It's a cigar, I think, or a Shakespeare play.

May clouds of tobacco smoke sing that idea to its rest.

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.

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.

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? — Sir2u

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.

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.

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.

Why are you so obsessed with spanking?

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.

Masochism.

Definitions explain what things are, not why they are.

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.

So you want to know why people are masochistic? I think it's a worthy topic of psychology, but what's the philosophical significance?

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?

These are great questions to ask inside the happiness discussion we have yet to create. We still need to figure out what who's going write it, what's being written, and where it's going to be published.

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:

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?

@Sir2u You're conflating pleasure with happiness. E.g. There's lots of pleasure to be got from heroin, but I don't consider heroin addicts to be happy people. But yes to the idea that there are relevant personality-specific differences.

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.

A promising topic imo. — Baden

Now that made me happy. Reading something beautifully expressed and creatively philosophical that made me think, nod a little in the right way, and is clearly from a position of life experience. No references to a particular philosopher, book or encyclopedia but a distillation of many. Probably.

Not only a promising topic but...an article, or a book, in waiting :wink:
However, it would have to include major philosophical, if not psychological, neurological professional thinkers and writers on the subject. No ?

Is it best to focus on only one or two aspects ? Hence the need for a focused title and OP.
How would you start? What were the influences which moved you to your destination ?
Perhaps that would be the discussion. To unpack your definition...

The title ?
'Baden's Happiness in a Sentence'.

Now that made me happy. Reading something beautifully expressed and creatively philosophical that made me think, nod a little in the right way, and is clearly from a position of life experience. No references to a particular philosopher, book or encyclopedia but a distillation of many. Probably.
....
The title ?
'Baden's Happiness in a Sentence'. — Amity

We can probably leave me out of the title I think. But your comment is much appreciated. :smile:

Not only a promising topic but...an article, or a book, in waiting :wink:
However, it would have to include major philosophical, if not psychological, neurological professional thinkers and writers on the subject. No? — Amity

If it were a non-fiction book and intended to be comprehensive, yes. Fiction, not necessarily. Both could be equally effective imo. Sort of depends how much you want to show or tell.

Is it best to focus on only one or two aspects ? Hence the need for a focused title and OP.
How would you start? What were the influences which moved you to your destination ? — Amity

If I were to write the OP, I would probably set it up as an exploration of what happiness is in a very general sense first then focus in on specific examples or experience as they become relevant in the progress of the discussion. But I wouldn't want to make it about my biography. :monkey:

We can probably leave me out of the title I think. But your comment is much appreciated. :smile: — Baden

So would a title like 'Happiness in a Sentence' be a good one or would it point to a 'Love is...' hallmark card series of comments. Actually, I do like quotes as starters. Would you be happy to be quoted in any OP ?

If I were to write the OP, I would probably set it up as an exploration of what happiness is in a very general sense first then focus in on specific examples or experience as they become relevant in the progress of the discussion. ButI wouldn't want to make it about my biography. :monkey: — Baden

Aw, what a spoilsport :cry:

The discussion needn't be about your or anyone's biography - although I would love to read everyone's story someday ! We can show but not tell :cool:

However, if your definition was used to start an exploration in a very general sense, then hopefully that would inspire specific examples. Either from posters' life experience or particular philosophy/ philosophers.

What do you think ?

Would you be happy to be quoted in any OP ? — Amity

Sure.

However, if your definition was used to start an exploration in a very general sense, then hopefully that would inspire specific examples. Either from posters' life experience or particular philosophy/ philosophers.

What do you think ? — Amity

All for it. :up:

All you have to do is present your idea for discussion, and hopefully someone else will take up the challenge and create a good discussion. — Purple Pond

What constitutes a 'good discussion'. It's quite easy to start one. The difficulty lies in creating a quality product. The starter of a thread usually takes responsibility, no ? To fully engage...

However, if your definition was used to start an exploration in a very general sense, then hopefully that would inspire specific examples. Either from posters' life experience or particular philosophy/ philosophers.

What do you think ?
— Amity

All for it. :up: — Baden

What do others think ?

What constitutes a 'good discussion'. It's quite easy to start one. The difficulty lies in creating a quality product. — Amity

We can discuss that. I suggest posting a draft of your OP here, and then we can comment on it. We already had two attempts at it. Hopefully we can create at least one quality discussion out of this.

The starter of a thread usually takes responsibility, no ? To fully engage... — Amity

There's only so much a discussion creator can do. The rest is up to the participants.

Wow, all this work and we have yet to created a single discussion. I'm not sure it's worth the effort. Oh, well, I still think it's fun. :grin:

Wow, all this work and we have yet to created a single discussion. I'm not sure it's worth the effort. Oh, well, I still think it's fun. :grin: — Purple Pond

Yes. It reminds me of meetings about meetings. However, I think this discussion has been fruitful.
So far, so good :smile:

We can discuss that. I suggest posting a draft of your OP here, and then we can comment on it. We already had two attempts at it. Hopefully we can create at least one quality discussion out of this.

The starter of a thread usually takes responsibility, no ? To fully engage...
— Amity
There's only so much a discussion creator can do. The rest is up to the participants. — Purple Pond

I agree that there is only so much a discussion creator can do. Also that the quality of a forum and its threads are down to the contributors.

However, I worry that if I started one about Happiness, I would not be able to follow the forum guidelines, particularly the first two:

Don't start a new discussion unless you are:

a) Genuinely interested in the topic you've begun and are willing to engage those who engage you.
b) Able to write a thoughtful OP of reasonable length that illustrates this interest, and toprovide arguments for any position you intend to advocate.

In a) I might be willing but it can quickly become overwhelming if there is a lot of interest and input.

b) In an exploratory thread, I would not be advocating a philosophical position as such. There would be no 'arguments' to support any non-existing position.

The guidelines aren't always enforced. The moderators should have deleted or closed half my discussions. (I shouldn't be telling you this :grimace:) Though I agree that when creating a discussion we should go with the guidelines even though they're usually not enforced.

a) Genuinely interested in the topic you've begun and are willing to engage those who engage you.
b) Able to write a thoughtful OP of reasonable length that illustrates this interest, and to provide arguments for any position you intend to advocate.

In a) I might be willing but it can quickly become overwhelming if there is a lot of interest and input. — Amity

Just engage in one or two people for a few posts. There's no obligation to engage indefinitely with everyone.

b) In an exploratory thread, I would not be advocating a philosophical position as such. There would be no 'arguments' to support any non-existing position. — Amity

@Baden can correct me if I'm wrong, but you only have to provide support if you have a position you are advocating. Like you say, you are not advocating any position, it's an exploratory thread, so no need for arguments. You can also frame your OP in the form of a question. Example: What is happiness?

Even if the arguments are not your own, you should still describe at least some of the ideas surrounding the topic in some detail. We normally delete short OPs based on questions alone as it suggests the OP writer hasn't thought much about the issue and will hardly be able to contribute much less lead the conversation.

The moderators should have deleted or closed half my discussions. — Purple Pond

You probably shouldn't let us in on that... :eyes: