I appreciate your comment.

Yes, you're right. Illogical is not the right word here. I apologize. However...

The trick is to align your drives into a more coherent whole, because they will probably stay with you in some way or another. — ChatteringMonkey

(I don't know if you read the first part of the discussion.)
I think you missed my point or you're using this paradox "without context".
My issue is not that I haven't found a way to control my feelings. My issue is that they are illusionary because they were built upon a worldview others forced me to undoubtedly accept. It's not that I reject their existence. It's that they were manipulated because I was told when and how to feel them. Thus, I'm looking for something that will allow me to feel them as something honest, transcendent, coherent and "real"...like pain does, as I argued in the first discussion.

I used this paradox to explain how reality stripped away this "box of thought". I used to show how it uncovered the fake. How my hate derived from this idea "i'm perfect", in short, interfered it with the real which is me feeling and being actually lonely, which is painful. And pain felt real because it showed me this "hate" was justified by a fake worldview.

I appreciate your comment. It is indeed very insightful. However, I want to point out two important things.

It's not that I'm seeking for the right ingredient to fill up the empty bucket. It's that "the empty bucket" itself is an illusion.

It was that there wasn't a bucket to fill up at all. — GreekSkeptic

I believe fulfillment itself is something structured. That's what I call "box of thought".

This emotional anxiety, fatigue, confusion, dread felt as more real than anything I've ever felt before. It showed me not how things are, but how things are not. It's like it started to strip this "box of thought" away, and it was really really painful because I was hanging between a thread of "am I doing something wrong?" and "is this right?". — GreekSkeptic

Basically everything I perceived as truth I saw it collapsed, from how I feel for myself to how I feel for other people. — GreekSkeptic

Plus, I stated that I indeed have found something that feels real in the same way my pain feels real.
(My definition of real is somewhat "unfinished and complicated" since I don't really know but I have an idea. I argued that pain is the primary standard of truth because it is the only thing that feels honest and coherent.

It sounds as self-destructive maybe I don't know, but I chased this kind of feeling. I tried to find ways to bring myself to the ground when alone. I told myself how bad I am, how unworthy, how ridiculous...all these bad stuff you know. It felt true, constant and honest. — GreekSkeptic

It cannot be faked. For me, real means in a few words something that penetrates my numbness.)
Helping others. It's the only anchor I found that pass the illusion aka box of thought, test. It feels honest. It's not a mask I put.

People shouldn't bear the pain of themselves. People shouldn't endure the pain of their own existence — GreekSkeptic

And it's NOT that helping others fill the bucket...its that it feels real. That's what matters. Happiness tries to fill a bucket I don't have, which is why it feels fake. Helping others ignores the missing bucket and focuses on the world outside, which is why it feels "real.".

I appreciate all of your comments. I'm really trying hard to explain to people how I perceive things because I aspire to open a Philosophy Club in my university. However, there is more for me to uncover and show you. I'll do so in other discussions. This is just the "first part".

could you further elaborate on the poem? I didn't quite catch the meaning... sorry

Okay. So you're saying that trust relies on the outcome of the weight we've put onto the other person. If he succeeds in what I told him I trusted him with, then I really trusted him. If he fails? Did I never trust him? I probably did.

But if I measure trust only by the outcome, isn't that not only manipulative but also conditional? Because, I could choose to "trust" anyone and see the outcome. Yet, I give my trust only to those that I believe they won't betray me in the sense of doing the opposite of what I intended them to do.

Thus, let's talk about where "trust" survives. Many times, I've seen people trusting someone, and that someone often betrayed them. Yet, these people kept their trust in them. So, is it conditional? Or is it a coping mechanism, designed to give a small bit of the weight of our existence to others, under the illusion, they won't destroy it.

However, that would imply that in this scenario " Yet, these people kept their trust in them. ", that they have no one else to put their trust in. So that must mean, there is an authentic, real type of trust.

I know all this sounds kind of messy. I'm really trying to type in what I'm feeling about it. It's just when people ask me "Do you have someone you trust?", I don't even know what that means, because it implies that trust pre-exists consequence.