xLUNCHxTIMEx

lol.... no wonder he wants to disagree so much. Re-read the post you replied to lepton, then you'll understand primates post

I never disagreed with this statement. in fact I explained my case the same way you are explaining this issue. I have NO CONCERN for this because its obvious that you can replace emotions EVEN IF you cant prevent them. My point here is to read the whole frickin post and not base your ideas off one word which could have multiple meanings. I answered every question that was asked of me, but if you are in a philosophical forum and you are arguing something that has nothing to do with the idea itself (it doesn't disprove or build off any of the actual idea) then I will assume you have another means for replying to the forum and I will tell you to stay on topic. Please excuse me. I explained with such stress in my first post about disagreeing because the nature of the idea tells people to change themselves and most will say fuck you given the chance. I wasn't trying to open this option up to the public. Now if someone would like to re-read the first post and maybe "BUILD OFF OF IT" or disagree with something "PHILOSOPHICAL" then please reply. I have no interest in discussing technicalities which have no solid ground in the topic. EDIT: hows this for evidence

First of all I answered your question with my second sentence. Second of all, If you like an in depth explanation Can you provide evidence to support the claim that emotions can be prevented? like I suggested, then here you go. We as humans are habitual by nature. Correct? correct. We adapt and learn by taking in new ideas and storing them. We are information sponges if you will. How can you logically say that a person doesnt have the subconscious ability to memorize a feeling of a situation of anger or fear, along with memorizing what situations lead to it and simply changing the situation when the time comes. its trial and error all the way but there is an ending point where the situation just doesnt bother you anymore, it is called for lack of a better word habit. Heres the kicker. This explanation right here is something we all do every day and its how most people get through the day. My thread discusses what to do on top of this to make any situation something that cant bother you or throw you off your balance of thoughts. I would like to talk to some real people here who discuss "Philosophy", not biology. And finally, who are you to say what the human mind can and cant do for sure, the mind is initially a sandbox for ideas. Now please stay on topic or leave the thread.

I want to know why you are so determined to disprove this idea. I can easily give a real world example of opting out of an emotion and replacing it with another if you really want that, but your not disproving anything. You have to at least practice a passive nature to understand. If you do nothing but disagree its impossible because of the nature of the idea itself. Now I am done explaining this to someone who wouldnt try to understand it. "The creation of this body state is automatic, largely preset by our genes to respond not to a particular thing but to certain categories of things." This only strengthens the theory. Oh one more thing. The type of point you are trying to stress is meant for a different type of thread anyway.

Im not suggesting anything supernatural here. Every negative emotion in the body can be calmed and soothed immediately after it takes place and even prevented. Its simply a matter of staying calm... The point (and this you cannot disagree with) is to limit the situations that have a grasp on ones emotions. Obviously there are situations in this world that have emotional effects which take time regardless, but these are not the same for everyone and its impossible to have it any other way. oh and infact you can call up emotions on demand. its called referencing something that pisses you off. Props! great post thanks for the link

haha thanks, I just think this idea needs more credit, I know its been around forever, I mean look at Buddhism, or indian religions, but most people just dont get it. Its something that has to be taught unless you come to the conclusion I am christian from birth and will remain in the belief that jesus is significant, but many christians these days have it all wrong about how to become happy.

First of all I would like it to be known that these are my theories and educated guesses on a subject that has plagued mankind for a long time. If you have something to add or you disagree with something, please comment. happiness is something we allow situations in our lives to change while we all have the mental ability to keep it alive at all times. this can also be used to define human nature lol. an example of this would be to say that you would never be happy unless you lived out your dream which is false, or to say that a relationship ending will cause you to go into depression. This is also false. You cause the emotions. The situations could be perceived as the devil or the trickster that tries to get you agitated. in teenage years emotions fluctuate until you get that deep IDGAF feeling, which is basically adulthood, or confidence gain. when you learn not to care in general is when you gain confidence. but confidence can obviously be taken too far and become arrogance or ignorance, which is what populates most of the confident world c; . the way to keep away from this path is to acknowledge and practice logic. (common sense) this is a common term that isnt commonly understood. the definition is basically to continuously practice an amateur understanding of everything and everyone (including yourself) which is where self awareness comes in. get to that on a different topic. Id like to point out that this idea would trigger a thought in my mind that science and religion obviously have to work together if there is a god, and most religions try to teach people to be of a passive nature while maintaining confidence. My main focus of this theory to explain that if happiness is used in conjunction with confidence and logic then you get a person of a passive nature that can achieve any goal they set out to achieve in an American lifestyle. The great thing about this theory is that I have immense backup on the subject from various religions and science communities. If it is already a credited idea dont hate, I am merely conversing.