Emotions do not perceive.

I think they are a form of perception like sight and hearing. Sight and hearing are forms of awareness that allow you to perceive objects and sound.

...

Let me post 3 logical arguments to make my point clear:

Hedonistic Logical Argument #1

Here is a logical argument that explains and sums up my philosophy. It is my 1st logical argument:

1.) Happiness can only be a positive emotional state induced by the biochemicals. This is a scientific fact. If you lose all of these chemicals and nothing you do can induce these chemical induced euphoric states, then you cannot have happiness. So, happiness can only be our euphoric states. Likewise, unhappiness can only be our dysphoric states while having neither happiness nor unhappiness can only be an apathetic state.

Lastly, happiness is a perceptual state like any other such as sight, hearing, thought, etc. But happiness is a positive toned state of mind (perceptual state) which means it is a state of mind that possesses an intrinsic good quality. It would, therefore, follow from here that unhappiness would be a negative toned state of mind which means it possesses an intrinsic bad quality while apathy would be a neutral toned state of mind which means it possesses an intrinsic neutral quality.

2.) Perceiving good value, worth, joy, beauty, liking, enjoyment, inspiration, and love can only be a perception for you that has a positive tone (an intrinsic good quality). In short, having perceptual good value and worth, along with joy, and beauty in your life is always a positive toned perceptual state no matter how you look at it. Even if you thought that a negative toned perception can be of good value to you, then this still presupposes a positive toned perception in despite of that negative toned one.

3.) Perceiving bad value, torment, suffering, hate, and misery can only be a perception for you that has a negative tone (an intrinsic bad quality). In short, having perceptual bad value, along with suffering, misery, and torment in your life is always a negative toned perceptual state no matter how you look at it. Even if you thought that a positive toned perception can be of bad value to you, then this still presupposes a negative toned perception in despite of that positive toned one.

4.) Perceiving neither good value, worth, bad value, joy, beauty, suffering, torment, or misery can only be a perception for you that has a neutral tone (an intrinsic neutral quality). In short, having neither perceptual good value, worth, nor bad value, along with having no suffering, misery, torment, or beauty in your life is always a neutral toned perceptual state no matter how you look at it. Even if you thought that a neutral toned perception can be of good value to you or bad value to you, then this still presupposes a positive or negative toned perception in despite of that neutral toned one.

5.) The intrinsic profoundness and intensity of these positive toned, negative toned, and neutral toned perceptual states dictate the level of perceived value. If you were in a very positive toned perceptual state, then you would be perceiving much good value and worth in your life. If you were in a very negative toned perceptual state, then you would be perceiving much bad value in your life. Likewise, if you were in a very neutral toned perceptual state, then you would be perceiving much neutral value in your life.

6.) Positive toned perceptual states can only be happiness, negative toned perceptual states can only be unhappiness, and neutral toned perceptual states can only be apathy. It is, therefore, only our euphoric states which can be the positive toned (happy) perceptual states, our dysphoric states which can be the negative toned (unhappy) perceptual states, and neither euphoria nor dysphoria being neither the positive or negative toned (neither happy nor unhappy) perceptual states.

Therefore,

Conclusion: It's actually not the conscious states themselves (i.e. our thoughts, outlooks, and value judgments alone) that possess the positive and negative tone. They do not possess any real intrinsic good or bad qualities. It is only our positive emotions that can allow us to perceive good value and worth in our lives, our negative emotions that can allow us to perceive bad value in our lives, and our apathy that can allow us to perceive neither good value, bad value, nor worth in our lives. You cannot be in any state of suffering, joy, misery, torment, hell, heaven, beauty, or perceived good value, bad value, and worth without your positive and negative emotions.

You could certainly have positive or negative thoughts in the absence of your positive and negative emotions. You could also display positive and negative tones and gestures without these emotions. But you would have no positive or negative toned conscious state to give your life any real perception of good and bad value. In addition, the intensity and profoundness of your positive and negative emotions dictates the level of perceived value in your life. Lastly, saying that all the positive and negative qualities I've mentioned above are all nothing more than a person's value judgment or mindset would be denying the existence of any real suffering, joy, etc. It would be treating them as judgmental qualities rather than qualities that are intrinsic to our everyday lives.

Hedonistic Logical Argument #2

1.) How you think is how you will feel. If you thought that something was good to you, but not all that great, then you will get a euphoric feeling from that which would be a euphoric feeling that possesses an intrinsic quality that isn't that great, but still good, nonetheless. Likewise, if you thought you were having the most beautiful moment of your life and you felt euphoric from that moment, then that euphoric feeling would possess an intrinsic quality to it that is the most beautiful and joyful.

2.) Thoughts are, in a way, like feelings. If you were telepathic and could only communicate feelings rather than thoughts, then the other person would still get the message of what it is you are telepathically communicating to him/her. In premise 1, I have clearly established that how you think is how you will feel. This means that our thoughts take on a different form. They become feelings. It's no different than how water takes on a different form when it freezes. It becomes ice. Even though it's ice, it is still water (H20).

3.) Referring to premise 2, it would follow that if you think something is beautiful to you and you got a euphoric feeling from that, since it is commonly believed that it is our thinking (value judgments) that make things beautiful to us, then it would have to be the case that the euphoric feeling you get would have to make things beautiful to you. Remember, I have clearly established that thoughts are, in a way, like feelings.

4.) Still referring back to premise 2, it is only the ice (euphoria) that can give our lives the perceptual quality of good value, worth, joy, beauty, and happiness. The liquid water (thoughts/outlooks alone) does not possess this quality. It's no different than a situation where you only had a frozen icee drink versus a hot melted one on a hot summer day. The hot melted one cannot give you the delicious frozen beverage you seek. There is no other frozen beverage out there. That is, there is no other euphoria out there to be obtained. This means that life itself is a desolate desert with only one frozen beverage (the frozen icee). That one frozen icee would be our positive emotions since you cannot have a euphoric state without your positive emotions.

Therefore,

Conclusion: It is only our positive and negative emotions that possess the intrinsic quality that give our lives a real perception of good value, bad value, worth, joy, happiness, and suffering. Our thoughts/outlooks alone simply do not possess this intrinsic quality for us.

Hedonistic Logical Argument #3

1.) Perceiving beauty, love, joy, good value, and worth in our lives is the most important thing to us as human beings. They are the higher, humanistic qualities we need in our lives.

2.) Our judgments do not dictate reality. For example, if we judged a person as ugly who had a daunting appearance, then that does not make the person ugly on the inside. For all we know, this could truly be a beautiful person on the inside. It is, therefore, what's on the inside that counts and not what's on the outside.

3.) Consciousness is also the most important and precious thing. Without it, then we would either be dead or unconscious. We also wouldn't be able to perceive any of the qualities mentioned in premise 1. There are also many mysterious about consciousness that we still have yet to figure out.

Therefore,

Conclusion: Our value judgments do not dictate what type of perception we have in our lives (i.e. joyful, good, bad, beautiful, horrible, etc.). So, it is not our judgments that are important here. Rather, it is what's on the inside that truly matters (our consciousness). It is, therefore, the type of conscious state or emotional state we have that determines whether something truly is hell, joy, or horrible for us or not just as how it's what type of person he/she truly is on the inside that determines who he/she really is. If you disagree with my conclusion, then, like I said, there are still many mysterious about consciousness that we don't know and my whole theory could be one of these mysteries.

That's quite a bit of material...

It deserves more attentiveness than life permits at the moment. I'll read it a bit more carefully next time around and voice any immediate concerns afterwards...

Cheers.

How you think is how you will feel. — TranscendedRealms

You seem to take this as a premise. I want logical reasoning to back up this claim.

You seem to take this as a premise. I want logical reasoning to back up this claim. — BlueBanana

I'll take a stab at the logical reasoning you are looking for "How you think is how you will feel."
If each of our realities are made up of OUR perceptions, then to change our reality, we need to begin with changing OUR perceptions. Once we understand that we can control how we feel by changing our perceptions we can make the assertion that how we think is how we will feel.

Does that help?

You can't change how you perceive something (except our thoughts - changing the thought obviously changes one's perception of it).

One distinction I think should be made in this discussion is the word "feel", which can refer to both feeling emotions and one's feelings about a subject (which is different from one's thoughts about the subject).

Once we understand that we can control how we feel by changing our perceptions we can make the assertion that how we think is how we will feel. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Have you actually experimented with this idea? From what I've observed it doesn't work, but the idea is somewhat in vogue.

Changing perspective does affect how one might react, but results are always unpredictable as are all things in life. There just isn't such a thing as being able to control how one reacts, only change. Emotions just happen, and are more likely guides rather than objectives.

You can't change how you perceive something — BlueBanana

Yes, you can change how you perceive something.

Have you actually experimented with this idea? From what I've observed it doesn't work, but the idea is somewhat in vogue. — Rich

When I first was shown how the theory can work and how well it works, I took it on as a "tool" to add to my coping with life "toolbox". It is not the only tool but it is an effective one once you are able to do it.

Changing perspective does affect how one might react, but results are always unpredictable as are all things in life. There just isn't such a thing as being able to control how one reacts, only change. — Rich

Let me show you by an actual example that has worked for 25 years of my life and although you might not completely relate to my example, if you try the theory, you will see that it can work.

I was seeing a Social Worker in regards to my childhood and some of the garbage that I was carrying unnecessarily into my adult life that was beginning to affect my marriage. In the process of trying to heal my past and stabilize my current life I was taught a bunch of "coping tools" through CBT Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and some worked, some didn't. The tools that did work I took with me and I left the rest.

The real life experiment consisted of something that I really wanted to have more of in my life but that my husband could feel taxed about my need of at times and something that my husband did on a daily basis that drove me crazy and that I had tried to work with him about but to no avail.

What I wanted more of? Hugss from my husband
What daily habit of his drove me crazy? Him leaving his wet towel on our bed.

So my therapist and I took those two opposite emotions and began to change the only thing we could which was my perceptions. He told me what he actively wanted me to do for two weeks and report back to him if it had any influence, good or bad. He said for two weeks when you make the bed and see that wet towel on the bed I want you to change your thought of frustration, into that towel being your husband's hug that you are wanting more than he wants to give.

Needless to say I laughed at him, asked if I could get my money back for that session because all he was telling me to do was to foster this bad behavior of his not picking up after himself. He said that may or may not change over time but YOU can change your perspective of what it means to YOU to have him place that wet towel on the bed. I did as he asked and reported back two weeks later and I said it was working a little bit but I still thought I was letting him get away with me picking up after him. He asked me to try another two weeks of it and by 4 weeks the wet towel on the bed no longer felt disrespectful but not a hug either. By about month three I began to feel like he had thought of me when he left the wet towel there and didn't mind hanging it up.

The change in my reality really showed up when we moved into a new house and the bathroom bedroom setup was different. My husband began hanging up his own towel and not leaving it on the bed and the first time I saw the bed without my hug, I was sadly stunned. Which of course made no sense to my husband because he thought I WANTED him to hang up his wet towel, which soo many years ago was my desired change in him but now? It felt odd.

I explained to him why my perspective over the wet towel had changed and that it now represented a hug from him and it blew him away. He couldn't believe that was the reason I no longer nagged him about it but it was and is the reason why. Even as recent as this morning, there is a wet towel at the end of the bed and we both know why and yes, when we get into disagreements, he has been known to hang up his own wet towel. ;)

You write Happiness can only be a positive emotional state induced by the biochemicals. This is a scientific fact.

False. Happiness is a moral theoretical postulate you superimpose on psycho-biological findings. Happiness is a moral, not a psychological state. What you describe is contentment, something which is fleeting and transitory. Today at work I may get a bonus, and so I feel very content, whereas tomorrow I might lose my wife and so feel very depressed. Happiness is over above these emotional/psychological vacillations. Happiness has to do with having complete virtue, temperance, charity, love, faith, and so on.

Nonetheless, go ahead and read the rest of the material in those logical arguments and you will see the point I am trying to make here. In addition, read my opening post because it also makes my point as well.

It is an interesting story. As you pointed out, your husband was surprised and so were you. There were changes but outcomes are always unpredictable. I've should try to change but it would be to much to expect control over outcomes. It just isn't possible.

How you think is how you will feel. — TranscendedRealms

You seem to take this as a premise. I want logical reasoning to back up this claim. — BlueBanana

This rings true according to the theory of constructed emotion that I'm currently learning about. The basic logic of it is that emotions are essentially concepts which are learned. For instance, a constructionist might say that ArguingWAristotleTiff changed instances of her emotional concepts, or perhaps simply created new emotional concepts. And of course our concepts affect our perception.

You might be right to distinguish forms of "happiness" but I feel you are jumping straight in and playing a word game in order to downplay one form of happiness and bolster another. However, I feel you have got it wrong lexically because "contentment" is not a very good word to describe very pleasurable states. Contentment tends to imply a long term spell of low to moderate happiness. In fact, the C word might well be the one to apply to your "over and above" moral state. Unless it's a really intense long term state, in which case "bliss" would be a good word.

Additional Note: If, let's pretend, that I was telepathic and I could only communicate feelings rather than thoughts, then if I were to telepathically send you a feeling that I got from a certain character, you would be able to describe the attributes of this character to me. You would tell me that this character is beautiful, a joyful god or goddess out on a heavenly tropical adventure, etc. This clearly proves that our positive and negative emotions possess intrinsic qualities. Many people think they don't. They think it is all a matter of our value judgment that determines whether something is beautiful, good, or horrible to us. I am here to challenge this notion. I think it can only be our emotions that can make things beautiful or horrible to us.

Final Statement: This whole idea/theory of mine is a theory that could change the world. That is the reason why it is vital that I go in great length to fully discuss it. We currently rely on our value judgments to give perceptual value to our lives and I have every reason to think this is the wrong method. It is a theory that would help encourage others to find cures for depression and other illnesses that take away our positive emotions. I think a book needs to be published on this very subject that I have learned from my own struggles with depression and misery in my life. After all, where would we be without our positive emotions? If you were to perform a positive emotional expression such as closing your eyes in a profound stature at the wondrous sight of nature, but you were to have no positive emotion whatsoever, then this would be a contradiction. You would be forcing a certain expression that does not reflect your state of mind.

Likewise, all other positive emotional expressions such as helping others, making the best of life, thinking that you are perceiving value in your life, etc. in the absence of your positive emotions would not reflect your state of mind either. Therefore, that is why I find this whole value judgment version of perceptual value to be a contradiction because it says that you don't need your positive emotions in order to perceive value towards the helping of others and in making the best of life. This would have to mean that, the only thoughts and expressions that can truly reflect an apathetic state of mind would be those of a mere droid. What kind of life would that be? It's no way to live. Likewise, the only expressions and thoughts that can truly reflect a negative emotional state of mind would be negative thoughts and expressions.

So, how is it then that depressed and apathetic people are still able to have these positive thoughts of value in their lives and display these positive tones and expressions in the absence of their positive emotions? It would be due to the fact that they are deluded. They are forcing themselves to make the best of life anyway without their positive emotions and they think that is somehow a good and worthwhile life to them when it is not. These forceful expressions have become so natural to them that they are fooled into thinking their lives really are good to them. Or it could be the case that these depressed and apathetic people have, at least, a small amount of positive emotions to give them a small perceptual amount of value in their lives.

So, how is it then that depressed and apathetic people are still able to have these positive thoughts of value in their lives and display these positive tones and expressions in the absence of their positive emotions? It would be due to the fact that they are deluded. They are forcing themselves to make the best of life anyway without their positive emotions and they think that is somehow a good and worthwhile life to them when it is not. These forceful expressions have become so natural to them that they are fooled into thinking their lives really are good to them. Or it could be the case that these depressed and apathetic people have, at least, a small amount of positive emotions to give them a small perceptual amount of value in their lives. — TranscendedRealms

I think it's because one of our basic instincts is to search for love, reciprocation, community - all of which are aimed at survival of the individual and the species. The problem is that how the world currently operates is often largely at odds with how we feel it should be at a deep level. The resulting stress causes much of the unhappiness and mental disorder that we see these days. Despite being depressed or apathetic, we continue to search for and acknowledge the things we are instinctively driven to seek out, in an effort to find a reason to live in the face of sometimes extreme mental suffering.

Instinct or not, it still does not possess the intrinsic quality to give one's life any real perception of value. It is nothing more than an instinct to aid our survival and the survival of others, but that is not the same thing as actually perceiving value. Going back to my additional note, I think it can only be the emotions themselves that truly possess the instinctive drive that gives our lives perceptual value. There were many moments in my life where I was completely hopeless and miserable due to an emotionally traumatic life event. Even though I have chosen to get help to change my life for the better, I could still clearly tell that my whole life and the whole idea of me getting help to change my life was not of any real perceived value and worth to me. But once I have fully recovered from these horrible moments, that is when I noticed that all of the perceived value automatically came back into my life again. It was like magic and not my way of thinking. This has led me to the definite conclusion that it is only our positive emotions that can allow us to truly perceive the good values in our lives. Before anyone objects, I know what these miserable moments were like for me.

I know this was not just my value judgment judging my life as something being without value. I can definitely tell the difference between a thought version of value versus a feeling version. The feeling version engulfs my whole entire reality in a state of either complete paradise or complete hell depending on how I feel. But the thought version is just a thought and nothing more. The intrinsic quality of thoughts alone are of a completely neutral quality which means these thoughts possess no intrinsic quality to them to give my life any real perceptual quality of value. I describe in my later packet that these intrinsic qualities that give our lives a real perception of value would be the divine light and spiritual darkness. Remember, it is just an analogy. If we lived in a purely naturalistic universe, then it is quite possible that consciousness would be nothing special and would just be the result of chemical and physical processes in the brain, it would be meaningless in a grand sense, and would possess no intrinsic qualities. But if our emotions really do possess intrinsic qualities, then it is quite possible that we live in either a spiritual universe or a naturalistic universe that somehow allows for these intrinsic qualities.

But my important question here is, can the divine light and spiritual darkness take on the form of a person's thinking besides his emotions and, thus, give this person a real perceptual quality of value without the need for any emotions? I'm not sure this is possible. I just can't possibly fathom a thought that can bring my life the immense amount of profound joy and value that I have had through my positive emotions and neither can I possibly fathom a thought that can bring my life all the immense suffering and horrible value that I have had through my struggles of emotional trauma and misery. That is the reason why I just have to come to the conclusion that it can only be our emotions that possess these intrinsic qualities. As long as we treat suffering, joy, and value as value judgments rather than intrinsic qualities, then we are only denying the existence of any real version of these qualities. That is showing a lack of empathy and compassion towards those who really do go through real suffering. It shows both a lack of compassion towards me and others who go through real suffering and it shows a lack of consideration towards my human need for real perceived joy and value in my life.

If, let's pretend, that I was telepathic and I could only communicate feelings rather than thoughts, then if I were to telepathically send you a feeling that I got from a certain character, you would be able to describe the attributes of this character to me. You would tell me that this character is beautiful, a joyful god or goddess out on a heavenly tropical adventure, etc. — TranscendedRealms

I think this is a good scenario to explore your ideas about emotion.

It is unclear exactly what you would be teleporting to another mind. You say "feelings rather than thoughts" but then claim that a character with attributes is communicated. Is a "character" a feeling? Are attributes a feeling?

Perhaps you're implying that it doesn't really matter how a feeling manifests and what character or attributes it takes on in the receiver, and all that matters is that it's generally 'good'. But in this case what good is simply feeling good? We have drugs that accomplish this, and as the current opioid crisis attests, this is not good.

This clearly proves that our positive and negative emotions possess intrinsic qualities. Many people think they don't. — TranscendedRealms

For one thing, hypothetical scenarios don't prove anything but the capacity to construct hypothetical scenarios. For second, you haven't actually shown what intrinsic qualities emotions possess. See above.

They think it is all a matter of our value judgment that determines whether something is beautiful, good, or horrible to us. I am here to challenge this notion. I think it can only be our emotions that can make things beautiful or horrible to us. — TranscendedRealms

This seems to imply that our emotions are intrinsic or that we all possess the same set of emotions. Is that right?

I am saying that our emotions possess intrinsic qualities of beauty, joy, good, bad, and suffering that gives our lives a real perceptual quality of those terms in our lives. Without our emotions, then we cannot perceive these qualities. You have posited a scenario where getting euphoric highs off of a drug is a bad thing. Sure, it really would be a bad thing. But the drug user would not be able to perceive any of that bad value as long as he is getting high. If I were that drug user, I would still stop the drug anyway since I know the harm it would cause me. However, that is not the same thing as perceiving my drug addiction as a bad thing. That is just making a decision. Like I said, the intrinsic quality of this thought during my high would possess a neutral quality to it and, thus, cannot be any real perceived bad value. This means that we as human beings can still make decisions knowing the harm and consequences.

However, there would be no real perceived value in the absence of our emotions. Actually, in a way, I guess you could consider it to be a real perception of value. However, it would be a no quality standard of perceived value which would mean it really wouldn't be any real perceived quality of value. So, if anyone is gong to live their lives without their positive emotions, then that is a no quality standard of living. Living a life that has nothing but negative emotions would be a bad quality standard of living. The fact of the matter is, you need a perception that possess an intrinsic good or bad quality to make you perceive a real quality of good and bad value in your life. It is only our emotions that possess these inherent good and bad qualities. Remember, these intrinsic good and bad qualities are the profound and spiritual divine light and darkness in my analogy.

Even though I have chosen to get help to change my life for the better, I could still clearly tell that my whole life and the whole idea of me getting help to change my life was not of any real perceived value and worth to me. — TranscendedRealms

My experience with depression was quite different. Having experienced what I consider to be a normal state of mind leading up to the depressed period, I could indeed see the value in returning to that normal state, despite the fact that I was completely miserable. Also, my mood during my depressed state did not reflect what one would expect, given my life circumstances at the time, which were pretty damned good. It wasn't until I addressed my negative irrational belief systems that I was able to recover from the severe depression. In my case, the thoughts were driving the emotion and perception as much as the emotions were at times driving the thoughts and perception.

Actually, it would be like sight and hearing. There are objects and sound waves out there. But the only way we can perceive them would be through sight and hearing. Likewise, things, moments, and situations in our lives hold values. In order to perceive these values, then that requires your emotions. In a way, you could consider emotions to be a sense. They are a higher sense that transcends our biological senses. Going by my spiritual analogy, they would be our divine and spiritual sense. The positive emotions would be the divine spiritual sense.

However, the negative emotions would be our dark spiritual sense. Just like how a blind person cannot make himself see anything by believing and thinking he can see objects, we cannot see the values in our lives by thinking we can see them in the absence of our emotions. If a person were to create a magnificent character, then the magnificent light energy is there. If I were to get a positive emotion from that character, then it would be like I am sensing the spiritual life energy of that character. I would literally feel all the beautiful and magnificent attributes of him or her. It would be the divine light giving me a powerful and transcended perception.