• PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    I mean…

    Maybe anger would have, but he wasn’t consistently specifically angry at sadness.
    And maybe sadness would have killed herself, but she didn’t.

    It’d be out of character for any of the others to do it.

  • DarkSpectrum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Because happiness can only exist when outlined by sadness. You only know times are good if you have bad times to compare to.

    • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      That just sounds like philosopher dribble peddled to make sad people feel better.

      You can very well know happiness without sadness. It’s called ignorance and from what I’ve heard it’s bliss.

      • DarkSpectrum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        It is possible to know one without the other, however the first experience becomes the baseline upon which other experiences are compared and measured against forming a spectrum.

        Take a baby for instance, early in life they are exposed to milk, the feeling of being close to their parents during feeding and the feeling of a full stomach (happiness). However, this becomes the reference point to compare feelings of being alone and hungry (sadness).

        If a child experiences nothing but absent parents and malnutrition, the child will not know it is sad because there is no comparative reference point. Its just normal.

        Another example, a long time ago when life expectancy was much lower and daily life was very hard, the circumstances needed to feel happiness were much lower. A woman living a hard life in an isolated wilderness suddenly receives a fine dress from a distant city and, compared to her daily harsh reality, it brings her extreme happiness.

        Compare that to modern times where daily life is much easier and we have access to almost anything we want. Not surprisingly, people find it harder to find happiness. Why? Because they don’t have the comparative negative baseline.

        • Vilian@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Are they ignorant or all their “knowledge” just revolve in being racist and an asshole?, a truly ignorant person would be like a toddler no? Without racism and such

          • TrousersMcPants@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 days ago

            Being a toddler is traumatic! They have no knowledge of the world around them and it’s frequently terrifying. Why do you think young children cry so much? Ignorance is scary.

            • DarkSpectrum@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              18 hours ago

              Common fallacies are well documented with generally similar names. Might be worth reading up on them so that when you label something a fallacy, you are doing so from an informed position. Labelling something a fallacy, without understanding whether it is or isn’t, is a subtle form of disinformation.

              • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 hours ago

                That’s a rather rigid view of rhetoric. I know common fallacies have been documented (mostly in infographic form) but the way that you categorize them and how you define them isn’t some immutable law of the universe, and neither are their names. Collections of fallacies aren’t very reliable. More official sources exist but they don’t tend to name very specific fallacies.

                Anyways, what really bothers me is this:

                Labelling something a fallacy, without understanding whether it is or isn’t, is a subtle form of disinformation.

                This represents a fundamental misunderstanding that I cannot allow. Something isn’t a fallacy because some guy said it is; that, ironically, is an Appeal to Authority Fallacy™. Memorizing a list of fallacies by name does not teach you what a fallacy is and it certainly doesn’t grant you understanding like you claim. The list doesn’t decide what a fallacy is. A logical fallacy is simply a mistake or nonrigorous section in an argument that follows a common pattern. If you can identify the pattern, and you can identify that it’s not logically sound, you can call it a fallacy. That’s not disinformation just because you didn’t read about it on logicalfallacies.com.