About logical fallacies and happiness pursuit
We humans tend to bend logic to our own suit. We tend to override critical thinking and act on something we like to call emotions, but I find more appropriate to call scapegoats. Note than I'm not saying emotions don't exist, or they are wrong, or should guide us. But then, we should be stupid under the flag of emotion. We should try to save the childhood friend who is ultimately doomed instead of stopping the bomb from killing the whole country. We shouldn't donate money to a "charity" foundation for a ghost problem, like an African warmonger that disappeared years ago. We shouldn't eat only vegetables because "look at their eyes".
That isn't acting on emotions. It's just brazen.
Sure, there are things we should do and can do to help Africa, but donating to ghost causes isn't one of them, despite what some short documentaries want you believing. And there are literally hundreds of sensible reasons to leave that pork chop untouched.
And yet we use those emotions for the worst they could be used: misguiding us. We think that the negative emotions during the process of some things will be turned into good emotions at the end. Tears will turn into laughs, and shoves into hugs, like as if every journey implied some sort of magical catharsis and transmutation of emotions. And so, we pick the choices that bring us the most pain thinking it will beget the most happiness.
And I like how humans find picking the infinitely possible a better choice than the obviously possible. Even when both outcomes are about the same (the most probable even better). I find it amusing and endearing.
It's a myth that the strife equals the happiness that results from it (or even than the happiness is proportional but higher than the strife).
Happiness comes from choices that may pass through strife but finally have a set end.
It's like this (please take everything in this "formula" as nothing but a metaphor to comment on how decision making should be based not on false perceived values but on actual value, even taking in account added value from abstract sources, up to a point, which deserve it's own book):
If I wanted a great house I would have 2 sensible options (politely written in pseudocode):
House that's already great: A
House that has potential of greatness: B
Shitty house (or, for sake of completing the metaphoric options, a great house that's burning and will inevitably become shitty): C
IF (A costs) GREATER THAN (B cost + B repair cost)
Buy B AND repair B
Else IF
Buy A
End IF
Note the absence of C? Yeah, you never pick the house that will stay shitty no matter what you do, because even if the strife you invest on it is great, the happiness will be minimal.
Apply that to everything, be it career choices, romantic partner choices, car choices, ice cream flavor choices, anything. Everything (specially life changing choices like career, romantic, etc.) and you too will be able to avoid wordings like "I thought I would grow into this career" or "I really thought he would change", or "If I invested enough time, I thought my Venomous Sandwich business would flourish". Shitty choices stay that way.
That's why we have to stay away from walking further into a wolf's jaw once we find enough evidence to device it is not a cave, but in fact a wolf's jaw. Let me assure you, deeper down a wolf's jaw we will only find a wolf's gut.
PD: Corollary 1, lotto tickets are stupid.
That isn't acting on emotions. It's just brazen.
Sure, there are things we should do and can do to help Africa, but donating to ghost causes isn't one of them, despite what some short documentaries want you believing. And there are literally hundreds of sensible reasons to leave that pork chop untouched.
And yet we use those emotions for the worst they could be used: misguiding us. We think that the negative emotions during the process of some things will be turned into good emotions at the end. Tears will turn into laughs, and shoves into hugs, like as if every journey implied some sort of magical catharsis and transmutation of emotions. And so, we pick the choices that bring us the most pain thinking it will beget the most happiness.
And I like how humans find picking the infinitely possible a better choice than the obviously possible. Even when both outcomes are about the same (the most probable even better). I find it amusing and endearing.
It's a myth that the strife equals the happiness that results from it (or even than the happiness is proportional but higher than the strife).
Happiness comes from choices that may pass through strife but finally have a set end.
It's like this (please take everything in this "formula" as nothing but a metaphor to comment on how decision making should be based not on false perceived values but on actual value, even taking in account added value from abstract sources, up to a point, which deserve it's own book):
If I wanted a great house I would have 2 sensible options (politely written in pseudocode):
House that's already great: A
House that has potential of greatness: B
Shitty house (or, for sake of completing the metaphoric options, a great house that's burning and will inevitably become shitty): C
IF (A costs) GREATER THAN (B cost + B repair cost)
Buy B AND repair B
Else IF
Buy A
End IF
Note the absence of C? Yeah, you never pick the house that will stay shitty no matter what you do, because even if the strife you invest on it is great, the happiness will be minimal.
Apply that to everything, be it career choices, romantic partner choices, car choices, ice cream flavor choices, anything. Everything (specially life changing choices like career, romantic, etc.) and you too will be able to avoid wordings like "I thought I would grow into this career" or "I really thought he would change", or "If I invested enough time, I thought my Venomous Sandwich business would flourish". Shitty choices stay that way.
That's why we have to stay away from walking further into a wolf's jaw once we find enough evidence to device it is not a cave, but in fact a wolf's jaw. Let me assure you, deeper down a wolf's jaw we will only find a wolf's gut.
PD: Corollary 1, lotto tickets are stupid.
FÖRST!
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, we should think with our minds and feel with our hearts, not backwards.. Ever since we hit puberty, we people think we know all about emotions and take their decisions depending on how we "feel", not even caring if it will affect others, or even us.. As long as it makes us feel good, it's alright because you only live once and live goes on fast, and that's killing us.
ReplyDeleteTake the drug situation, for example.. People drug because they only live once and they want to know what it feels like, enjoy life, but they don't think about the thousands of people that die in order for those to arrive up there.
Why instead of tweeting about Kony, people tweeted about the cartels in middle-america? True, maybe it's not the government's place to determine if you should trip yourself to the grave, BUT it the gov. weren't to legalize some/all drugs, why not helping by stopping the consumption of drugs and so without demand there wouldn't be need for innocent people dying because of your happiness? I guess that's why it's worth believing in an afterlife, because it won't really matter if you suffer here.
We can't always make choices with a formula containing variables. It's not cold matter of emotion-less thinking but definitely also not a brain-less emotion-biased spree. It's about what's right, it's about helping others be happy and finding happiness in that.
I understand the feeling of not taking decision based on a formula. But the formula, for example that I stated, is more a metaphor than a law, a weighing of pros and cons, evaluating the real value of a matter instead of the false value based on things created out of the emotions that esteem from fear.
ReplyDeleteFor example, helping someone out of a sense of pride emanating from justice is fine, but helping someone out of a pride that comes from fear of social views, is, in my sense, not straight. And even if the emotions that emanate from positive sources sacrifice the best outcome for the desired outcome, then they too should be ignored.
You sure? Because it sure didn't look like a metaphor when you said "Apply that to everything". I'm not sure if I understood well what you said, but what I got from what you said is: doing things as if nobody were watching (as if public opinion didn't existed). If that's it, then I concur.
DeleteP/S: hit that "reply" button next time, will ya'
Deletekkthxbye
Fix'd! Thanks for your comments :)
DeleteLoved the Wolf's Jaw metaphor. And word, shitty choices will stay shitty
ReplyDeleteit depends if your decision seriously affects others.
ReplyDeleteDecisions, my friend, always affect others. Maybe not so in a meaningful way, but still. I think we are hold accountable for every grain of rice we waste, if you take it as a dramatic overstatement.
Delete