They’re not entirely wrong, and your comment is seemingly unhinged and unprovoked… but there’s a lot of literature on stuff like mindfulness, CBT, and the impact thoughts can have on one’s emotions, especially happiness.
CBT and mindfulness can help with SOME problems. It is great when it does but it also can work less well or even harmful for other problems. Especially people that are prone to rumination don't benefit much from it, they need the opposite of mindfulness.
The unhinged part was to imply that people can just choose to be happy under any circumstance which is obviously magical thinking.
>to imply that people can just choose to be happy under any circumstance which is obviously magical thinking
Worse, I'm afraid. It's ideological thinking of the basest sort.
Magical thinking at least lets a person see that their bullshit isn't working, potentially even walk it back, correct themselves.
In ideological thinking, you gotta act as if the impossible wish has already come true. Reality says otherwise? Well, wish harder - or else. That's ideological thinking for ya.
And those are only two of the cards in that deck. I've observed that with sufficient mental self-mutilation, people can in fact choose to be happy under any circumstance. Occasionally even at no cost to innocents. (Though rarely - who'd permit them a clean getaway?)
Woulda had a field day with figuring out what complexes are puppetting AdieuToLogic, if their most coherent argument wasn't "fuck off" - pardon, "full stop".
>> to imply that people can just choose to be happy under any circumstance which is obviously magical thinking
I never said nor implied that. It has only been the person with the account name "cardanome" who has applied absolutist determiners such as "all" and "any" to mischaracterize what I wrote.
> Worse, I'm afraid. It's ideological thinking of the basest sort.
Projection is a poor position to espouse and one easily identified such as the above, further supported by your previous assertion of "[w]hat you're promoting is a deeply narcissistic worldview."
Reread what I originally wrote in this thread objectively, if either you or "cardanome" can:
I say;
Happiness is found in neither a dream chased nor a chosen
profession. It is instead a choice we make each day in
what we do, in how we view same, and if we allow
ourselves to possess it.
What constitutes each day is immaterial.
But that's just me.
This is what is called a personal philosophy[0], specifically:
2 a : pursuit of wisdom
b : a search for a general understanding of values and
reality by chiefly speculative rather than
observational means
> Woulda had a field day with figuring out what complexes are puppetting AdieuToLogic, if their most coherent argument wasn't "fuck off" - pardon, "full stop".
I was directly replying to this[1] post, which contains phrases such as "I think PP's point was ..", "elites of your heretical society", and "at odds with your own inner values and moral compass".
If you and/or "cardanome" cannot comprehend why I finished with "full stop" in response to this post, then there is nothing I can do to help either or both of you understand.
Reread your own post some more. How you found it necessary to exhibit a couple of universally known pieces of horseshit so that your original piece would make sense as some sort of reaction to those. Outstanding.
There's a reason why you're finding it necessary to explain what a personal philosophy even is. Think about that before you go ooh wizdum (and if you have a spare dictionary, throw it up.)
>No, my point is happiness is a choice.
If happiness was a choice, there would be no point to happiness.
> How you found it necessary to exhibit a couple of universally known pieces of horseshit so that your original piece would make sense as some sort of reaction to those. Outstanding.
> There's a reason why you're finding it necessary to explain what a personal philosophy even is. Think about that before you go ooh wizdum (and if you have a spare dictionary, throw it up.)
All you have done in this thread is direct conversations into ad hominem attacks you launch and/or a meaningless non sequitur such as:
> If happiness was a choice, there would be no point to happiness.
As I alluded in a peer comment, I hope you reflect on why you choose this style of communication and have someone in your life you trust in which you confide regarding same.
I am not that person and shall no longer enable your vitriol.
I could of course explain exactly what my words "hinge" on, and what "provokes" them. I've found that this does not create understanding where previously it was lacking. So instead let's talk about what you said.
Two of your words I consider harmful and insulting:
>is seemingly
What the hell?!
...oh, right:
- If you say "X is Y", you gotta back it up. Scary!
- If you say "X seems to me Y", you gotta justify your perceptions. Nasty!
- But saying "X is, seemingly, Y", that's totally safe! Because it's bullshit. It posits a statement as true knowledge and elidies the need for justification outright, on the syntactic level.
What's worse, you probably didn't even notice you were doing this. You just picked up the pattern from people who looked like they had what you wanted.
That cognitive habits like yours are so widely accepted as "normal", is exactly why I'm guessing that CBT (or, for that matter, parent poster's wireheading suggestions) are probably going to be super effective on you, not kidding.
If you were to give those a shot, anyway. Instead of, you know, just stating existences of literatures at people. Also unless your current state of mind wasn't already achieved by similar methods. In any case, do report back!
What you're promoting is a deeply narcissistic worldview, and I hope either the cure or the consequences reach you soon.
Though maybe those are going to present as the same thing.