Closed Thread
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-12-2020, 04:29 PM
AlexPontik is offline
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 20

Fun, Ethics and choises, how do they relate?

the text below is about fun and their relation with ethics.
Different people can say different things are fun to them in real life, so the language in the text is general, with the aim to not exclude anyone's fun (now whether that is so remains to be seen)
I look forward your opinions, apologies for any mistakes in advance, this is still an argument in progress

Introduction - why is fun such a general word?

All people set on their life to have fun. But what does fun mean?
Fun is a word people use to describe what is good for them and they want to do, but it doesn't describe specific experiences.
Also, fun is just a word, and while making sounds with our mouths (i.e speech/language) does help us describe how we want to feel and what we want to do, it doesn't mean we are going to feel this way.
Language guides us to fun, but it doesn't guarantee fun.
This is because one will need to live an experience and then judge if he/she considers it fun.

As an example of this, lets consider what one can say about playing music.
To play music, you simply need to play your instrument, and listen to the song. And you don't have to do anything else.
But in practice, it's more tricky to do, than to describe it. Because in practice music happens in the moment, after patient preparation.
You need to play music for a long time, to be able play music good, or you can instead spend your time talking about playing music.
Sometimes you are in a good mood and prepared, and playing music works, meaning that the song sound like music.
Sometimes you are pushing yourself further than you should or you are unprepared, and playing music doesn't work, meaning that the song, even if it doesn't have mistakes, sounds lifeless.
In the end, when you are playing music, you never know what is coming next.
But with patient preparation over time, one learns his/her limits instinctively, and within these limits, one can play music.

Ethics and fun, from a third person's viewpoint,the quick way, or the obvious way
There is a link between ethics and fun in human beings.
Generally speaking, when people have fun, they try to behave ethically. If they don't behave ethically, then after they behave unethically either:
1) others people's fun experienced gets violated, and then people reach a point where the jokes end, and conflict starts.
(e.g. he/she said this, then I said that...and then things escalated. Have you lived something like this before in your life?)
2) they violate a law of nature, and consequences happen.
(e.g. one tries a stunt but he/she hasn't worked enough to be good at doing the stunt, and fails. Have you seen something like this before on youtube?)
3) they do something unethical and they manage to avoid being blamed, for now, but they will need to judge whether they want to repeat this behavior or not.
Laws also are written as a necessity in society to limit the occurrences of this latter case , because some people get carried away, and keep excusing unethical behavior in themselves.

The third person's viewpoint, while useful, has the problem that people behaving unethically can argue that this is just someone else view (it is a third person's viewpoint after all), and they are simply misunderstood.
And since one can make up stories on the fly to support this argument for each occasion, we need to look at fun from an individual's point of view, and see where the stories humans tell themselves start from, and where these stories end.

Ethics and fun, from a first person's viewpoint, the long road, or the not so obvious way
Now from the general view, let's look at how an individual experiences fun.
The ride is a bit lengthier here, because we need to consider what one would write to describe fun, without writing any specific experiences to him/her on the text, so that it includes the fun experiences other people have.
The aim for doing this is that is to find a link between moral choices and fun.

A joke is funny if and only if:
1. When I think of it, it is abnormal
2. When I feel it, it feels good
3. I cannot experience it continuously for it to be funny.

Forward proof. Assume a joke is funny→ prove that all 3 above are true:
1) If when I thought of it, it was normal, it wouldn’t surprise me. Yet a successful joke always
surprises me.
2) If when I felt it, it felt bad, it wouldn’t be a joke to me.
3) No matter how good a joke is, I can only experience it from time to time for it to be funny.

Backward proof.
Assume all three above are true→ prove it is funny
Start from 2.
2) it feels good → it belongs in the set of experiences I want to live.
1) I think it is abnormal → it is a surprise/unknown experience I want to live.
3)I cannot experience it continuously → It is an unknown experience I want to live,
But once…or from time to time…but I’m not sure when…isn’t it ?

The words Think,Feel,Experience above, by definition, provide answers to the following questions:
1) Think:if I calm down emotion, what is the conclusion I reach?
2) Feel: what emotions come to me?
3) Experience: if I look from the viewpoint, within everything ,it is me, and it is the rest , what is the connection I have with the rest in time?

A general observation also for the words Think,Feel, Experience is also that I can:
1) Think
a) Normal: I am not alarmed
b) Not Normal: I am alarmed
2) Feel:
a) Wanted: Give me more please
b) Unwanted: Give me less please
3) Experience:
a) Once: happens in the moment
b) Continuously: happens in time without interruptions

If from the last observation, we put all the combinations in a matrix, and we consider
1)what words describe the specific combination more accurately in language
2)what happens when one pushes it to far (too much limit)
3)what happens when one pushes it to little (too little limit)
4)what happens when people align in society
5)how much luck is involved for people in society to align for each row, starting from the assumption that everything humans did up to now in history was luck.

we get the following matrix.
Think_____|Feel_____|Experience___|I___________|Too much___|Too little___|All align_______|How much Luck to align?_|
Normal___|wanted___|continuously__|believe_____|dogmatic___|uneducated___|civilization__|Let’s say luck___________|
Normal___|wanted___|once_________|Understand_|obsessed____|servant____|Knowledge_____|Sorta luck_____________|
Normal___|unwanted_|continuously__|Have to_____|problems___|boredom__|Economy_______|Less sorta luck_________|
Normal___|unwanted_|once_________|Measure____|chaos______|failure______|The system___|Luck?_________________|
abnormal_|wanted___|once_________|sense______|nonsense___*|nonsense___|Common sense_|Luck?_________________|
abnormal_|wanted___|continuously__|wonder_____|Delusional__|Depressed__|Culture________|Less sorta luck_________|
abnormal_|unwanted_|continuously__|Fear_______|horrified____|idiot______|Strategy________|Sorta luck____________|
abnormal_|unwanted_|once_________|Unknown___|Madness____|Madness__**|Peace_________|Let’s say luck_________|
*also, beware of unearned wisdom
**also, madness backwards, so back to dogmatic

In this matrix, limits of human behavior appear, which humans adopt instinctively for the most part.
The clearest example of this is fear.
Most people know that at a certain point you are too afraid, then become horrified and then panic (so you'd better find a way to reduce fear in those cases).
On the other side, too little fear and you become careless, and if you don't learn from mistakes you make by being careless, you are bordering with being an idiot, and may get hurt.

What is missing from this matrix, is the process that drives humans to find these limits. And this is where curiosity enters the text.

Curiosity and fun. (also apologies but...Humans are pervs! )
In general, they are four ways humans use their curiosity

PERV LEVEL 1 : “The Curious”
-summary:the fact that one is curious by default, and can't avoid it. One has to use his/her curiosity, while being careful at the same time.
Humans are curious. When you are curious you are looking into something, but cannot fully assess if it will hurt you or not.
To find that, you need to look further.
But…you could simply not look and avoid being hurt as a default…but you look…so bit of a perv huh?

PERV LEVEL 2: “The Philosopher”
-summary: how one uses curiosity to find all good experiences, with the aim to live a good life.
Eric Idle quoted Voltaire who said “once a philosopher, twice a perv”
As a philosopher, you try to use your curiosity to find the good life and live it.
And…as you live it…you keep questioning it…what a perv! But if you don’t always…

PERV LEVEL 3: “The Physicist”
-summary: how one uses curiosity to find the limits where an experience remains good, instinctively, and then stay there by learning to have the needed patience at all times.
As a physicist, you know you’re a bit of a perv, and apart from that…you don’t know.
You do stuff, you observe the results, you find limits where it is fun to do stuff, and…as you don’t know…you’re a bit careful.
Why? Cause you’re having fun obviously!

And finally…
PERV LEVEL 4: “The prophet” - how one uses curiosity to hypothesize, or talk about the potential future.
The prophet predicts the future.

Humans appear to be passing from all the above states naturally and stabilize at level 3, because this is where the experience remains good stably, instinctively.
But, there is progress also in physics. So, let's talk about this also.

The final Judgement ! - Where ethics meet with fun.
Physics seems to progress in the following manner:
1) We have a current theory in physics.
2) A New theory in physics is proposed (that can be simplified to the current theory if more error is allowed)
3) We make experiments to test the new theory

Michael Sandel in his course “What is the right thing” , points the difficulty in moral judgements in life, plus the valuable tools discovered for moral judgements in difficult cases.
One of them is to think of an end (or a boundary in mathematics). The tool is captured in the below argument “Who should have the good flutes. The good flutists. Why? Cause this is what flutes are made for, to be played good, and for the rest to enjoy them”.
For the physicist the end justifies the means, but only if the means justify the end, it is fun in the end!

So…here it goes, let’s go to see what can happen in the end.
All but one final piece has already been found in physics, and one final experiment is needed to check the theory proposed, or…in other words… one final thing needs to be done to find the final …thing, that finally explains everything in nature.
Should the physicist execute the experiment? It seems no. Why?

Ask, “what is there?” in general, when the physicist observes the world (or in other words, else let’s relax and talk about everything…)?
Well, there is “nothing”, “something” and “something else”.
Why? Cause if there was something else…well we already included it in what we said, no?
And why is there something else there, in the first place?
Because it’s different from something and nothing, its …well… something else, and we said we would talk about everything, so we need to include it.
Also nothing and something are different from one another, and different from something else. (they mean different things)

If the experiment is executed, the options in the result are that:
1) “Nothing” happens
2) The prediction of the theory happens. What is that? I don’t know, “something”?
3) “Something else” happens. (if you wonder how is this possible, ask: “what is there?”)
So know that you know the options of the experiment, or answer to what is there, what is there really to find, that is missing? What you do, so let’s talk about that also.

Let talk about you compared to the rest that there is, out of everything
You can do nothing or you can do something, and you want to live something else .
(rephrased: you can act or not, and your emotions guide you to live new experiences)
Hypothesis:Let’s assume you live something else as you wanted, all the time.
1)Can you do nothing all the time? No because you would never do something, and we said that you can do something, so at a certain time … well.. you will do something.
2)Can you do something all the time? No because you would never do nothing, and we said that you can do nothing, so at a certain time … well.. you will do nothing.
So sometimes you do nothing and sometimes you do something, and your emotions guide you to live something else.
3)Can you use only your emotions to guide you to live something else all the time? No then you would be doing nothing all the time.
4)Can you know when to choose between doing nothing or something all the time? No then you would be doing something all the time.

So regardless of what you do you don't seem to be able to live something else all the time.
Observation for Morality: “The difficulty in the choices in one’s life seems to remain stable, in order to have fun.”
Why? Comedians (or “social physicists”…well or …just physicists), who appear to be doing nothing but fun, seem to be reaching the same conclusion for all around them (ask your friend Joe Rogan regarding this)
Or, rephrased, within certain limits in your behavior you can have fun in a stable manner, but outside of the limits ,where one forgets about being cautious,luck happens.
And while luck is happening, you may or may not be able to judge right a situation, cause... luck is happening , and are not cautious.
Old 05-12-2020, 08:37 PM
Telemark's Avatar
Telemark is offline
Charter Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Just outside of Titletown
Posts: 24,108
Originally Posted by AlexPontik View Post
A joke is funny if and only if:
1. When I think of it, it is abnormal
2. When I feel it, it feels good
3. I cannot experience it continuously for it to be funny.
“Explaining a joke is like dissecting a frog. You understand it better but the frog dies in the process.”

― E.B. White
It's extremely difficult to wade through a wall of text like you've posted here and in your last thread. Message boards are not really suitable for that type of discussion. Perhaps you can cut it down to one or two paragraphs with a single salient point to discuss?

I predict that few people will engage with you on a post like this; even if it was easy to understand (which it isn't) there's just too much of it.
Old 05-12-2020, 08:50 PM
snfaulkner's Avatar
snfaulkner is offline
Join Date: May 2015
Location: 123 Fake Street
Posts: 8,891
This reminds me of people I hung out with when I used to smoke meth.
It may be because I'm a drooling simpleton with the attention span of a demented gnat, but would you mind explaining everything in words of one syllable. 140 chars max.
Old 05-12-2020, 09:16 PM
El_Kabong's Avatar
El_Kabong is offline
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Smack Dab in the Middle
Posts: 15,960
This is going to be fun.
Old 05-12-2020, 09:31 PM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,674

The Moderator Speaks

Right. I'm shutting this down as well.

Alex, please try to be more coherent with your posts. If you want to make them in Great Debates, that's fine. But have a clear thesis and debate topic moving forward.
Closed Thread


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:20 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to:

Send comments about this website to:

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

Copyright © 2017