Do you value pain?

Post Reply New Topic

Mathematics is a language that processes logic within a mind or a machine designed to elucidate consequences. They usually are transferred to a mind for choice but machines have come quite a ways and are permitted some choices.

Thinking about this a bit more I realized that when a machine is programmed to make choices - and this does occur - I cannot attribute those choices to emotion.

Last edited by Sand on 14 Mar 2009, 12:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Most animals can hold their urge to urinate. For example, my cat and dogs just don't pee as soon as they feel the urge to. My dogs will actually hold it until they see a good enough tree or patch of grass to unload their saved up waste matter. I don't know if it's due to logic or emotions that compel them to hold it. Perhaps it's both. It's definitely not instinctive though. They could very easily urinate anytime, anywhere, but they don't. Now, I've witnessed some humans doing the opposite. One time a guy peed right in front of me on a street corner. Another time a guy masturbated next to me on a bus.

i thought about that when posting, but dogs and cats allready have that "as an instinct", so... its not something they learn by being pets, but something they allready do in nature.

ever noticed how both a dog and a cat try to cover their feces?

poop smells* and may attract "bigger fish" in the environment, and both wild canines and felines will hold it in, untill they find a nice suitable place to poop it, and cover it up. thats probably why mammals are even capable of stopping themselves from peeing in the first place

*predator poop is full of meat and proteine and is way more stinky than herbivore poop, thats usually just dead fibers coming out.**

**cows are fed artificial crap. household animal poop = human poop.

Cats and dogs mark their territory through urination. If they were purely instinctive, they would mark in the house. Most pets will do this until the owner "teaches" them that it is unacceptable.
What keeps animals from urinating at first urge is not very different from what keeps humans from urinating at will. It's the social consequences that keep us acting civilized. That is probably due in part to an emotional response as well as a rational one.

i think the a reason cats dont pee inside, for territorial marking, is that the house is FILLED with the odors of itself and its family allready, and never gets challenged. teaching cats and dogs to take their business outside, wouldnt be possible without the cat and dogs ability to hold themselves in nature.

we are using their instincts

"its not safe to poop here. predators will pick it up. poop elsewhere!"

as i was getting too-close-to in another reply, rationality/reason/logic all stem from survival skills.
so rewinding it, it naturally all comes down to survival and instinct, whatever the reason, predators, social status, etc.

my original point was still about pain, and the humans unique ability to stop and observe pain, know why its there, and know that its harmless if it indeed is harmless.
animals are like human infants. poke it w a needle, and it cries and cries as long as the pain persists.
poke a grown human w a needle, and he goes "ow! goddamnit!" and then stops reacting, once he realizes the pain comes from no further source of danger. the pain persists, but we dont have to react to it.
we can ignore it.

Like I said before, cats and dogs will pee inside if they are not taught to hold it. Although they can hold it (just like humans) the reasons why we are able to do this and make a choice whether to hold it or not is based on similar "instincts". I agree that human emotions/rationale can all be pin pointed back to instincts.

In a sense, you can also say that society uses our instincts to civilize us. In fact, there have been many psychological studies in which the government learned some basic societal survival methods such as the effectiveness of propaganda and such.

Going back to pain and whether is is useful, I'd have to say yes because fear is the main driving force that keeps a civilization together. If pleasure were the main driving force, people would move to an island rather than save up money to take a trip away from a life that is tiresome and stressful and I would even say painful. It would be more logical to just up and leave the rat race altogether. It appears to me that most people I know aren't very happy. They are mostly worried and trying to make more money, trying to keep up with the neighbors, and not really enjoying the present moment. Why would they continue to do this? I mean, why would "eskimos" continue to live in such harsh environments?

Also, I've seen animals in pain who withhold their cries of anguish. For example, my cat had a wound on her tail and didn't cry. You can say that is instinctive too because crying is a way of drawing attention to yourself and that can attract predators. Maybe that is why humans don't cry when in pain. Maybe it would be construed as weakness and that can attract human predators who would take advantage of them. Human predators come in the form of salesmen or manipulating friends and relatives who do favors in exchange for unwritten IOUs.

I don't see the act of pissing as that far off of a way to look this topic, not all. The act of pissing is territorial. I see it all over the place here on WP and not just WP. Pissed on, pissed off. It's damn binary. The repercussions from being pissed on, marked, by others in what we jokingly say as the NT's, only it isn't so damn funny to be pissed on. Someone is trying to grab your hearth, your home, which is ultimately you. It's primal and the genius (loath the term) of Freud, to me, is I think I can see it in Binary and in a way I think he did too. He took it right back to the primordial soup. Off's and on's, 1's and 0's, pain and pleasure, war and peace.



Edit: Not looking back but when someone, pardon me for not quoting, mentioned the act of pissing oneself on the bus and the reaction from the supposed affront from the others on the bus, my ears and eyes perked up big time. You can piss on yourself, do you value it highly? Is it painful? Self esteem can be low sometimes around here.

And I'm throwing this is a direction unfortuantly because I think there can be other ways of looking at this that I haven't seen. But I do think it very worthy of discussion.

(And yeah I know that one opened up a big straight line and someone will see it. )

See http://www.ovimagazine.com/toon/13

Ok this is seriously taking this off topic, ummm maybe, I never know. There was theory floating around for a while if dogs didn't have major impact on making man more civilized, rather then the more opposite leaning. I thought it pretty well debunked through a evolution way of looking at it, survival of the fittest, for the domestication of the dog.

Talking about psychological pain. I do value it, but I think my value of it is misguided. We have a tendency to try and get some good out of such pain when really there is none. We say it makes us stronger or more wise or improves character/understanding of others, because we are desperate to rationalise it somehow, make it meaningful and give it some purpose (and I am guilty as anyone about this).

Really life would be better without psychological pain - we can't even imagine what a pain-free life would be like and since our personalities have been shaped by pain we rightly think that without that pain we wouldnt be ourselves and thus wouldnt want to be without it. However, what we would be might be better, certainly happier. In the end pain just wears one down, takes away joy, enthusiasm, intelligence and the vitality of life.

What is all this talk of piss?

I think it is possible you may have it switched around. I think people have a tendency to rationalize, and give meaning and purpose to the things that give us pain, not the pain itself, because the endurance of pain is an investment. It is difficult to get rid of things when ones own personal suffering is a part of the investment. The longer the pain is endured, the more difficult it is to cut ones losses.

I agree with the statement of, we cannot really imagine a pain free life, but I disagree with the rest. How can one possibly know what happiness is, without psychological pain?

You're both saying the same thing and I have to agree with both statements. When I was a kid, before I encountered painful situations, I was probably closer to being my ideal self. Pain may make us stronger, but it's unfortunate we have to be so strong to get along in this world.

Pain is a body signal to take urgent action. It is vitally necessary to maintain life. But when pain is caused by a situation which cannot be remedied and which cripples or destroys a person's abilities to confront daily living it has no virtue whatsoever.

I think we can know happiness - as a young child, before suffering any significant psychological pain, I was the happiest I have ever been. Was I aware of it? I don't know, but self awareness in general is low at that age. I think as an adult one would be aware of what it might be like to suffer loss etc without having to suffer it. Furthermore, even if one wasnt aware of what pain was I don't think that would diminish happiness in any way.

The 'strength' that pain gives us is only useful against further possible pain. If there were no pain then it wouldnt be necessary. This type of strength is like a shield - it can prevent us getting hurt again, but also shields us against positive things. For example stopping us from getting close to people again (after being hurt by someone). I don't think there is any real benefit in having it if there was no more pain to be suffered. And after enough pain, strength reduces not increases. There is only so much anyone can take.

Pain and gain topic

The pain of wanting to pee, the pain of an itch, the pain of emotional loss, the pain of wanting to engage in you-know-what.

Pain is a sign that something needs attention. The pain could be physical, psychological, emotional. We choose what to do after a pain is experienced. Is this choice logical, cultural, emotional, social? How and with what we respond depends on age, experience, skill, temperament, opportunity, judgment. It is certainly individual.

I believe suffering can be incredibly beautiful, when it is done out of love for someone else. Love and self-sacrifice are so intertwined, it would be hard to have one without the other. Sacrifice out of love begins to stop feeling like suffering anymore, because you are so willing to do it.

Think about parenthood. It begins with childbirth, one of the most horrible physical pains imaginable, but the reward is having a child to love, and so mothers don't really count the cost. They say "I would die for my child" as a way of expressing, "I am willing to suffer in the most ultimate way I know how, that is how very great my love is."

Or, think of the classic love story, Romeo and Juliet. Again, the ultimate pain, death, as an expression of sacrifice for another person, because they loved that person so, so much. I know this is real, I have felt it, I'm just sorry I'm describing it so poorly.