Good and bad defined in terms of evolution

Discussion in 'Science and Nature' started by MattMVS7, Nov 20, 2014.

  1. #1 MattMVS7, Nov 20, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 20, 2014
    Now speaking in terms of evolution, our minds are designed to experience emotions from our perceptions (thoughts) for a very important reason.  First off, our thoughts are nothing more than what is used for rationalizations and problem-solving while our emotions are what encourage our survival in life.  So if you have the perception (thought) that there is a wild animal that is going to attack you, that would then send an emotional signal to the fear center of your brain in order to encourage you to get out of there so that you survive.  Same thing with experiencing pleasure.  Pleasure is what also encourages us to benefit our survival and the survival of others as well (although pleasure can be misused in not benefiting our survival such as harming ourselves and others).  Where I'm getting at with all of this is that our thoughts alone do not encourage our survival.  The word "good" means "looking forward to things in life," "being encouraged in life," etc.  But you cannot be encouraged in life without any emotions since only our emotions (as well as pain) are what is designed to encourage us to survive.  
     
    The quoted term "looking forward to things in life" as well as any other terms for the word "good" are all derived from what only pleasure can achieve since "good" means "Our encouraged survival in life to benefit ours and others survival."  Thoughts alone without our emotions may make us do great things in life and make us benefit ours and others survival.  But that is not the same thing as being "good" (our "encouraged survival in life").  Same thing applies with having no fear or any other emotions, but choosing to run away from a wild animal that is attacking you anyway.  That is not the same thing as our "encouraged survival" either while you are running away from this dangerous animal in order to survive.  Also, "good" and "bad" are both our "encouraged survival in life."  The difference is that our encouragement to survive in order to benefit ours and others survival (which would be pleasure) is the "good" version of our "encouraged survival."  
     
    But things such as fear, pain, and despair are evolution's "warning" version of our "encouraged survival" since they warn us that something is wrong in life.  So "warning" in terms of evolution is what is "bad" which makes pain and despair the bad version of "encouraged survival."  Therefore, this is why only pleasure is good while only pain and despair are bad while everything else in life is neutral (neither good or bad).  So this is the reason why you cannot be a good or bad person and that your life cannot be good or bad if you did not have feelings of pleasure, pain, or despair.
     
    Now there may be other definitions of the words "good" and "bad" out there that others might have proposed, but they are all still derived from our evolutionary design which would be our "encouraged survival" in life (which would, again, be definitions that are derived from our emotions as well as our pain).  If, for example, another definition of the word "good" means objects and people that help us avoid suffering, anything that helps us accept our losses and move on in life, or our actions of helping others, then even that is derived from pleasure and can only be achieved through pleasure because someone might then tell those with anhedonia (absence of pleasure) to be encouraged in life knowing that these things are good and that his/her actions of helping others is good despite his/her loss of pleasure.  
     
    But as I just stated before, this person cannot be "encouraged" or "look forward" to those things in life without his/her pleasure since pleasure is the only thing that can achieve those quoted things (pleasure being all good feelings including love and motivation).  The term "looking forward to" and any other such terms here are derived from "our encouraged survival" since you cannot look forward to anything in life without being encouraged.  Even things such as value, worth, and beauty are also derived from "our encouraged survival" (which would be pleasure).  Other things in life aside from one's own pleasure might be defined as "good," but without our encouragement (pleasure), then this version of "good" is nothing more than a neutral thought that doesn't make us or our lives anything "good" in reality without our pleasure.  
     
    Same concept applies for "bad."  Even if we were to somehow redefine the word "encouragement" to something else besides our pleasure and then tell someone to be encouraged in life knowing that there are other good and greater things in life aside from his/her pleasure, even this would still be nothing more than a neutral thought.  As I said before, our "looking forward in life," "being encouraged in life," etc. is all derived from our own pleasure.  So this is the reason why people are only fooling themselves into thinking that they are good people and that their lives are somehow good independent of their pleasure or if they had no pleasure in life.  These thoughts of "good" and "bad" or any other created meanings for that matter that these people have are all nothing more than neutral thoughts.  
     
    As I said before, thoughts are just thoughts no matter what they are and the only difference is that they are different sounds, images, words, etc. and that is all.  They might send different signals to different parts of the brain, but even those other parts of our brain besides our pain and emotions are not our "encouraged survival" (meaning, that they are neither good or bad) and nor is anything else in life good or bad either aside from our own pleasure, pain, and despair.  You are also not in the minds of others and cannot experience their pleasure, pain, and despair.  Therefore, it is only your own pleasure, pain, and despair that are the only good and bad things from your own perspective while the pleasure, pain, and despair of others are the only good and bad things from their own perspectives.  
     
    The pleasure, pain, and despair of others from your own perspective is neutral since it is nothing more than a neutral thought.  Even if it is a good or bad value you have towards the pleasure, pain, and despair of others, that is still nothing more than a neutral thought.  Therefore, how good one is (their level of greatness) and how good one's life is solely depends on the level of pleasure he/she has in his/her life.  Same thing applies for how bad one is and how bad his/her life is.
     
    There might even be definitions of the word "good" that others might claim don't require pleasure. However, that version of "good" is nothing more than a neutral thought that doesn't make us or our lives anything good without our pleasure. The real version of "good" would be our pleasure (encouragement) in life. So just thoughts alone do not make us or our lives truly anything good at all without our pleasure. Words such as "good" and other meanings that are good such as beauty and magnificence, they all require us to be encouraged and look forward to things in life in order to validate our lives as being good in the first place from our own perspectives. For example, if a person perceives his/her life being good, then that means he/she would be encouraged and would look forward to things in life. Otherwise, if he/she didn't feel encouraged at all and didn't look forward to anything in life, then his/her life wouldn't be good at all. The lives of others he/she helped despite his/her absence of encouragement and looking forward in life, the lives of those might of been good, but his/her own life would not be good without his/her pleasure. Therefore, since I stated that pleasure is our encouragement (our looking forward in life), then that means that pleasure is the only thing that makes our lives good. Even if someone told him/her something such as that "You might of had no encouragement or looking forward in life, but your life was still good anyway for helping others," even that quoted message itself warrants him/her to be encouraged and look forward in his/her life in order to validate his/her life as being good from his/her own perspective. Again, only pleasure would achieve that.

    First off, the idea (thought) that pleasure-seeking will only bring you and others nothing but pain and despair as well as no pleasure at all in the future, even that thought itself is just a neutral thought while the pleasure still stands by itself as being good.  Same thing for bad.  The idea (thought) that our pain and despair will bring us and others nothing but pleasure and no pain and despair in the future (or at least, much less pain and despair in the future), even that is just a neutral thought while the pain and despair still stands by itself as being bad.

    Second, aren't words such as "good" as well as "value" and "worth" used to help people feel encouraged and look forward to things in life? For example, if someone is feeling very depressed and angry with his/her life, wouldn't we then tell this person that his/her life is still good and worth living in order to try and help him/her be encouraged and look forward to things in life?  Otherwise, what would be the point of those words if they aren't used to try and help us feel better? But again, as I said before, it's not the words themselves that are "good" since they are neutral, it's just pleasure alone that is good and is the only thing that encourages us in life.
     
  2. can you throw some carriage returns in those walls of text? anywhere really.. 
     
  3. This is the 3rd thread of this topic you've made...stop spamming
     
  4. #4 MattMVS7, Nov 20, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 20, 2014
     
    This is a different topic.  My other previous topics were just about my depression and anhedonia and how I felt nothing was good in my life.  Whereas this topic talks about evolution and what good and bad are in terms of evolution.
     
  5. They are the same topics, you just went about the topic differently...

    They all 3 are you saying everything is neutral except pleasure and that pleasure is the only "good"...
     
  6. Always question the source of knowledge, even if the lineage leads to intellectual giants such as Darwin.
    Understanding their lives, although inconclusive of the reproducible quality of their theories, are always an amusing branch of thought to contemplate.
    It turns out Darwin's work was acknowledged and praised in the top institutions of the time. Getting to this point was a long struggle for Darwin, one that even after acceptance, weighted on his conscious heavily. Which makes sense, as the Nazi's used much of his theories to justify eugenics.
    (He ended up marrying his cousin and had a litter of children, some of which died before the age of two. His father was highly engaged in retaining their family's class standing and actually arranged for Darwin to set sail, all while the young and impoverished Alfred Russel Wallace based his studies on his time amongst Polynesian women)
     
    Much of human evolution has based on fitness produced by meagerly scraping by. The ancestors of marmots were essentially like ants to some dinosaurs, yet used this advantage when their time came. What we have now is the dawning of an abundant era. However, we are still very grounded in our animistic behaviours as we squander and murder for resources. If we make it past this stage in our evolution, there is a good chance we transition to a Type I civilization.
     
    Ask a biologist what a cow is and they will give you a lengthy explanation of their hereditary phylogeny as a function of biochemical properties. Ask a theoretical physicist what a cow is and they may tell you they are simply circles, used to model the sun.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZpsVSVRsZk
     
  7.  
    This is actually a theory I made of my own using little of what I already know about evolution.
     
  8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kd81KPuENyI
     
  9. #9 MattMVS7, Nov 20, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 20, 2014
    First off, the idea (thought) that pleasure-seeking will only bring you and others nothing but pain and despair as well as no pleasure at all in the future, even that thought itself is just a neutral thought while the pleasure still stands by itself as being good.  Same thing for bad.  The idea (thought) that our pain and despair will bring us and others nothing but pleasure and no pain and despair in the future (or at least, much less pain and despair in the future), even that is just a neutral thought while the pain and despair still stands by itself as being bad.

    Second, aren't words such as "good" as well as "value" and "worth" used to help people feel encouraged and look forward to things in life? For example, if someone is feeling very depressed and angry with his/her life, wouldn't we then tell this person that his/her life is still good and worth living in order to try and help him/her be encouraged and look forward to things in life?  Otherwise, what would be the point of those words if they aren't used to try and help us feel better? But again, as I said before, it's not the words themselves that are "good" since they are neutral, it's just pleasure alone that is good and is the only thing that encourages us in life.
     
  10. when it comes to science, there's no such thing as 'good', or 'bad', as nothing is inherently either.

      
     
  11.  
    Exactly, because "good" and "bad" are defined by the experience of positive and negative feelings. 
     
  12. Heredotus described this almost 2500 years ago.
     
    Books are great!!!
     
  13. I cant read that wall of text but heres my simple explanation

    Humans are pack hunters

    Pack hunters are animals that survive better because more numbers are better than one

    if you have conflict in the group, the group is less productive, the group dies out

    less conflict in the group means better cooperation, equals better survival

    in other words, people have become less and less shitheads to each other because the groups that didnt have to watch their backs from each other were able to focus on other things like finding food and building stuff
     
  14. #14 smokehound, Dec 23, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 23, 2014
    We're not pack-hunters by nature.  We're opportunistic omnivores, much more akin to a crow's lifestyle than a wolf's.

     A true pack-hunter has the behavior ingrained into instinct.  A wolf or lion pride is a true pack.

    We are no less violent and warlike than we were back in the pleistocene epoch.   In some regions, large game is very scarce, and always was, which is basically the one reason why we arent pack hunters by definition...   Take away all our technology, and we're nothing more than talking apes that prefer not to throw feces. (well, most of the time...)
      

     keep in mind that most of humanity spends a much larger percentage of our lives cultivating plants, or foraging for edible plants, rather than hunting.

     Look up the acorn people.
     

Share This Page