Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #21
    Does ownership of a car directly increase my happiness more than having access, but not ownership of a car? In otherwords, can two humans share a car and effectively double the happiness that particular resource provides or does their happiness split in half based on who has access to the car at that moment?

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by nanook12 View Post
    Many people know about the law of conservation of energy which states that energy can neither be created or destroyed. There is a finite amount of energy in the universe and none more can be created. And since mass is equal to energy it serves that there is only a finite amount of matter in our universe as well meaning there is only a finite amount of resources for people.

    Therefore if we assume that happiness comes from having resources available to us and we believe in the law of conservation of energy, then in order to obtain happiness you are going to have to take resources from other people in order to obtain your happiness since resources are finite. In short there is a finite amount of happiness on earth and you are going to have to take happiness from other people in order to have happiness yourself.

    If you want to challenge this theory, then I would dare you to imagine a scenario where happiness can be obtained without any resources at all.
    well yes there is a finite amount of chemicals needed to feel "happiness" but chances of there ever being enough life to consume that? thats unfathomable big IF

  3. #23
    That would only mean every time you guys are happy you are making someone else in the world equally as sad.

    If you're smiling right now, you're no better than a bully.

  4. #24
    Banned nanook12's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Bakersfield California
    Posts
    1,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Very Tired View Post
    That would only mean every time you guys are happy you are making someone else in the world equally as sad.

    If you're smiling right now, you're no better than a bully.
    He gets it^ Although I will be fair and acknowledge that some people did bring up good criticisms.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by nanook12 View Post
    Many people know about the law of conservation of energy which states that energy can neither be created or destroyed. There is a finite amount of energy in the universe and none more can be created. And since mass is equal to energy it serves that there is only a finite amount of matter in our universe as well meaning there is only a finite amount of resources for people.

    Therefore if we assume that happiness comes from having resources available to us and we believe in the law of conservation of energy, then in order to obtain happiness you are going to have to take resources from other people in order to obtain your happiness since resources are finite. In short there is a finite amount of happiness on earth and you are going to have to take happiness from other people in order to have happiness yourself.

    If you want to challenge this theory, then I would dare you to imagine a scenario where happiness can be obtained without any resources at all.
    I highlighted the flaw in your train of thought.

  6. #26
    Fluffy Kitten xChurch's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The darkest corner with the best view.
    Posts
    4,827
    Quote Originally Posted by nanook12 View Post
    Are food, water, and air not necessary for happiness to take place. I am pretty sure that they are.
    They are sure, but it seems like you're talking more about a population issue than a happiness one. People need to be alive before they can consume resources.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by nanook12 View Post

    If you want to challenge this theory, then I would dare you to imagine a scenario where happiness can be obtained without any resources at all.
    In order to challenge this theory I would dare imagine a scenario where one person managed to obtained all of the resource for himself effectively wiping out the rest of humanity. That guy would be the happiest person on the planet.

  8. #28
    I'm not high enough for this thread.

  9. #29
    Honorary PvM "Mod" Darsithis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    51,235
    Quote Originally Posted by nanook12 View Post
    He gets it^ Although I will be fair and acknowledge that some people did bring up good criticisms.
    In a way, you're right. There is a finite amount of energy in the universe. What I thnk you're wrong about is that there is already enough resources to make everyone "happy", it's just really unequally applied to societies, even the most advanced ones.

  10. #30
    The carrying capacity is not exactly a new concept.

  11. #31
    Banned nanook12's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Bakersfield California
    Posts
    1,737
    Quote Originally Posted by ayentee View Post
    In order to challenge this theory I would dare imagine a scenario where one person managed to obtained all of the resource for himself effectively wiping out the rest of humanity. That guy would be the happiest person on the planet.
    That is a fair criticism. I don't know if that guy would be any happier or not.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by StationaryHawk View Post
    The carrying capacity is not exactly a new concept.
    I suppose it's not such a new concept.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by nanook12 View Post
    Okay then tell me about how a person can be happy without consuming any resources at all. Not even food, water, or air.
    That's not how this works. You posited a theory-one with one hell of an assumption. Burden of proof is on you.

    And if you think the burden of proof is not on you.. I assume that happiness is does not come from having resources available to us. Given that happiness is subjective and not objective any anecdotal evidence you provide to the contrary is easily refuted with my own. I would love to see some actual evidence that your initial assumption is true-but, given your response, I'm assuming there is none.

  13. #33
    Well, the universe will eventually end and no humans will reside in it at that time, so yes there is a finite amount of happiness in the universe because at some point in the future no happiness will be produced.

    Of course this all boils down to what happiness even is, and how you go about defining it.
    “Humanism means that the man is the measure of all things...But it is not only that man must start from himself in the area of knowledge and learning, but any value system must come arbitrarily from man himself by arbitrary choice.” - Francis A. Schaeffer

  14. #34
    Banned nanook12's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Bakersfield California
    Posts
    1,737
    Quote Originally Posted by medievalman1 View Post
    That's not how this works. You posited a theory-one with one hell of an assumption. Burden of proof is on you.

    And if you think the burden of proof is not on you.. I assume that happiness is does not come from having resources available to us. Given that happiness is subjective and not objective any anecdotal evidence you provide to the contrary is easily refuted with my own. I would love to see some actual evidence that your initial assumption is true-but, given your response, I'm assuming there is none.
    The assumption is that you have to be at least living and consuming essential resources in order to experience happiness. I don't see how that is a far stretched assumption?

  15. #35
    Immortal SL1200's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois.
    Posts
    7,577
    Happiness is just a positive state of mind. No resources are required.

  16. #36
    Banned nanook12's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Bakersfield California
    Posts
    1,737
    Quote Originally Posted by SL1200 View Post
    Happiness is just a positive state of mind. No resources are required.
    The state of mind is required. You can't have a state of mind if you are consuming no resources and basically are dead. In that sense happiness is dependent on resources.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by nanook12 View Post
    Therefore if we assume that happiness comes from having resources available to us and we believe in the law of conservation of energy, then in order to obtain happiness you are going to have to take resources from other people in order to obtain your happiness since resources are finite.
    Even if we accept your supposition, that still doesn't necessarily follow. There is nothing to say that however many "resources" are available isn't enough to provide happiness for everybody, nor can we assume that each person requires the same amount to feel happy.

    I would also add that given that there are issues like depression in which people can't feel happiness for no logical reason that the connection between resources and happiness is tenuous at best. There is probably a minimum level needed, as suggested by studies that found that once you start making a certain amount of money per year that more does not increase your happiness. It's hard to be happy when you're starving to death. That's still not to say that we have any idea how much it takes. People with seemingly nothing have been fine and people who seem to have everything have had problems.
    “Nostalgia was like a disease, one that crept in and stole the colour from the world and the time you lived in. Made for bitter people. Dangerous people, when they wanted back what never was.” -- Steven Erikson, The Crippled God

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by nanook12 View Post
    The state of mind is required. You can't have a state of mind if you are consuming no resources and basically are dead. In that sense happiness is dependent on resources.
    I can replace the word happiness with any other conscious state. This seems to be a discussion about entropy.

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by nanook12 View Post
    The state of mind is required. You can't have a state of mind if you are consuming no resources and basically are dead. In that sense happiness is dependent on resources.
    The requisite-to-life "state of mind" doesn't necessarily mean that state is happiness. You're mixing being alive and the "resources" that requires with happiness. They're not mutually inclusive. Being alive doesn't mean you're happy. Having an abundance of "resources" also doesn't ensure happiness.

  20. #40
    Actually, we keep the infinite amount of happiness in a pocket universe. Just for safe keeping.

    Neener neener neener.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by A Chozo View Post
    Yeah, if Cthulhu is below the sea, then all life is pointless!
    Yes. Yes, he is.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •