Tell your mom to sell the house and find a place for both of you to live where no one knows you or your problems. Your environment is a constant in everything you do so a change will probably help to break the cycle.
If you could find a smaller house and convert it to 2 apartments you would have the best of both worlds and be able to make friends with new people as well.

If you had to give a definition or clarification on your theory of Happiness what might it be ? — Amity

I don't really have a theory of happiness, just some personal thoughts about it.

They say that you cannot buy happiness, but your wife is probably unhappy when you forget to buy her a present.
Is unhappiness not buying stuff?

They say that happiness grows over time, why are there so many divorces then? Does marriage make people unhappy?

Bars have Happy Hours, is getting drunk going to make you happy.

Restaurants have Happy Meals so kids can get fat and die an early death from heart problems. Does giving your kids that shit make Mom and Dad happy? Of course it does if it makes the kiddies happy and keeps them quiet for ten minutes.

Who the hell knows what happiness is, except of course for "S" and he is keeping his dictionary in the shit house so no one can see it.

Is happiness something that we can expect to be only temporal or should we expect it to be long lasting?
How do you measure happiness, by quality, by length of time, by degrees?

I keep it in my shrine. — S

The outhouse?

Who is this 'us' ? You mean yourself as in acting a bit of a schmuck. — Amity

Oh dear. You do not understand sarcasm at all do you. And irony also seems to be missing for your understanding abilities.

First of all it is customary around here to provide ones usage, definition, of words that are not necessarily standard. I have not found Shmancy in any of the philosophy books I have read so I asked for it to be explained. As you yourself said basic definitions are necessary to start a discussion. I don't go to Wikipedia for definitions either.

Second, calling someone a schmuck is not an example of Shm-reduplication, it is an insult.
schmuck - (Yiddish) a stupid, foolish or annoying person
Which would probably be more applicable to a person that uses "fancy schmancy" in what is supposed to be a serious discussion.

Shmancy works just fine in context. — Amity

The context is him making fun of the words you use, so I guess you should know whether it works fine or not. :smirk:

Either way, you will still need to define what you mean by being or doing 'happy' or 'Happiness'.
I like the specific focus of your suggested discussion. Specifics, like that, could arise or spin off from unpacking the general definition of Baden:The definitions were only to be there as a starter.
What do you think ? — Amity

While Baden's definition is sort of fitting for some discussion, it is rather first person. It is about how one becomes happy, not how one makes others happy.

Fancy-shmancy. :wink: — S

Could you please give us a workable definition of "shmancy", I cannot find it anywhere. And I know that you really like to provide people with the definition of words that are not in common use. Where can I find that dictionary you use?

I'd like to see a discussion about happiness that deals with two main approaches, namely materialism vs meaning, with participants arguing which is better or is more likely to lead to happiness. — praxis

That is closer to my original idea about what makes people happy than trying to find better ways to explain what exactly happiness is. We know already, thanks to "S", the definition of happiness so lets look at the good and bad of making people happy.

Example:
Is it correct(moral) to give a 16 year old a shotgun for his/her birthday if it makes her/him happy?

Wait. How dare you? — S

I would not like to get called out (again) for assuming something I cannot prove, so I figured that if you don't fit into one or more of those three I could always just call you "anything else present".

My pronouns are ze/zir. — S

Is that the equivalent of I/me, him/her or just some more bullshit?

Did you read the thread? That was a lot of fun. :cool:

He/she/it does not like any of my questions.

And he never answers them either.

Not that I give a rat's ass about it anyway.

For example, we do not say statements like ''there is rain'', rather we say ''it is raining'', as if there is some subject, ''it'', to which the predicate ''raining'' can be attached. — philosophy

In some languages you do say there is rain.

The absurdity of this becomes clearer with a statement like ''lightning flashes'', since there is no distinction here between the subject ''lightning'' and its predicate ''flash''. — philosophy

''lightning flashes'' could be a clause or phrase or even a subject but never a statement.

This would depend on context.
The lightening flashes across the sky. It is obvious which is the subject.

There are lightening flashes in the sky. Nothing confusing about that either.

In other words, going back the example I started with, does Aristotle posit the existence of substance because that is how the world really is like, or does the world appear to have substances because of the way Aristotle uses language? — philosophy

If Aristotle was not already substance, how could he posit anything?

Meh. I think I already know what happiness is, so I don't need other people telling me what they think it is. I don't even need to put it into words, least of all fancy-shmancy words. — S

I know you don't need to do it, but you could at least put it into plain, ordinary, simple words so that the rest of us might have an idea what you think.

You're conflating pleasure with happiness. — Baden

That is one point of view, but I am not mixing them up. It is more of a cause and effect thing. Isn't pleasure a source of happiness?

Pleasure;
A fundamental feeling that is hard to define but that people desire to experience
Something or someone that provides a source of happiness

I don't remember who, but someone once said something along the lines of happiness being a larger part of pleasure and a smaller part of pain. Or something like that. It was so long ago that I did any serious reading.

Another possible question for discussion.

Is it ethical for people to produce mind numbing TV programs to entertain the masses just so that they can earn large amounts of money?

Let me think about it, I might create it. The only problem is that I probably wont be around for the next week or so because of work.

If someone else thinks it is worth doing, let them go ahead. Now the ideas have started coming maybe S would care to have a go at it. :smile:

So you want to know why people are masochistic? — Purple Pond

If being sadistic or masochistic makes them happy but revolts others, how can there be a proper definition of happiness? Is there even such a thing as happiness or is it just the absence of things that bother us.

I think a worthy topic of psychology, but is it of any philosophical significance? — Purple Pond

If you ask this question, then there is something to discuss. It is part of human existence, is happiness necessary for a fruitful life? Are there ethical sides to being happy?

Let's take another example of happiness. How many people do you know that can sit for hours watching soap operas on the TV are are happy doing so. Is it because their brain is incapable of processing higher level stuff? I don't think so, my wife does it when she is not working or studying.

Definitions explain what things are, not why they are.

Why are you so obsessed with spanking? — Purple Pond

I am not, I am obsessed with happiness and I would like to understand why or how being hurt can make people happy.

I don't understand your bafflement. There are plenty of examples where one action hurts a person while it benefits the other. A cruel person is happy to make an unfortunate person shriek with pain when spanking them. — Purple Pond

When you are happy being spanked and your partner is happy spanking you it is not the same as one hurting another.

Happiness: Something like the proper mixture of sensitivity, creativity and strength achieved through habit and self-reflection; a self-sustaining stability of not-wanting rather than the result of procuring something wanted; the satisfaction that comes with focusing outwards on a regular basis while recognizing choice and freedom in each moment in the context of a healthy and active imagination; originality in identity and character in a way that fosters same in others; consistent quality in thought and action. — Baden

OK, now how does being spanked fit into that? I actually know someone that loved his wife because every payday she beat the shit out of him and took all the money. I asked him a while ago about her and he told me that they had separated. The place he worked at started paying through the bank and she did not need to beat him to get the money.

Why are there so many different types of happiness? Just saying that there are different types of people does not actually explain it.

On a related note, I almost got myself beaten up by some guys last night because I thought that it would be funny to push a random button on the fruit machine they were playing as I walked by. — S

Heads I answer mean, tails I answer politely. Tails, tut tut. You should learn not to put your hands in place they are not wanted.

Like critiquing someone's ideas without offering any ideas of their own. — Purple Pond

Actually this does not make me unhappy. I enjoy when people critique my way of thinking in a constructive or even passive way. It is a good way to test ideas. What does make me unhappy is criticism that is abusive or down putting.

But going back to my question, why does spanking make some people happy and others sad? How is it possible that the same pain can have opposite effects on people?

So you don't think smiling helps? — Purple Pond

Funny thing about that, yesterday I saw a sign "In this house we don't smile because we are happy, we are happy because we smile". Maybe there is something in that after all. You would certainly have to be careful when and where you smiled though.

Don't pay any attention to him. Tell us what you think, it might just make you happier. :wink:

ineffable — Purple Pond

Well that sort of puts the dampers on things.

What makes one person happy can put one person down — Purple Pond

Like spanking maybe?

Yes indeed, and that is smiling. — Purple Pond

Do you really think that walking around smiling at people would make them happy? I know some people that I don't want smiling at me.

How would you make that philosophical? — Purple Pond

Would you like to define happiness and then explain how to make people feel like that? But we could also look at the lighter side of it.

Cheerleader2u. — S

Pull your knickers up, your jealousy is showing.

I would like to see a discussion with the title: How to silence those nagging voices that you hear in your head.

No, sorry. I just figured out that the noises are not in my head. I was reading S's posts.

Seriously though, what would be nice is a topic about making people happy.

There's a middle finger missing in the emojis. — Purple Pond

:rofl: :up: :100:

My last few discussions are practically duds. :cry: — Purple Pond

Be carefully it does not come and tell you that you are missing an "e" at the end. He will not understand that you used the correct descriptive word.

People who think they are really wise and everything. — Purple Pond

Are there any of those around here?

Ah, a complaint clinic. — Wallows

Was dat? Ain't neva herd a dem.

If you have purchased or consumed any of those products, you must be against human rights. Right? — chatterbears

Kind of funny that the first thing they show is how to use a cell phone to access the information, then go on to explain that child and forced labor is part of the process to make cell phones?

My obvious hostility is what makes me so endearing. Everyone I force into submission tells me so. — S

So they don't tell you too often then do they. :lol:

You are delirious from the poison and walked onto a road. Jump again, that's one big mother of a truck coming at you.

Slat.

Too late. :cry:

I have always had intermittent problems with the Quote function on this forum, with the button sometimes just not working, no matter how carefully, firmly and repeatedly I press it. — andrewk

I have had the same problem with my Windows 10 using Firefox on and of since about a year ago. I have no idea why it started, no new installations or updates made at that time nor any change to the problem with later updates. But it works fine with the touch screen

I found, by accident, that if I right click on the button then left click in the Reply Box it works OK.

Never had any problems on any of the other machine I have, including one that has multi-boot various versions of Linux.

No [you]. — S

No what? Could you please try a little harder to clarify what you mean?

It should be obvious that that doesn't really clarify anything and still leaves a lot of ambiguity. Healthy according to who? Or according to what criteria? Criteria set by who? Is this an ideal? Whose ideal? — S

The same could be asked when when you say that it is not necessary to eat meat to live a healthy enough life.

First of all, what claim of mine do you call into question? Then we can take it from there. If I think that anything I've claimed requires an authoritative source, I can look into it and get back to you. — S

Just answered that.

I like good grammar.
I thought you'd think that that was a mistake.What you highlighted isn't a mistake.
Although it is common to use only one "that" in such sentences. I'm just a bit of a stickler for formality. You'll see the double "that" again up above a few times and in at least one other of my sentences further down. — S

Bullshit. It makes no sense as you wrote. The fact that you can use that twice in a sentence does not mean that it will always be right. If it had read "that they" it would be clear what you mean, but it would mean almost the same as I wrote.

Do you, or do you not, claim that it's necessary to eat a certain amount or a certain type or a certain whatever of meat each day or even at all in order to be healthy? — S

No I do not claim any such thing. If you would read what I have said it will be clear that I have stated that we need certain vitamins and minerals to maintain our bodies health.

You should also concede for your own fault. But I bet you won't. — S

If you are talking about me saying that it is immoral to sit around eating all day and becoming obese then I will not admit that I am at fault. It is my judgement based, just like yours, on my facts, as I see them, logic and my feelings.

I think that it's not necessary wrong, and I think that it's wrong to simply assume that it's wrong. — S

That makes a lot of sense. Try using your logic and the facts as you see them and make a judgement.

You think that Sapiens is mediocre? Have you actually read it? Or are you judging a book by its cover? — S

No, I did not read it. I listened to it because I do not do a lot of actual reading nowadays because of my eyes. But I have read(listened to as well) much better books explaining the history of humanity.

See, this is where you're showing your ignorance. Please read the book and educate yourself. I purposefully chose the example of a Peugeot, because that's given as an example in the book. — S

See, this is where you show your arrogance. Just because it is the only one you have read you think it is sacred. There are other ways to look at things you know.

We didn't discover Peugeots, obviously. We created them. And that has to do with how we evolved to a stage where we can create fiction. That makes us unique, even among other species under the genus Homo. It's actually an extremely important part of our evolution. — S

Pathetic, any machine is a combination of discoveries. They discovered the wheel, the lever, the gear, electricity, internal combustion all of which made the Peugeot possible. Human beings have evolved little since becoming Sapiens and fiction was created long before that.
So exactly how do you think that these creations are going to change the nature of humans. Will it make us less susceptible to disease, that does not seem to be working very well. Will it make us need less food or water, I can't imagine how. Will it help us to survive as a race, could we actually evolve into a carbon monoxide breathing being.

Going back to what I said, there is plenty of info sources available about the need for vegans to take supplements because they cannot live normally without them. Here is one from a vegan and one from a government institution.
https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/the-vegan-diet/
https://www.theveganrd.com/2010/11/recommended-supplements-for-vegans/

Please show me any reliable site that says they do not need to be taking supplements.

Show me a dolphin who has made a conscious ethical judgement to refrain from eating fish, and you may just have a point. Otherwise you're just trying to nail jelly to your wife. — S

So you think that dolphins automatically eat every fish they see? Try watching Discovery Channel instead of reading those mediocre books you keep recommending.

What’s wrong with the comparison? They eat what they evolved to eat, and we evolved to eat cooked meat. — Noah Te Stroete

Nothing at all wrong with the comparison, it is quite good. But we did not evolve to eat cooked meat, the cooking part came much later. A discovery, whether it is cooking meat or riding around in a Peugeot are not part of human evolution. They are just things that make life easier. That being so, they have no effect on human nature at this time. The results of the laziness that these things cause might make a difference to how humans evolve over the next hundred thousand years but I am not going to wait around to see.