>>7560509 >Inside Out It is an excellent film. Much to the point at hand, I found the name of Joy to be not the best choice. I think the idea of joy can be seen as getting at what I think OP is talking about: a sense of satisfaction/fulfillment/positiveness/etc in the face of what is negative in life. And I think happiness could be defined in a similar way (and so that wouldn't have worked any better for a name). Joy's character arc involved learning her limited role (and Sadness was the real hero of the film); I like Glee as a name for the character and her role in the story.
Anyway, OP >>7560432, if happiness can exist without sadness, I don't think we'd be able truly to recognize it as such. For a literary example, something that comes to mind is Alyosha from Brothers Karamazov. I think he experiences a kind of happiness by the end of the book, in spite of the sad things that happen earlier. I think the sad things inform the happy things and highlight how good they are.
what is happyness but a means to emotion, we are above that here, for we are on 4chan, the world of infinite, emotions epressive, expressos, we know waht it means to be all emotions, we are one and all are none for we are on 4chan, we live, we forget, expect us
>>7560432 No, they are two poles of on a magnet. But they are the crudest form of emotion and you should get get them out of your life. If you live for happiness you enable sadness to exist. Its better to live for the glory of existence and sit balanced between the two.
>>7560668 Jodi is fucking doable for 53 and we both know it.
Of course it can, but not in the way we think of normal daily life. Happiness or badness exist only with an accompanying subjective experience to endure specific moments of them. It's not hard to imagine an entity experiencing only happiness, and equating their concept of "being" with this. However, by definition happiness alone would have to be static (perfect, even), otherwise the lower of its degrees would be termed badness.
actaully yes. It is just a chemical reaction based on the production of endorphins. If you steadily inject some endorphin in your veins you'll be able to be happy. There is an issue: your body will have a growing defense against that hormon so you'll have to inject every time a bigger dose. This will end with your dead cuz this process is pretty dangerous but at least you'll be eppee fhur evuh
Only if you define happiness as an emotion or set of emotions. If we took an older virtue based view of human life injecting endorphins into your veins would only make you feel pleasure, not actually be happy.
I think the emotion based view on happiness is a part of the reason why so many people today are unhappy. While I don't take Stoicism to that external denying extreme I do think happiness is impossible without virtue for the same reason that a person in terrible conditions can be more fulfilled than a billionaire.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.