I purposely put that in there hoping someone would try to put flow states on a pedestal. Flow states don't make up for the lack of existence. Flow states are another avenue for lack actually. Then people miss the feeling of flow and chase it around for fleeting moments that fade. — schopenhauer1

It seems they belong on a pedestal. We're talking about the experience of transcending time "as though time were irrelevant" -- all of the suffering irrelevant (or relevant depending how you look at it). Don't you think it possible to cultivate these flow states (less default lack) and make them a regularity in our lives?

Yep, I understand you need variety in order for there to be traits that promote survival and reproduction in populations. I wasn't challenging that. My point was that we are existential creatures, unlike most other creatures. Being existential creatures means we have unique abilities- such as reflecting on why we do anything in the first place..why we exist..what's the point of it all. I'm explaining that there is a structural futility or emptiness behind all pursuits. We (as individuals) survive to survive to survive, doing repetitious or habitual routines- all within a cultural/linguistic, historically contingent, socioeconomic milieu. But we also do non-survival but related activities dealing with how comfortable we want to be (based on cultural expectations)- so we clean the house, fix the drain, wash the dishes, get the oil changed, etc. Finally, much our "free" time (non work or maintenance related) is to flee the eternal emptiness of the mental state of boredom. So, we flee it by trying to entertain ourselves with goal-driven activities- in other words, giving ourselves something to achieve. Sometimes our goal-driven entertainments lead to flow states which is a complete absorption in an activity as though time is irrelevant while we are engaged. — schopenhauer1

It seems to me the bolded concepts don't jive with each other. As I've experienced, "flow states" offer a sort of mystical timeless transcendence that give profound meaning and fullness.

So are you implying that it is possible to experience physical pain without experiencing mental pain? — MonfortS26

Yes. Mind over matter.

That just seems like an arbitrary boundary between the two definitions in order to make the statement that suffering is the result of desire true while keeping the reality that pain is caused by external forces also true. How are you defining pain vs suffering? — MonfortS26

Pain as physical, suffering as mental.

So when it comes to the desire not to be tortured, the suffering in that area comes from desire itself? Not the person shoving bamboo under your fingernails? — MonfortS26

The pain comes from the torture. The suffering comes from the frustrated desire to not be tortured.

Correct, IF there is no afterlife, no Justice. You're stating there is no afterlife. Do you feel you have sufficient evidence to make this claim? Wouldn't it be fairer to say we don't know what happens after we die?

Religion also helps people that have a Fear of Life.

Yes, Fear of Death is only one of the reasons Religion is around. Justice is another reason. The horrible things that happen in this life will be justified in the life to come.

Until someone proves or disproves God, I will continue to serve Him, because it’s better to be safe than sorry. — Starthrower

Sounds like fear not love

nobody has any idea whether God exists — Starthrower

That won’t stop me from trying to show them that God is real and is active. — Starthrower

How do you reconcile these two ideas?

No. Those don't give you energy, you just no longer feel sad. — Agustino

To a certain extent. Those are good, but they already require energy to undertake. — Agustino

Good point, but these should address the real issue (the depression). And with that relief, it will be easier to take action. Negative thoughts will fade for a time. It all comes down making the effort to take action. Action drives passion and visa versa.

Exercise and eat healthy. Anti-depressants.

music

Are you defining Belief as Religious Belief? Or in other words, belief that extends beyond it's boundaries of certainty.

When the mind is vacant of thought, perception, ideas, concepts, etc, it is asleep or maybe more simply not overthinking.

It what world would it make sense that it was "okay" to cause suffering to an innocent person?

It would be wrong with presupposed values that are consistent with allowing others to have the ability to valuate. However how can you demonstrate that that those presupposed values aren't just what you or majority of people feel or think is right vs. some objective moral standard that describes what actually is right or wrong. — SonJnana

My argument only matters if you grant intrinsic=objective. I'm thinking something along the lines, that the fact the life exists and seems to have forced itself into existence (something like Schopenhauer's Will). I believe transgression and violation against this will of life itself is intrinsically, objectively morally wrong. Life and nature's morality stands on its own. Life's persistence isn't a presupposed value nor is it a matter of majority opinion. And it's got nothing to do with "outer, non-human judge".

The title of this thread is a little misleading now, but I don't expect you to read all the replies. My position now is that objective morality hasn't been demonstrated. So as you say murder is socially reprehensible, that is because many humans generally value life and safety. Since those presupposition values are subjective, that doesn't demonstrate that it is objectively morally wrong to kill. — SonJnana

So your position went from:
Nothing is intrinsically morally wrong
to
Objective morality hasn't been demonstrated.

Is intrinsic morality the same as objective morality?

It's not objectively morally wrong because the person you're killing values life and safety. It's objectively morally wrong because murder annihilates the person's ability to valuate at all.

Morality is intrinsic if you would allow me to extend intrinsic to mean natural. Murder is socially reprehensible and therefore reprehensible to human existence. Humans cannot survive without socialism.

I am that I am

Why do you say the number of truth statements is limited?

Given the time, one could make an infinite number of true statements (as well as false statements),

Trump is the president.
The president is white.
The president has hair.
The president has blonde hair.
The president is taller than 5'
The president is taller than 5'1"
etc etc

Is a non-condition a condition?

I think you just have to do what makes you happy, it might justify your existence.

Is there a difference between love for mother, sister, and friend even?

Forget about pain, what about boredom?

God gives X a new pain that he is unable to derive pleasure from.