guymandudepersonthin said:everyoene here is a psuedointellectual, boredom is the natural state of man. we didnt evolve to be happy we evolved to survive, certainly natural life was filled with more stress instead of boredom due to the dificiulty of surviavl. but boredom FUNDAMENTALLY stems from the fact that consciousness is a prison
This is the example of Immanuel Kant's influence on the state of our culture today. You are perpetuating that boredom is the natural state of man. That we are metaphysically incapable of thinking, valuing, judging, and loving. And not only that, like him, you're proclaiming a transcendental solution to the "problem" of consciousness. What a woozy. I'm going to argue with you in defense of man's greatness, his ability to reason, and the pursuit of happiness.
To start, I'm going to mention the metaphysics of objective reality before I address your fallacy that only a witch doctor (who hates mankind) would destroy himself with.
First, existence is identity and consciousness is identification. An entity is an existent that both exists and has its own identity. Consciousness is the state of awareness of reality and the existents thereof. Only living organisms are capable of consciousness. The epistemological basis for the knowledge of these axioms is because they are perceptually self-evident. Yes, a human infant cannot formulate the perception of existence into concepts like an adult can. However, as stated by Gregory Salmieri, "an adult knows nothing more about what is to exist than an infant does." (A Companion to Ayn Rand, pp. 250)
Second, reality is mind-independent. You don't need to degrade the capabilities of consciousness in order to understand that. There is no distraction from the external world because our sense organs grant us the perceptual data from our interactions with other existents. These sense organs are the tools in which living organisms can navigate through the mind-independent world.
Now, you're claiming that we evolved to survive. Whether you mean living organisms as a whole or just humans in particular, you're not entirely wrong. The purpose of life for any living entity is to commit to self-generation and self-sustenance. And while evolution plays a factor in the continuation of a species, it isn't the primary cause, unlike the sole principle for its reason to exist. Life is literally meant to be lived, and this includes man.
Man is equipped with the faculty of rationality, and this is the fundamental, proper epistemological conclusion that grants his identity while distinguishing himself from all other creatures. He is the source of his capacity to value, and he's even able to choose his values at his own discretion. Why? Because he can think. However, in order ensure his survival, man must think. His rational faculty is his only means of survival. He cannot rely on his emotions to guide him for what is in his self-interest. Emotions, like fear, won't tell him how to survive a flash flood or an earthquake.
You reduce man to a hedonistic savage that can only respond to the range-of-the-moment because that's how he can escape his perpetual state of boredom, and you encourage that he should. You claim that instead of being able to love, he should go TikTok and YouTube because of his insatiable, intrinsic nature of being disinterested in life. That nothing can treat it besides replacing boredom with another emotion. You evade man's passion for his values and virtues, such as productivity and achievement, because to you, it is a distraction from the perpetual disinterest in life. The mood of boredom is the result of a man who has no direction, no purpose, no values, no ideas. But how can boredom help him survive? Boredom, like any other emotion, doesn't give him the knowledge to produce or create a product or service that enriches his life. If anything, it destroys his ambition to self-sustain.
guymandudepersonthin said:take all your senses away, for 100 years still alive, just black
you have no mouth and you must scream, prison right?
put your senses back, life is normal again. do you get the sense that it's still the same but now you are distracted?
I don't understand the point of this question. You cannot have your all your senses taken away without death, and even if so, you wouldn't even be capable of perceiving black. I can only imagine that you'd start hallucinating if such a thing were to happen.