NationStates Jolt Archive

Many here may have heard that pile of horse feces that is the phrase, “The best things in life aren’t things.”
I’ve got news for anybody that buys into that, it isn’t true at all.

I suppose when most people think about things in life that aren’t things they either forget about or are ignorant of the functioning of the brain. The brain is most certainly a thing and its actions are the actions of a thing. When one experiences joy, the brain is simply firing synapses between neurons in such a way as to illicit certain thoughts and release certain hormones. Your emtions are things.

So, pretentious artsy type admiring nature on a morning stroll, that feeling you're getting? No different (or at least better) than the oil tycoon signing a check for a new alpine estate on the ass of a Philipino whore.
Chin up though hippy, that feeling of pretentious superiority and false deepness is all yours, well it's your brain’s activity's anyway.

“The best things in life aren’t things.”



This statement is nonsense because to be one of "the best things in life" whatever is then being considered must come from the category of "things".

In order to compare "things" and "non-things" to decide which are the better life-experiences then you have to change the statement.

and yet i would trade anything i own to get an hour drinking coffee with my mother on a nice spring morning in florida.

and yet i would trade anything i own to get an hour drinking coffee with my mother on a nice spring morning in florida.
coffee= a beverage brewed from beans, a thing
your mother= a complex combination of carbon-based molecules, a thing
spring= the suns direct rays moving toward the Tropic of Capricorn and way from the equator, a thing
morning= the earth's rotation bringing a part of the world into contact with light from the sun
Florida= a peninsula, a thing

Sorry, your pretentious, holier than thou bull doesn’t make you any better than me.

Many here may have heard that pile of horse feces that is the phrase, “The best things in life aren’t things.”
I’ve got news for anybody that buys into that, it isn’t true at all.

I suppose when most people think about things in life that aren’t things they either forget about or are ignorant of the functioning of the brain. The brain is most certainly a thing and its actions are the actions of a thing. When one experiences joy, the brain is simply firing synapses between neurons in such a way as to illicit certain thoughts and release certain hormones. Your emtions are things.

So, pretentious artsy type admiring nature on a morning stroll, that feeling you're getting? No different (or at least better) than the oil tycoon signing a check for a new alpine estate on the ass of a Pilipino whore.
Chin up though hippy, that feeling of pretentious superiority false deepness is all yours, well it's your brain’s activities anyway.
pedant :p

I like things. I think everyone should own things. Things create options. Options keep you from being bored.

It's a silly saying! Stop overreacting! Basically, what it means is that material things can't bring us joy. Nothing tangiable can bring us joy. I agree. The only thing that brings me complete joy is performing, which certainly isn't tangiable.

It's a silly saying! Stop overreacting! Basically, what it means is that material things can't bring us joy. Nothing tangiable can bring us joy. I agree. The only thing that brings me complete joy is performing, which certainly isn't tangiable.

Eh?

tangible

1. touchable; able to be touched or felt; perceptible by the sense of touch; palpable
2. possible to be treated as fact; real or concrete
3. comprehensible by the mind; understandable

I assume we're going by 1. here, otherwise...

Fry: "Maybe you can't understand this, but I finally found what I need to be happy. And it's not friends. It's things."
Bender: "I'm a thing!"

Ah...Futurama...

Eh?

tangible

1. touchable; able to be touched or felt; perceptible by the sense of touch; palpable
2. possible to be treated as fact; real or concrete
3. comprehensible by the mind; understandable

I assume we're going by 1. here, otherwise...

Yes, Dina, I mean something you can touch.

It's a silly saying! Stop overreacting! Basically, what it means is that material things can't bring us joy. Nothing tangiable can bring us joy. I agree. The only thing that brings me complete joy is performing, which certainly isn't tangiable.
Sorry, but the pleasure your brain experiences is most certainly a thing. It’s the same kind of joy a serial killer’s brain gives him when he’s stalking a mark.

Sorry, but the pleasure your brain experiences is most certainly a thing. It’s the same kind of joy a serial killer’s brain gives him when he’s stalking a mark.

You're missing the forest for the trees, methinks.

Yes, Dina, I mean something you can touch.

Ah, okay then...Although, there's all the other senses what get neglected...And what about things with "Do Not Touch" signs on them? Eh, don't mind me...>_>;;

I'm pretty sure the phrase was "The best things in life are free," but I'm sure you could produce a good argument against that. Please do, I would love to read it.

I'm pretty sure the phrase was "The best things in life are free," but I'm sure you could produce a good argument against that. Please do, I would love to read it.

Payment isn't always monetary. You generally forgo something for everything.

Ah, okay then...Although, there's all the other senses what get neglected...And what about things with "Do Not Touch" signs on them? Eh, don't mind me...>_>;;

Assume you're badass, and therefore would touch them.

Sorry, but the pleasure your brain experiences is most certainly a thing. It’s the same kind of joy a serial killer’s brain gives him when he’s stalking a mark.
why bring up serial killers? that was odd. anyhoo, your brain experiences tangible (touchable, for dinaverg) stuff as things, it doesn't experience the chemical reactions in your brain as things but as abstract phenomena that can have any number of possible interpretations.

Assume you're badass, and therefore would touch them.

Hmm...I see how that would work...Now to find something with a "Do Not Touch" sign...

why bring up serial killers? that was odd. anyhoo, your brain experiences tangible (touchable, for dinaverg) stuff as things, it doesn't experience the chemical reactions in your brain as things but as abstract phenomena that can have any number of possible interpretations.

Well, as long as we're talking about a blind deaf mute guy with his taste buds burned off, that can only touch things...The things he touches could be interpreted in a variety of ways as well.

coffee= a beverage brewed from beans, a thing
your mother= a complex combination of carbon-based molecules, a thing
spring= the suns direct rays moving toward the Tropic of Capricorn and way from the equator, a thing
morning= the earth's rotation bringing a part of the world into contact with light from the sun
Florida= a peninsula, a thing

Sorry, your pretentious, holier than thou bull doesn’t make you any better than me.

1) Ashmoria did not suggest anyone was "better than" you.
2) Knock off the flaming.

I'm pretty sure the phrase was "The best things in life are free," but I'm sure you could produce a good argument against that. Please do, I would love to read it.
Actually, they are two separate phrases, but nothing in life is free. Everything requires expending energy of some sort, which must be obtained through food which takes effort to obtain, even if that effort is just shoveling food onto you plate at a free buffet.

I suppose some people think that the joy they get from relationships is free. Ha. Maintaining a healthy relationship with family, friends and lovers take more work than many nine to five jobs. The rewards you get are just your payment.

Life is a series of continuous transactions.

Now to find something with a "Do Not Touch" sign...
try the BIG RED BUTTON!

they're always exciting :D

Actually, they are two separate phrases, but nothing in life is free. Everything requires expending energy of some sort, which must be obtained through food which takes effort to obtain, even if that effort is just shoveling food onto you plate at a free buffet.

I suppose some people think that the joy they get from relationships is free. Ha. Maintaining a healthy relationship with family, friends and lovers take more work than many nine to five jobs. The rewards you get are just your payment.

Life is a series of continuous transactions.

Now you're really missing the forest for the trees.

try the BIG RED BUTTON!

they're always exciting :D

Nah, everyone does that...I need a miniscule cerulean toogle switch.

Sorry, your pretentious, holier than thou bull doesn’t make you any better than me.

Oh, while she is indeed your better, it's not her wish to see her mother once more that makes her so, but your behaviour in besmirching that.

why bring up serial killers? that was odd. anyhoo, your brain experiences tangible (touchable, for dinaverg) stuff as things, it doesn't experience the chemical reactions in your brain as things but as abstract phenomena that can have any number of possible interpretations.
Those chemicals reactions are things. There is no abstract phenomenon. Every possible feeling that you or I have ever experienced will some day will be able to be explained conclusively by some scientist somewhere.

Actually, they are two separate phrases, but nothing in life is free. Everything requires expending energy of some sort, which must be obtained through food which takes effort to obtain, even if that effort is just shoveling food onto you plate at a free buffet.

I suppose some people think that the joy they get from relationships is free. Ha. Maintaining a healthy relationship with family, friends and lovers take more work than many nine to five jobs. The rewards you get are just your payment.

Life is a series of continuous transactions.
oo, stop splitting hairs. some things are best taken at face value. and face value can be pretty deep if you've got the right eyes. (just in case you wanted to break that down too :p)

oo, stop splitting hairs. some things are best taken at face value. and face value can be pretty deep if you've got the right eyes. (just in case you wanted to break that down too :p)

X-Ray eyes?

Those chemicals reactions are things. There is no abstract phenomenon. Every possible feeling that you or I have ever experienced will some day will be able to be explained conclusively by some scientist somewhere.
not everything is divisible by science! at least not yet anyway, and possibly never. emotions are far mor complicated on the individual level than we can possibly comprehend with our current advances in biochemistry and whatnot.

X-Ray eyes?
yes, exactly :D or just the eyes of someone who's known the subject for a long time.

not everything is divisible by science! at least not yet anyway, and possibly never. emotions are far mor complicated on the individual level than we can possibly comprehend with our current advances in biochemistry and whatnot.

Umm...not really...I just don't think a lot of people care.

Umm...not really...I just don't think a lot of people care.
which people? about what? i dunno, i think there's plenty of psychiatrists and neuroboffins interested in emotions. i don't really care either, i just find it annoying when someone claims that emotions can be entirely broken down into chemical interactions when the resposes to these chemical reactions can be so entirely different between individuals that the reactions themselves might as well be entirely irrelevant. (i mean obiously they're not but there's so much more at work there).

which people? about what? i dunno, i think there's plenty of psychiatrists and neuroboffins interested in emotions. i don't really care either, i just find it annoying when someone claims that emotions can be entirely broken down into chemical interactions when the resposes to these chemical reactions can be so entirely different between individuals that the reactions themselves might as well be entirely irrelevant. (i mean obiously they're not but there's so much more at work there).

Individual brains vary greatly when it comes down to individual neurons. We call it personality.

Clippety snip snip.

In that view of existence the worst things are also things. Things are universal. A given, like background noise or ether. One must still use idea things to determine which situational things are are of high thing quality and which are of low thing quality. Youve chased your tail thing right back to the begining point thing which you started from with the exception thing that youve added anothe thing level of complexity with no advantageous thing leading to a greater understanding thing of the whole reality thing.

Individual brains vary greatly when it comes down to individual neurons. We call it personality.
that's pretty much what i was getting at. ???

In that view of existence the worst things are also things.
duh
not everything is divisible by science! at least not yet anyway, and possibly never. emotions are far mor complicated on the individual level than we can possibly comprehend with our current advances in biochemistry and whatnot.
But the possibility of comprehending them exists, and thus they are things.

duh

But the possibility of comprehending them exists, and thus they are things.

Only if they exist in the first place. You either take the existance of things as a given or not.

If the universal existence of things is a given then a philosophy stating that things are the only things and are therefore the best things is redundant at best and at worst a closed loop of thought.

If on the other hand the universal existence of things is not a given then certain parts of quantum mechanics becomes possible and comprehensible.

Only if they exist in the first place. You either take the existance of things as a given or not.

If the universal existence of things is a given then a philosophy stating that things are the only things and are therefore the best things is redundant at best and at worst a closed loop of thought.

If on the other hand the universal existence of things is not a given then certain parts of quantum mechanics becomes possible and comprehensible.
i'm gunna leave this to NB: s/he's got a whole knew level of argument i can't match.

Only if they exist in the first place. You either take the existance of things as a given or not.

If the universal existence of things is a given then a philosophy stating that things are the only things and are therefore the best things is redundant at best and at worst a closed loop of thought.
Or it could just be an argument against spirituality...
If on the other hand the universal existence of things is not a given then certain parts of quantum mechanics becomes possible and comprehensible.
Not if you accept that some things have radically different properties than other things.

Not if you accept that some things have radically different properties than other things.

Like matter suddenly and randomly existing in a vacuum and then failing to exist a short time later? Thing from nothing and then back to nothing doesnt sound much like a universally existing thing to me.

Or it could just be an argument against spirituality...



I thought you were talking about the existance of things not the disbelief you have in spirits.

Like matter suddenly and randomly existing in a vacuum and then failing to exist a short time later? Thing from nothing and then back to nothing doesnt sound much like a universally existing thing to me.
Well it does to me.
I thought you were talking about the existance of things not the disbelief you have in spirits.
I am talking about the existence of things, in order to piss on anything even remotely religious.

I am talking about the existence of things, in order to piss on anything even remotely religious.
i'm not even remotely religious either. i just think that scientific determinism is just as bad as religion.

i'm not even remotely religious either. i just think that scientific determinism is just as bad as religion.
Well that just doesn't make any sense at all. You are content to accept not understanding parts of reality? I find that to be pathetic.

Many here may have heard that pile of horse feces that is the phrase, “The best things in life aren’t things.”
I’ve got news for anybody that buys into that, it isn’t true at all.

I suppose when most people think about things in life that aren’t things they either forget about or are ignorant of the functioning of the brain. The brain is most certainly a thing and its actions are the actions of a thing. When one experiences joy, the brain is simply firing synapses between neurons in such a way as to illicit certain thoughts and release certain hormones. Your emtions are things.

nouns are people, places, or things.
verbs are things.
therefore verbs are nouns.

coffee= a beverage brewed from beans, a thing
your mother= a complex combination of carbon-based molecules, a thing
spring= the suns direct rays moving toward the Tropic of Capricorn and way from the equator, a thing
morning= the earth's rotation bringing a part of the world into contact with light from the sun
Florida= a peninsula, a thing

Sorry, your pretentious, holier than thou bull doesn’t make you any better than me.
and yet im happy and youre not

quite a paradox eh?

Well that just doesn't make any sense at all. You are content to accept not understanding parts of reality? I find that to be pathetic.
you can find it how you like. i find any sort of determinism, scientific, religious or otherwise, to be moronic.

you can find it how you like. i find any sort of determinism, scientific, religious or otherwise, to be moronic.

...Ummm...why?

and yet im happy and youre not

quite a paradox eh?
Who says I'm not happy?

...Ummm...why?
because nothing is that simple imho. to me, every fact or theory is entirely reletive to it's context. in the case of this thread, emotions are entirely relative to who is feeling them, they are not quantifiable with contemporary scientific techniques because an outside observer cannot fully comprehend them and the individual experiencing them has too much of a vested interest in the results to be a reliable observer. this makes them intangible according to all three of your earlier definitions and i would contend that this means that they transcend definition as mere things.

*snip*
^^ Really love that post.

Well that just doesn't make any sense at all. You are content to accept not understanding parts of reality? I find that to be pathetic.
oh, and what i said does not mean i'm "content to accept not understanding parts of reality". you inferred that in order to try and make me look stupid. what it means is that i recognise that not everything can be explained with theories or terms couched in just one field of human enquiry.

because nothing is that simple imho. to me, every fact or theory is entirely reletive to it's context. in the case of this thread, emotions are entirely relative to who is feeling them, they are not quantifiable with contemporary scientific techniques because an outside observer cannot fully comprehend them and the individual experiencing them has too much of a vested interest in the results to be a reliable observer. this makes them intangible according to all three of your earlier definitions and i would contend that this means that they transcend definition as mere things.

thing (plural: things; diminutives: thingy / thingie, thingo [Aus])

1. That which is considered to exist as a separate entity, quality or concept.
2. A word, symbol, sign or other referent that can be used to refer to any entity.
3. An individual object.
4. (law) whatever can be owned.
5. the latest fad or fashion.
6. (in plural) clothes, possessions or equipment.
7. A unit.

Looking at one...are you telling me emotions transcend existence? I'm pretty sure my emotions exist.

thing (plural: things; diminutives: thingy / thingie, thingo [Aus])

1. That which is considered to exist as a separate entity, quality or concept.
2. A word, symbol, sign or other referent that can be used to refer to any entity.
3. An individual object.
4. (law) whatever can be owned.
5. the latest fad or fashion.
6. (in plural) clothes, possessions or equipment.
7. A unit.

Looking at one...are you telling me emotions transcend existence? I'm pretty sure my emotions exist.

i didn't say they transcend existence, i was saying they transcend definition as things as the definition of things has been inferred in this thread up til now. the argument is now descending into semantics so i suggest we have reached something of an impasse. Undelia's origial argument was against the quote: “The best things in life aren’t things”. this quote relies on the acceptance of things to mean material possessions. that is all it has ever meant and all it needs to mean to ring true.

Many here may have heard that pile of horse feces that is the phrase, “The best things in life aren’t things.”
I’ve got news for anybody that buys into that, it isn’t true at all.

I suppose when most people think about things in life that aren’t things they either forget about or are ignorant of the functioning of the brain. The brain is most certainly a thing and its actions are the actions of a thing. When one experiences joy, the brain is simply firing synapses between neurons in such a way as to illicit certain thoughts and release certain hormones. Your emtions are things.

So, pretentious artsy type admiring nature on a morning stroll, that feeling you're getting? No different (or at least better) than the oil tycoon signing a check for a new alpine estate on the ass of a Philipino whore.
Chin up though hippy, that feeling of pretentious superiority and false deepness is all yours, well it's your brain’s activity's anyway.

You miss the point entirely. Albert Einstein once said, "The most prescious things in life are not those one gets for money." What truly matters in life is friendship, love, and inner peace, not money, plasma screen tv's, and fast cars.

You miss the point entirely. Albert Einstein once said, "The most prescious things in life are not those one gets for money." What truly matters in life is friendship, love, and inner peace, not money, plasma screen tv's, and fast cars.
You miss his point. He is saying that to some people, material things can bring that exact happiness. He is saying it is elitist and moronic to assume that only certain abstract ideas are gratifying, a thesis I agree with.

You miss his point. He is saying that to some people, material things can bring that exact happiness. He is saying it is elitist and moronic to assume that only certain abstract ideas are gratifying, a thesis I agree with.
:D

haha, europa maxima complaining about elitism. teehee!

anyway, i don't see how it's elitism at all.

haha, europa maxima complaining about elitism. teehee!
I am an elitist in my own ways, I'll admit it.

anyway, i don't see how it's elitism at all.
It is in that people think they are somehow better off.

Many here may have heard that pile of horse feces that is the phrase, “The best things in life aren’t things.”
I’ve got news for anybody that buys into that, it isn’t true at all.

I suppose when most people think about things in life that aren’t things they either forget about or are ignorant of the functioning of the brain. The brain is most certainly a thing and its actions are the actions of a thing. When one experiences joy, the brain is simply firing synapses between neurons in such a way as to illicit certain thoughts and release certain hormones. Your emtions are things.

So, pretentious artsy type admiring nature on a morning stroll, that feeling you're getting? No different (or at least better) than the oil tycoon signing a check for a new alpine estate on the ass of a Philipino whore.
Chin up though hippy, that feeling of pretentious superiority and false deepness is all yours, well it's your brain’s activity's anyway.


Does anyone really care about this?

It must be awful to be so jaded.

It must be awful to be so jaded.
A case in point for you Infinite Revolution.

It is in that people think they are somehow better off.
oh well, i use it more personally than that, although obviously i'm aware that there will be a section of the population who will use it to place themselves on some sort of moral high ground. that's not how the OP was originally arguing against it though. undelia addressed the semantics of the saying and i just took it in a different direction to call his bluff. turned out s/he all but abandoned the thread. i probably got boring or something.

A case in point, Infinite Revolution.
yes indeedy.

and besides, the OP was claiming, if not the moral, then the logical highground, which is just as silly cuz you can justify anything with logic as long as you have enough room.

You miss his point. He is saying that to some people, material things can bring that exact happiness. He is saying it is elitist and moronic to assume that only certain abstract ideas are gratifying, a thesis I agree with.

And I feel only the greatest pity for those people.

and besides, the OP was claiming, if not the moral, then the logical highground, which is just as silly cuz you can justify anything with logic as long as you have enough room.
The OP was claiming no high ground at all. It was just straightening things out.

The OP was claiming no high ground at all. It was just straightening things out.
straightening things out = claiming a logical high ground

straightening things out = claiming a logical high ground
His logic is well-founded though. It is silly for someone to assume a person cannot derive pleasure from being a materialist.

His logic is well-founded though. It is silly for someone to assume a person cannot derive pleasure from being a materialist.
if you'll read the OP though you'll see that his argument said nothing about the pleasure that can be derived from materialism. nor have i denied it.

if you'll read the OP though you'll see that his argument said nothing about the pleasure that can be derived from materialism. nor have i denied it.
He did, if you read it carefully.

So, pretentious artsy type admiring nature on a morning stroll, that feeling you're getting? No different (or at least better) than the oil tycoon signing a check for a new alpine estate on the ass of a Philipino whore.

He did, if you read it carefully.
oh yeah, well, i stopped reading when it got overly trolly. besides that was auxilliary to the main argument which was based on the semantics of the saying and the word 'things'. that was what my argument was addressing, in a slightly tangental way.

oh yeah, well, i stopped reading when it got overly trolly. besides that was auxilliary to the main argument which was based on the semantics of the saying and the word 'things'. that was what my argument was addressing, in a slightly tangental way.
He was using them to promote the main argument. ;) Those were the bases.

yes, well, that's as maybe. i wasn't addressing that part of the argument since i didn't bother reading the trolly bit :P

Life is short;
Filled with stuff
Don't know what for;
I ain't had enough.

I learned all I know
By the age of nine
But i could better myself
If i could only find -

Some new kind of kick
Something i ain't had;
Some new kind of buzz -
I wanna go hog mad

I'm lookin' and lookin' and lookin' for -
Something i ain't had before.

- Just came to mind. Now I really wanna listen to the Cramps.