Outline Suggestions

Ali Jo,

What exactly do you define as "true" pleasure and happiness? And in contrast, what is a false state of happiness?

I know you are not an advocate of binary statements, so how do you defend there being such a thing as a "true" or "false" state of happiness? Happiness is after all, a state of mind, and any feeling that we experience must be very much authentic, no? I know that you bring up the point of temporary and long lasting as a way of distinguishing which feeling is the real deal, but is how long lasting a certain feeling might be really a good indicator of how true the feeling may have been? I would argue differently, because some of the strongest emotions felt are ones that are fleeting; the terror as death grabs us and lets us go just in time to survive, for instance. Was this "short" feeling not true? Also, to discuss the idea of time that a feeling lasts, we need to have a working definition of what temporary and long lasting is, because generally speaking it's all relative (and a binary idea at that).

Now the reason I bring all this up is because you said in your comment to me: "There is no such thing as "true" and "false". Everything in our universe, whether it's ethical or not, is a natural and indigenous part of REALITY. If it can be fathomed, it's natural."

So then if it can be felt, is that not real also? Is it not the reality of our experience? Can a feeling EVER be false?

And I certainly see your point (don't think I'm attacking it) when you argue that nothing can ever be true or false, but the tricky thing with that is that we are not able to effectively convey our experiences as human beings in terms that are not binary. Something has to be right, and something has to be wrong. Something has to be good, and something has to be bad. Something has to be alive, and something has to be dead. Or else, we cannot comprehensively make sense of our situation.

While I, like you, am interested in ways that this can at least be minimized to acknowledge that at best our world is shaded gray (or purple, blue, yellow) and is not a binary universe, we must remember that we are trapped within our human ability to understand. This is why we measure time on a weird round shaped thing with two clicking lines moving across numbers. It's also why we measure how "big" or "small" things are by how much "space" they take up, when in fact the universe is constantly expanding, and so it is impossible for us to even understand this concept of space. Our universe does not have parameters, but our ability to process it does.

So even though you seem to emphatically believe that binary distinctions are bullshit (and I agree with you) both of our papers have theses that revolve around these distinctions of "true reality" for me and "true happiness" for you.

Now this is only to be expected of us as humans; I'm personally stumped for how to write this paper without including binary ideas, let alone perceive my life without them.

Soo yeah pretty much we can reject binary ideas on a theoretical level, but I'm just not sure that it can be done in practice.

But binary and reality debates aside, I'm sure your paper will be thoughtful, and well written as always :)

________________________

Carol,
I like how you relate our use of digital gadgets to our happiness. You provide a specific definition for what happiness means or is portrayed as in our culture, which is good. However, what do you think happiness should be? You seem to not believe that digital media can make one truly happy, so what would you argue does and why? Maybe you can talk about what you perceive to be the difference between these two states of happiness (if there is one as you argue). Adding that in will make your paper stronger.

Your use of evidence is great though-I think you will have a lot to work with here.

As your ideas develop further, I'm sure your paper will be really good :)