• HEALTH & RECOVERY
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules Thread Directory 1 Thread Directory 2
    Mindfulness Links Addiction & Mind
    Sober Living Partner Program (SLiPP)
  • H&R Moderators: streaM Freak

Happiness or Pleasure

M!$TER-ED said:
I disagree that the "me factor" is something you loose in order to be happy. If anything, for me, putting myself first above all else and others make it possible to love and give of myself to others. If I weren't sure of who or what I am, I cannot give the way that is needed.

As far as defining happiness that depends on your interpretation and expectations of what happiness means to you. Being content to me means I am happy, no need to look further, at peace with myself and my surroundings.
Feeling joy can be described as happiness, happiness can be shared, however, finding things funny does not necessarily mean happiness, nor does laughter.
Click to expand...
I was just interested to hear from others if what makes us feel happy ( even though the word itself is a vague description and a poor one to describe someone’s state of mind) is really just a more basic feeling of pleasure
Could we ,even with the best intentions actually just be rewarding our brain with the feeling of pleasure
Someone who goes out of their way to help others must feel pleasure in doing so
Someone who takes drugs feels the same pleasure
Could it be a double edged sword ,but something beneficial in our evolution as humans
Is it a selfish trait
 
4DQSAR said:
Happiness is a slow, incremental process. There is even a school of philosphy (Epicurians) who taught that the highest good is pleasure, defined as the absence of physical pain and mental disturbance (ataraxia). They advocated a simple life, friendship, and the removal of fear. Specifically fear of the gods and of death.

Hedonism is the persuit of euphoria, not happiness.

But the fact that the Epicurians actually stated a long list of things that had to be the case to follow their philosophy seems to demonstrate that their persuit of pleasure could well be at the cost of unhappiness in others. So it's quite a selfish form of philosophy and presumes that followers are indifferent to the needs of others.

I would argue that if you can ignore the needs of others, that is at odds with true happiness.
Click to expand...
I'm certain that persons ,groups etc who might surrender their life's to selfless /compassionate acts to others are doing so out of a base sensation of pleasure
 
If you look at life in general all motivation for what we do is based on reward. Humans just don't do something without reason. The question might be what motivates us for what we do? Everything points to some how. some way the person doing is getting something out of whatever they are doing. If there were zero consequences or experience related to the "doing" there would be no point or purpose for doing.
 
4DQSAR said:
Do you mean 'Euphoria or happiness'?

Because it seems that apart from the psychedelics and entactogens consumed occassionally, all a drug can ever do is to produce euphoria which ironically makes the user less happy as it fools the brain into thinking that euphoric is a natural state. It can be, but our bodies only supply dopamine as part of the reward system.

Hence everything from gambling to skydiving can produce euphoria. But after that first 'high', the brain will simply adjust (homeostasis) so chasing that first 'high' is the very definition of addiction. Repeating the same process again and again expecting a different outcome.
Click to expand...
That could describe someone who constantly goes out their way to help others
 
M!$TER-ED said:
If you look at life in general all motivation for what we do is based on reward. Humans just don't do something without reason. The question might be what motivates us for what we do? Everything points to some how. some way the person doing is getting something out of whatever they are doing. If there were zero consequences or experience related to the "doing" there would be no point or purpose for doing.
Click to expand...
I agree ,that really is the question, your right
Is it selfishness that motivates us
 
I don't know that our actions are necessarily considered selfish, but yeah we do things to get something in return
 
M!$TER-ED said:
I don't know that our actions are necessarily considered selfish, but yeah we do things to get something in return
Click to expand...
I agree , and the term /word selfish shouldn't necessarily be a negative one ,it can motivate us to help others
But I think we need to recognise why we do these things
 
Imo so much about happiness depends on someone’s mindset. You are never gonna reach a state of being that’s of ultimate bliss. It’s about maintaining a balance and intentionally making the choice that you are gonna be happy regardless.
But we really are a product of our environment. So many have became stimulation dependent. This wreaks havoc on intrinsic motivation. Life just becomes a compulsive pursuit of chemical rewards at the expense of your own happiness. It works kinda like a see saw with pleasure on one side and pain on the other. When we do something that's pleasurable…like eating a chocolate chip cookie, sex, drugs, etc…it makes that see saw tilt to the pleasure side. This triggers our brains to release a hit of dopamine. That’s why drugs make us feel high. But theres a governing principle that’s regulating this balance because our bodies are always striving for homeostasis. It wants this see saw to remain level. So the brain will adapt to this by tipping the see saw in equal and opposite amounts to the pain side. This is what triggers what eventually becomes the comedown as we begin wanting more. If only we could just wait long enough….that feeling would pass and homeostasis would be restored. But we’re already convinced that all we need is just one more….and that’s all….

We fuck our dopamine baseline up with drugs
 
Kellsee said:
Imo so much about happiness depends on someone’s mindset. You are never gonna reach a state of being that’s of ultimate bliss. It’s about maintaining a balance and intentionally making the choice that you are gonna be happy regardless.
But we really are a product of our environment. So many have became stimulation dependent. This wreaks havoc on intrinsic motivation. Life just becomes a compulsive pursuit of chemical rewards at the expense of your own happiness. It works kinda like a see saw with pleasure on one side and pain on the other. When we do something that's pleasurable…like eating a chocolate chip cookie, sex, drugs, etc…it makes that see saw tilt to the pleasure side. This triggers our brains to release a hit of dopamine. That’s why drugs make us feel high. But theres a governing principle that’s regulating this balance because our bodies are always striving for homeostasis. It wants this see saw to remain level. So the brain will adapt to this by tipping the see saw in equal and opposite amounts to the pain side. This is what triggers what eventually becomes the comedown as we begin wanting more. If only we could just wait long enough….that feeling would pass and homeostasis would be restored. But we’re already convinced that all we need is just one more….and that’s all….

We fuck our dopamine baseline up with drugs
Click to expand...
Hopefully new generations in the future will realise the pursuit of happiness is hopeless
Just being alive and not being in pain (mental or physical)would indeed be an achievement
 
I actually started the thread as I was asked at a meeting multiple times about happiness, being unhappy and general happiness
 
I'm in no position to judge, but pleasure only requires money, happiness is possible if Maslow's hierarchy of needs is met. In fact it's my opinion that Maslow overstates needs. The Stoics assign a far lower emphesis on what is needed.

Comparative phlosopy is a rabbit-hole far too many seemily rational people seem to fall down. Or, rather, some people substitute a faith with a philosophy. As long as two schools are not diametrially opposed, they may be synthesized into what I can only term a personal philosophy. Just as extremists pevert a faith, so extremists pervert a philosophy.

Jeremy Bentham developed Utilitarianism which shows that a given weight of a given philosphy is not only the path for individual happiness, but that happness can be harnessed to ensure the maximum amount of happiness for the maximum number of people. His work doesn't accept any form of extremism and as far as I am aware, was the first to identify extremism as a major block in the path to happiness. But he seperates faith and governance, governance with personal freedoms, personal freedoms and the responsibility towards oneself and towards others. So his works straddle faith, politics, philosophy and philanthropy.

Mikhail Bakunin focussed purely on politics but as far as I am aware, the only microstate to actually adhere to his political philosophy was the early decades of Christiania's existance. But it showed that as there will always be individuals who pervert a system of governence and the more freedoms, the easier it becomes to pervert said governance. Although Clive Hamilton was the first to write a coherent work on the subject, 'The Freedom Paradox', it was Karl Popper and Jean-Jacques Rousseau who first articulated this paradox.

I commend reading and understanding any and all philosophical works, even if they are at odds with your personal beliefs. Anarchism seemed to work, but was too fragile to scale or to withstand those who sought to pervert that system of governence.

Anarchism had become demonized, but on what basis? Mutualism absolutely rejects violence yet Bakunin was the very first person to be expelled from the First International BECAUSE he foresaw that communism would inherenly be perverted by extremism. So Anarchism is neither communist nor capitalist in nature, yet it's sole requirement is that all ahere to mutualism. Sadly, Bias of Priene was the first to posit 'all men are bad'. Now don't go claiming YOU are the exception. Moral relativism is all around us every day. I think a reasonable modern example is this.

The man driving his car at 60MPH in a 50MPH zone will complain about the man who chooses to drive at 70MPH.

We all draw a line in the sand and firmly put ourselves on the right side of that line.
 
Last edited:
lost weekend said:
That could describe someone who constantly goes out their way to help others
Click to expand...
I generally think activity’s and actions are an another drug, it’s all chemicals anyway.

I understand the cynicism that can be expressed through that idea, but I do believe it involves moral and personal choice,

But ultimately you likely do things because they still feel good, especially figuring out what can be replicated again and again.

You can only roll on pingers once a month but can still get that rush from acts of kindness on a daily basis.

I agree with 4DQ in my interpretation. My fav read when I first got clean (no longer but in a different way from before) was the meditations.

I am autistic and couldn’t argue with the logic from stoicism as I saw it, that our needs are so basic,

My experimentation showed me I could be content with little.

I only renounced a stoic and ascetic way of life because I got a girlfriend and I got bored.

I wanted to do opioids and smoke weed again and I realised that due to having ADHD I quite literally have a brain that will not be satisfied whatever I do.

I had knowledge of the cycle but I can’t prevent it. If my brain doesn’t have chemicals it craves.

I cba to list it all here, but I lived in a flat with my best friend, woke up at 4am everyday to go to the gym and work, did not use my phone, only read, meditated, journaled and read therapy books.

For 2-3 years with no drug use, a social life, and I became a manager of 3 social care homes.

It did not fix my brain, I’m happier like this overall by a mile.
 
returned just to add a little about human connection.

From a isolated event from a unreliable witness (me) today.

I went and saw my best friend and his girlfriend, only very briefly sadly but still had time for a chit chat.

We had a general conversation and they shared their perspectives, my friend and I also planning our band practice as we had a break over the month before we go to record our album soon.

Damn man, so much from that one interaction.

I’d had a terrible morning and all the usual shit that goes through my head, the world is doomed and I may aswell kill myself.

Just that one conversation grounded me after probably days of severe dissociation, I’ve tried to carry forth as much as I can into postive actions for today and days to come.

No my problems don’t vanish but it reminds me how strong our perspectives are.

A little shakeup but nothing too drastic can really make everything bright.

I will sink back down the hole at some point, but people are there. I’m just so lucky I know people. I wouldn’t make it else.

Idk, but thought I’d share.
 
4DQSAR said:
We are all different. I find all DAT-seletive ligands to be extremely dysphoric.

For me, it feels like being lied to. Like someone else lying when you KNOW they are lying. But worse, because it's me lying to myself.

I also find it extremely shallow. As if I'm in a thin plastic bubble so fragile that I can poke a finger straight through it. Anybody claiming that I just needed to take more should know I tried that once, it just got worse.

But I don't judge others for consuming anything they want to. The fifth freedom should be a fundamental human right. If nothing else, pragmatically, illegal drugs in themselves don't destory lives, it's the fact that they are illegal that destroy lives.

Now I'm not a total idiot. Just as some alcohol users go on to become alcoholics, so will all the other drugs that are currently illegal. But I don't trust US figures. I suggest about 1% of drinkers go on to become alcoholics and I honestly believe that if all drugs were legal, that percentage would hold true for other drugs.

I knew a Russian chemist who made methadone. In Russia substitution therapy is rare but if all drugs were legal, if someone decides they have been over indulging in heroin, they can simply buy the much cheaper methadone.

Parentheral administration IS a risk factor but if legal and sold at the prices paid by the NHS (for example), 56 x 120mg oxycodone tablets costs £114.38 i.e. £2.04 per pill. So users need not use parentheral routes as if they wish to, they can simply buy two pills. Because when people cross the 'needle barrier', cost is almost always the major driver.
Click to expand...
Ok, DAT- selevtive means what exactly? Dopamine...?
I may add that even if all drugs were legal and not destructive when occasionally taken (some are though!), there's still the addiction issue that occurs legal or not and THAT is destructive to a certain extent even if getting it was not an issue...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top