Welcome to BeerMoneyForum.com - BIGGEST MAKE MONEY FORUM ONLINE

[iamawriter]

I truly believe that it is our thinking that gives a value to a thought. It is that spring in that step or otherwise that guides one towards a thought being good or bad What's your take on this?

 

[TheArticulate]

I'm having tough time understanding exactly what you're trying to say. Are you talking about our capability to direct our thoughts in either a good or bad direction, or are you literally saying that we can determine whether a thought is good or bad?

If it's the first interpretation, then yes, I agree with you. With practice and good outlook, I think we can begin to unconsciously prioritize "good thoughts" as opposed to "bad ones", which I believe will give you an overall better outlook on life. I try to do this everyday. Focus on the good, and not the bad.

Now if it's the second interpretation, I'd probably have to disagree with you. I think that for the most part, a thought's overall "good or bad" qualities are fairly objective. This, of course, is tied to human morality, what we perceive as ultimately being wrong or right, just or unjust, and the whole nine yards. What I'm trying to say is, if this thought pops into your mind: "I can't believe my wife cheated on me with another man. What did I ever do to deserve this?", that's probably widely seen as a bad thought, and unless you have some sort of mental fortitude that I've never experienced, I don't think anyone can make that exact thought a good thought.

Unless maybe you redirect the thought process to try and come up with one that's more along the lines of "good"? For instance, you go from "something something cheating on me" to "on the bright side, I now have way more time to focus on the things I like".

You got me rambling. Sorry, haha

 

[iamawriter]

I'm having tough time understanding exactly what you're trying to say. Are you talking about our capability to direct our thoughts in either a good or bad direction, or are you literally saying that we can determine whether a thought is good or bad?

If it's the first interpretation, then yes, I agree with you. With practice and good outlook, I think we can begin to unconsciously prioritize "good thoughts" as opposed to "bad ones", which I believe will give you an overall better outlook on life. I try to do this everyday. Focus on the good, and not the bad.

Now if it's the second interpretation, I'd probably have to disagree with you. I think that for the most part, a thought's overall "good or bad" qualities are fairly objective. This, of course, is tied to human morality, what we perceive as ultimately being wrong or right, just or unjust, and the whole nine yards. What I'm trying to say is, if this thought pops into your mind: "I can't believe my wife cheated on me with another man. What did I ever do to deserve this?", that's probably widely seen as a bad thought, and unless you have some sort of mental fortitude that I've never experienced, I don't think anyone can make that exact thought a good thought.

Unless maybe you redirect the thought process to try and come up with one that's more along the lines of "good"? For instance, you go from "something something cheating on me" to "on the bright side, I now have way more time to focus on the things I like".

You got me rambling. Sorry, haha

First things first. Glad that I made you put on your thinking cap. I did not say it but Shakespeare did. (Hamlet) Your example cannot be debated just with a sentence or two. For every action there is an equal or opposite reaction (Newton) However shocking it may sound about the example you gave about someone being unfaithful with analysis it could turn out to be good for both the parties.

 

[TheArticulate]

First things first. Glad that I made you put on your thinking cap. I did not say it but Shakespeare did. (Hamlet) Your example cannot be debated just with a sentence or two. For every action there is an equal or opposite reaction (Newton) However shocking it may sound about the example you gave about someone being unfaithful with analysis it could turn out to be good for both the parties.

Right, but the problem here is that if we're talking about how it "could turn out good for both parties", then we're no longer talking about the initial thought, but rather the outcomes of the actions that caused the thought we're talking about.

So are we evaluating good/bad qualities of individual thoughts, or are we evaluating the good/bad outcomes of a thought process or train of thoughts? Because I'm still not entirely sure what you're getting at here.

 

[iamawriter]

Right, but the problem here is that if we're talking about how it "could turn out good for both parties", then we're no longer talking about the initial thought, but rather the outcomes of the actions that caused the thought we're talking about.

So are we evaluating good/bad qualities of individual thoughts, or are we evaluating the good/bad outcomes of a thought process or train of thoughts? Because I'm still not entirely sure what you're getting at here.

As I have said in my post it is our thinking that rates an issue. Going back to your own example you thought being unfaithful is bad and so your thinking made it bad. But with further analysis who knows you could think that it is not bad after all.

 

[TheArticulate]

As I have said in my post it is our thinking that rates an issue. Going back to your own example you thought being unfaithful is bad and so your thinking made it bad. But with further analysis who knows you could think that it is not bad after all.

Well, now we're starting to get into circular logic, which is more of a fallacy than an argument. You say that my thought about unfaithfulness is bad because my thinking made it bad, which is circular in nature. It doesn't make a point or a case. "Your thinking makes your thinking bad" really makes as much of a point as saying "that's a circle because it's a circle".

I still think we're talking about two different things here. From what I can tell, you mean to say that our thought processes give us our overall outlook on life and various situations. Which is true. We view and understand the world around through our consciousness, which is essentially just a never ending stream of thoughts. If that's the point you're making, then we're on the same page!

I'm talking about the objectivity of some of the content of thoughts, which is something that's been determined by the constraints society has constructed. Given, there is some grey area here. Some thoughts could definitely fall in the area of "it could be a good thought, or even a bad one", but I think there's a certain element of objectivity to determining this. In most every society murder is considered a crime, so I feel as though there is no way that a morally righteous person could take thoughts of murder and say, "well hang on, let's analyse this thought. It could actually be a good thought."

Finally, I don't mean to be a jerk or anything, I just find topics like this very fascinating. Thanks for bringing it up!

 

[iamawriter]

Well, now we're starting to get into circular logic, which is more of a fallacy than an argument. You say that my thought about unfaithfulness is bad because my thinking made it bad, which is circular in nature. It doesn't make a point or a case. "Your thinking makes your thinking bad" really makes as much of a point as saying "that's a circle because it's a circle".

I still think we're talking about two different things here. From what I can tell, you mean to say that our thought processes give us our overall outlook on life and various situations. Which is true. We view and understand the world around through our consciousness, which is essentially just a never ending stream of thoughts. If that's the point you're making, then we're on the same page!

I'm talking about the objectivity of some of the content of thoughts, which is something that's been determined by the constraints society has constructed. Given, there is some grey area here. Some thoughts could definitely fall in the area of "it could be a good thought, or even a bad one", but I think there's a certain element of objectivity to determining this. In most every society murder is considered a crime, so I feel as though there is no way that a morally righteous person could take thoughts of murder and say, "well hang on, let's analyse this thought. It could actually be a good thought."

Finally, I don't mean to be a jerk or anything, I just find topics like this very fascinating. Thanks for bringing it up!

It is as simple as when someone kills he or she will not think it is bad and more so when their lawyer justifies it to be good and strangely they will even win the case. Why do a husband and wife argue on a point. They argue because one thinks it is good and the other thinks it is bad.

 

[TheArticulate]

It is as simple as when someone kills he or she will not think it is bad and more so when their lawyer justifies it to be good and strangely they will even win the case. Why do a husband and wife argue on a point. They argue because one thinks it is good and the other thinks it is bad.

Yeah, we're obviously not on the same train of thought with this discussion.

 

[tiada]

Yes, agree with you. We are what we think and if we think we can then we can.
So, we should embrass the positive thinking rather than negative one. For example, if a patient never think he/she will recovery, I don't think he/she will fully recovery and this might delay his/her recovery path too.

 

[PriscillaKing]

I believe absolute good exists beyond our human minds. We're not able to perceive it efficiently enough to agree perfectly about what we do understand of it. We'll understand more of it if we eliminate excuses for unethical self-serving behavior, though.

About absolute evil I'm not sure, but there's no shortage of evidence supporting the belief that it exists too.