Is evolution, happiness?

Why’s that, textman? :-s

(You can PM me if it’s something :astonished: serious.)

Anyway, I would say that a man can be happier than a newt, but if a newt is satisfied: tummy full and maybe enjoying a swim, it has a certain happiness as well. At least it seems dogs and cats have this.

I’ll comment, bdhanes:

In a certain way, yes. I can applay the word change in the following prespective:

“Change” will induce the sense of evolution.

I liked the way you asked that :slight_smile:
And I agree with your conclusion, mostly because you are refering to dreams (dream to achieve).
Tell me bdhanes, don’t you agree that a change (caused by an achievent like having a job you always dream of…) will induce the very feelling of evolution in your ego?
I find reasonable to answer yes. I feel this in everyday of my life. Everything that changes us, makes us better. Thus transminting an inner feelling that something new has born (evolved…).

Its true… but please try to look to the semantics in the words evolution and change. Im not trying to give new meanings to words, im just trying to use them, as best as I can to translate what I feel and interpret.

When I refert to evolution/change, this is purelly a state of mind, if it is correct to call it that, that occurs when you achieve a goal.
I remember that you mention that this feeling could also raise when you prespective an achievement. That is true because the very dream of achieving, can change you in a way that will make you evolving in the same, or another, direction.

In the end I would dare to classify the negative (bad) achievents has the most ‘evolution-carrier’ ones.
Just like in the quote “what does not kill you, makes you stronger”.

Regards,
Acqua.

No worries WK. English is not my natural language. And sometimes I feel extremelly difficulty expressing my ideas, otherwise easy in my mother language.

I agree with you. I think I know why people ‘rather like stability’…
You want to tell me why?

The first assumption would be to say that people are afraid of regression (antonym of evolution)?
I belive that people fear to loose everything they possess.

Like ‘master Yoda’ once said: “train yourself to let go of everything you fear to loose”.

regards,
Acqua.

Do not get attached to the meaning of the word. Instead, look to the idea in which the word is used.
I’ve mention in the posts above, what I was trying to explain by using the evolution word.

regards,
Acqua.

Ierrellus, you seem to be missing the point here. As I said before maybe it is the fact that my mother language aint english. I might have expressed myself incorrectly.

My point is that ‘people’ do feel happy when they sense evolution in their lives. It has been said before that evolution could also be described has a change. By this, you should also notice that we are not talking about the adaption to species to their environment (example skin color in man).
Nor happiness from a global POV. Seems reasonable to me that hapiness is a concept defined my man. You should be in agree with this (i hope).
So why you keep linking it to other species who do not share a comunication method capable of transmitting if they are ‘happy’.

This is entirelly focused on humans. And my idea is to focus on how humans derive happiness from their ‘passage’ on earth.

The feeling of evolution is not the one Darwin mentioned. Its our ego evolution. The one that reacts when you adquire or loose something.
The one that can so easily get addict into what actual life as to offer.

You agree with this source of happiness?

regards,
Acqua.

I think that he was trying to say that sex transmited pleasure… and this is true. In fact, the pleasure is a mechanism to keep desire for reproduction…
this is 101 logic… undeniable.

So, in that prespective, yes… animals have sex because is fun.

regards,
Acqua.

You’re playing with the sintax. Thats fine :slight_smile:

By the way, what is a hero? (what makes the hero?)

regards,
Acqua.

I’ve stated some posts above, that we cannot apply the interpretation of the feeling happiness into a specie which we cannot evaluate his ‘happiness’ its somewhat out of logic applying that here.

Happiness is a human definition. Like God for example. How can you people debate it from other species prespective? :expressionless:

acquaviva,
Any change is evolutionary on a small scale or a large one and affects everything involved in a a biosphere. If you are talking about an evolution of cultural memes, I’d suggest you read Dawkin’s “The Selfish Gene”. When attempting to describe a cultural evolution that involves particular individuals one must first consider what tools we had at times other than ours for such investigations. Sure, folks looked quaint when depicted by daguerrotype. They sound strange on wax recording discs… They look strange on acetate film. Are humans smaller or larger than they were 200 years ago? Then, to narrow this down to your own lifespan, are you mistaking the feelings one gets from passing though life stages and circadian rhythms for something more abstract?

I love the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon in which Calvin is lead to believe that the world before about 1939 was black and white, since color film had not yet become practical useage; and the 1950’s t.v.s still did not have color!

i think they are brilliant cartoons. :smiley:

But it is SO FUNNY to watch the Bonobo monkeys on documentaries have sex! They’re sex crazy! I don’t know if it is a universal qualifier, but it sure is funny. :laughing:

Thanks for mentioning Dawkin’s work. I’ll try to read it as soon as possible.
I feel that I’ve missed some of your metaphors… i mean, their context…
I hope you don’t take this comment has negative. Yes, I may lack literature knowledge, and most of exotic english requires post google translation tool… hope they have the translation for: “daguerrotype”.

If you have the time, and the patience, please send your message without the metaphors and go straight to the point.

Well, we normally see and believe that our cats and dogs exhibit what we take to be happiness when they purr or wag their tail. We understand that a sort of happiness comes from being satisfied, then we extend the idea to other animals insofar as we share animal nature with them.

yes.

Not in my opinion. Evolution is a necessary part of life, and probably a basic, inevitable principle of existence and continued experience, but I think evolution is just the way your experience changes and the way you change in relation to your experience, and even grow, and it feels good to grow, but I say happiness lies in the experience itself, the little things, interacting with friends, being what you want to be (which is of course subject to evolution and requires evolution to actualize), and just existing on a good day.

I think the word evolution existed before darwin’s theory also,

Main Entry: evo·lu·tion
Etymology: Latin evolution-, evolutio unrolling, from evolvere

On 13Jan07 textman wrote: A newt is not happy, because it lacks
the capacity (and concern) for happiness.
btw: Hey, my real name, I sure hate to be the one to tell you
this, but there is something seriously wrong with you, friend!
.
On 13Jan my real name asks: Why’s that, textman?
.
tx say: Well, I’m awful glad you asked that. It’s about your sig-lines:
.
(You can PM me if it’s something serious.)
.
Oh no, it’s nothing that serious. It’s only serious in the sense of
philosophical consistency and demeanor . . . I think.
.
“Truly, among all human studies, the study of wisdom is more
perfect, more sublime, more useful, and more joyful”
– Sancti Thomas de Aquino
.
Now this is a great quote, and it shows us that Aquinas was a friend
to Philosophy, but it would be going much too far to say that the
Church is likewise. Hence my confusion at your last sig-line:
.
If anything I publish here is found to be against the doctrine of
the holy Catholic Church, I hereby disavow my heresy and cling to
the teaching of the universal Church.
.
Why would you want to do that? … cling, I mean. After all, philosophy
requires of its members only that they be capable of a bit of free-
thinking now and again. Even good Thomas knew that, and perhaps too
boldly declared that “Truth has nothing to fear from honest questioning.”
.
Now there may or may not be a logical contradiction here in these two
sigs of yours, but clearly there is at the very least a conflict of
interest. For everyone now knows that the Church has ever been the most
zealous of all truth’s many enemies.
.
Anyway, I would say that a man can be happier than a newt, but if
a newt is satisfied: tummy full and maybe enjoying a swim, it has
a certain happiness as well. At least it seems dogs and cats have
this.
.
A newt cannot be satisfied because it lacks the capacity (and concern)
for satisfaction. Applying human realties to other living things is
always problematic, but I agree that dogs do seem to be capable of some
basic form of happiness. But human type creatures are, alas, infinitely
harder to please.

aquaviva, (water of life?)
A daguerrotype was the primitive form of photographic picture. Its images look metallic. And in those days of first photography people seemed to pose as if they were going to be hanged afterwards–stilted, uptight. 1950’s amateur photographers didn’t pose much better. They would be at at a magnificent scene like looking over the Grand Canyon and would take pictures of themselves standing by their Chevy.
Calvin and Hobbes rules!