balanced in the second order, amid desire instead of amid love. So hope is desire infused desire and despair is fear infused desire. That fits my model. Do you see the detail of the levels now? It is actually fairly easy to relate this truth, all things considered.
I agree and that misses the point. That is the balance of wisdom.Recognizing that you won't ever fulfill a certain desire doesn't mean that you are despairing - giving up on becoming wealthy enough to avoid fear and discomfort doesn't mean that you have despaired and given in to poverty.
Remember I said that MORE of each emotion is better. So we are NOT leaving desire behind (that is impossible). Rather, we are balancing more and more desire with fear and anger, RATHER than allowing it to rot and ruin our lives. This means hope is there in EQUAL measure to despair. That is the state of wisdom.
This means that wise are MORE desirous than the desire-centric folks. That means that the wise are MORE fearful than the ordered folks. They just are balanced and so they express these emotions less immorally and almost ALWAYS they express one and then the other in tandem. This situation shows a paradox about wisdom. Wisdom is arrived at through suffering which is a whole other topic. But it causes happiness, again, a whole other topic. But the point here is that the wise suffer exquisitely. They suffer MORE, not less than others. But they are also far happier than others. It all stands to reason. The model works.
I love it that you say 'the good' that is correct. But your overall point, MISSES the point of my model. The wise suffer exquisitely. Each failure is deeply felt, so you are wrong. It does mean despair, if truth is understood. It's just that hope enough exists to balance that despair. The state of balance allows for a sense or view of stability.Giving up on a relationship doesn't mean despair, it just means you recognize that your desire is impossible to fulfill because the good you were pursuing in that relationship isn't there.
Yes, it does. Desire is chaos. It wants what it wants. It does not care about fear and logic and rules. Pure desire has to suffer to learn to care about the GOOD. But pure desire it remains.So you can recognize that certain desires aren't conducive to your personal good, giving up on those desires but that can't possibly amount to true despair.
The other emotions are REQUIRED to help desire balance itself. Without them it is unrestrained and it will skew to despair in all cases where it cannot get what it wants, even if that want is evil.
You are wrong again. There is nothing 'heavier' than any and all emotions. It is a disaster to hear an INFP say this, and maybe also a miracle.If despair was something so simple as "seeing a certain future as impossible" then it wouldn't be such a heavy word.
That was poor form of you.4) Desires are flawed - well its rather obvious that everybody’s existences are incomplete and lacking in various ways, but that doesn't mean that wanting fulfillment will cause self-destruction.
You bait and switched. Desire IS NOT fulfillment so you are saying nothing here.
Fulfillment is more akin to wisdom and is transcendent to desire alone therefore. To say this this way you must retract or you do not understand desire. That is my contention.
I dearly love it that you say this. Kudos in the extreme.Some desires are flawed, based on whether they contribute to a person's true good or not.
Followed by this colossal error. Nope.This can be observed objectively.
Humans CANNOT be objective. This is why fear is just as delusional as desire. Memory and awareness are not perfect. So, there is NO SUCH THING as objective observation. What has happened, and any state, may be objective, but that is irrelevant to us finally. We can only TRY to be objective. Unless you say it that way, EVERY SINGLE TIME, you show you do not understand. Remember what I said about the wise. They express desire and then fear right after that in balance. The interest in objectivity has both desire and fear components, but, the display of the understanding of trying only with a constant expectation of failure and thus the possibility of growth and the earning of wisdom, is REQUIRED of a more moral person. Shortcuts are evil and not allowed.
This example shows clearly how hard it is to truly evaluate a situation. We thus use judgment KNOWING ONLY that accuracy is flawed and objectivity is forbidden to us. Still that can be trite. We are able to detect the likelihood of the best path. So, in general I agree.For example, alcohol can help a nervous person gain composure that they are lacking at the moment, so drinking a shot of whisky to calm down doesn't violate their true good. However, if that person has a critical illness or develops an addiction, the alcohol is contributing more to the destruction of their body than to the calming of their mind, and is therefore overwhelmingly in violation of their true good.
But, people's judgment is often DEEPLY flawed. The more they hang out on the over expressed ends of desire and fear, the worse their judgment is. The scales of balance are tossed aside. This is the reason I say all the time, 'if you are mostly right or left wing, you are NOT wise'. That is true. The right is fear-centric and the left is desire-centric. They are both mostly wrong. Following either CANNOT lead to wisdom really in any efficient way.
Incorrect. I am far more DEEPLY fundamental in my model than your surface assertions are.I get the feeling that much of the way you are explaining hope and despair is in reference to every day expectations of life and events, rather than the more fundamental issue I'm hoping to get at
- that is, in times of great suffering, or unusual circumstances, what is behind a person's hope or despair in reaction to the calamity? Especially in long-suffering. I don't really want to discuss the mundane hopes or despairs of a person who's life is at a point of normalcy, since their hopes can really only be about great and unnecessary life improvements (like luxury) given that they aren't being deprived of anything essential.
What you want is not relevant. Your desires are occluding your reason here.
The eternal truth is in every moment. Every small choice is as momentous as any supposed great one. Desire deludes itself that order is petty and small. This is the delusion of heart over mind (ridiculous). This is imbalanced, immoral, and a very clear example of what I am referring to in general about needing to understand wisdom as balance AND maximization.
And you do the left wing thing. You speak of luxury as anathema. Efficiency is a fear side guilt apology from desire. No, living life abundantly amid luxury is a constant state of wise choice. Wise choice is the only meaningful luxury. But to decry luxury itself is unwise.
Your question shows a lack of understanding of the basics of emotion.The question is, when greatly deprived of essentials, and in tremendous suffering, why does hope or despair appear?
So, what is emotion?
What is suffering?
Fear side people will suggest personal control, more of a bear up under suffering, I can take it, attitude.
Desire side people will try to circumvent suffering by ignoring it or wishing it away. They will say 'let them eat cake'.
The fear is delusional capacity and the desire is delusional wishing. So fear makes one delusionally 'correct' (incorrect) whereas desire rots everything (magical thinking).
Suffering is caused by encountering a situation for which you do not yet possess the emotional fortitude to get past.
But love is infinite. Its power the same. All suffering is therefore choice only. Everything you feel is your choice and you are to blame. Blame is empowering. It allows you to have the control in as much as is possible. Control DOES NOT mean you will live. It is BETTER to choose morally to die than to act in any immoral way at all ever. This is the ultimate statement of idealism.
Ridiculous left wing types, chaos-apologists, will say that I am blaming the victim. I am not. I am attempting to remind the victim of the truth of their empowerment. Choice is everything.