Philosophy Now Forum

Are you fucking with me? How is imagining food might be poisoned enjoying the food?

Dalek feels cornered a bit, yes.
Don´t give up, Dalek, otherwise I will try to figure out how to help you (for a change).

There.

Jaded Sage wrote:Are you fucking with me? How is imagining food might be poisoned enjoying the food?

Dalek should take his time and think how it is possible to enjoy food while being a full-fledged pessimist.

Perhaps he means that a pessimist is highly selective and is pessimistic in regard to the future of mankind for example but is realistic while eating.

Jaded Sage wrote:I'd be happy to hear how negativity makes someone happy.


You said: A pessimist must think: the food could be poisoned or I will get a heart-attack or I will get an allergy or I will put on weight and stop being attractive to the opposite sex etc. etc.

Explain how that would make someone happy.

Are you going to say it comes from the relief? Then it isn't the pessimism that leads to happiness, but the wrongness of pessimism.

So, when your optimism is frequently proven incorrect, it doesn't make you unhappy? There's no disappointment? Your holding pessimism to standards that the opposite bias can't withstand.

For the love of God help him explain how pessimism yields happiness.

Dalek Prime wrote:

Jaded Sage wrote:I'd be happy to hear how negativity makes someone happy.


You said: A pessimist must think: the food could be poisoned or I will get a heart-attack or I will get an allergy or I will put on weight and stop being attractive to the opposite sex etc. etc.

Explain how that would make someone happy.

Are you going to say it comes from the relief? Then it isn't the pessimism that leads to happiness, but the wrongness of pessimism.

So, when your optimism is frequently proven incorrect, it doesn't make you unhappy? There's no disappointment? Your holding pessimism to standards that the opposite bias can't withstand.

That's not optimism. That's the wrongness of optimism. That isn't what I meant. Besides, my optimism stays with me when I'm wrong. Doesn't your pessimism do the same? If not, it is not true pessimism (I think).

Okay, you are both blocked. You're both merely trolling here at.my expense and time.

When your optimism proves incorrect you jump to another positive scenario and hope for the best again.

You look forward to something good again.

Yeah, I think he is. I don't do that. I have better things to do. Like look for explanations as to how pessimism could possibly yield happiness.

duszek wrote:When your optimism proves incorrect you jump to another positive scenario and hope for the best again.

You look forward to something good again.

That's what I'm saying.

Dalek Prime wrote:Okay, you are both blocked. You're both merely trolling here at.my expense and time.

Who is blocked ?
I have just offered the solution of being a pessimist in some respects and a realist in a selection of pleasures.

I have been trying to help both roosters but did any of them say thank you ?

Shit. I always get you two mixed up. The D's don't play well with my dyslexia. Thanks to the one who tried to help. To the other: I'm still waiting for an explanation, or an admission of being wrong.

At first I backed up Jaded S. by doubting that a pessimist can enjoy anything at all.
Should he not imagine the worst (pessimo) happening after or during the meal ?

Then I offered a solution:
a pessimist can be a selective one: while eating he is a realist and thus can enjoy food or even fly in a plane without worrying (taking statistics into account) and in many other respects he is a pessimist.

Now:

How much pessimism is necessary to call someone a real full-fledged pessimist ?
Is pessimism a matter of degrees ?

duszek wrote:At first I backed up Jaded S. by doubting that a pessimist can enjoy anything at all.
Should he not imagine the worst (pessimo) happening after or during the meal ?

Then I offered a solution:
a pessimist can be a selective one: while eating he is a realist and thus can enjoy food or even fly in a plane without worrying (taking statistics into account) and in many other respects he is a pessimist.

Now:

How much pessimism is necessary to call someone a real full-fledged pessimist ?
Is pessimism a matter of degrees ?

This is where the confusion came in. He wanted to say that pessimists can't be happy. That was his strawman. I said that pessimism can't yield happiness. My statement leaves open the possibility that a pessimist can experience happiness, if, say, he suspends his pessimism in favor of realism.

To answer your question, I would say it is better not to think of it in degrees. A person is a full fledged pessimist when he is pessimistic and the opposite when he is opposite (I know that goes against my phrasing from earlier).