What's meant by 'are you happy? are you sad?' ?

Post Reply New Topic

I thought happiness was meant to be so elusive and unknown but say when i read this for the yahoo question 'what exactly does socially incompetent mean?' - 'Probably also includes people who don't have basic people-reading skills, i.e. being able to tell when someone is angry, happy, sad, etc, and respond to them/adjust your behavior accordingly.' - he writes it as if being happy is an everyday thing and not some elusive thing that people strive for...

also i don't get happy and when i feel sad it feels good not bad so i'm just wondering what people are actually describing with these words and if they're stupidly just use happy sad to mean good/bad which then just must mean emotionally stressed or not stressed. happiness being hte end all best emotion cannot be what he and most others mean. also sadness to me feels good - i enjoy feeling sad at say when the program i really liked series ends it doesn't feel bad and it feels better than just feeling normal ie nothing. so what is this social skill of being able to see when people are happy or sad? what does it really mean it seems to simplisitic and well robotic emotions...

I feel happy a lot. It's not "elusive" or rare to experience. What people mean by "striving for" or "pursuing" happiness is bigger moments of happiness, going for things that stand out in one's mind as things that would make oneself very happy.

Since emotions aren't visible or otherwise easily sensed people learn about them by associating words that others speak about them, which is why we often have trouble understanding ours and others emotions.

thinking based on your first paragraph; if happy you experience generally that makes me think it's not based on an object or a goal some but just a general state of mind and your brain and essentially a sensory thing. whereas the big happiness you refer to coming from like stand out things but would those things be like sensory experiences also or 'achievements'?

it's worrying to think it's normal/right that you learn about your emotions only by what other people tell you about their emotions if i've correctly drawn from you said? emotions are easily senses to me unless they're low in intensity (but then that leads to the question is it intensity itself or our noticing it at low intensity that increases it's intensity - ah from bit of reasoning it must be the intensity itself). so yeah i'd so if it's at an intensity that is high then it actually matters and then it is quite easily senses. anger i easily know when i am that. social nerves easy. i get it you're saying because they're not easily sensed ie one of the 5 senses therefore people describe the feeling to others so they can be sure of it because someone else is aware of/experienced that same emotion also?

i know you're using good conventional language but it's a bit vague to me; what do you actually mean by people have trouble understanding/learning their own emotions and others? do you mean like understanding what caused it or why? because otherwise you don't learn emotions they're just a prime of the human experience and there's no should feel this way or that it's just how it is - the base reaction.

curious thing related to your 'emotions aren't visible' is my theory that emotions are very linked to sensory information we receive or mentally imagine.

also i don't feel happy a lot just normal. and if i do too much thinking and not enough of my imagination i feel a bit down - a black (that isn't racist in the slightest to any fking racist minded people out there i mean the abstract visual of my state if i had to give it a colour - it's like a slightly washed out black). it seems i can get myself in what i call an excited state but is basically happiness and allows me to experience the 'joy' i call it on others faces (in videos or real life or cartoons even) and other emotions but i have to consciously do this imagining creating senses and it puts me in that 'present' sensory mindful state. but is that how it is for you? or is like other stuff that causes your general happiness?

i think you're right about people saying striving for bigger moments it makes sense. but i wonder why they fail to write it properly then and refer to big moments rather than use the same word that refers to thing they can have often without striving for. if it's like a scale with bigger moments of happiness hows it work? like do you make your own happiness like with me essentially i do i put myself in the state and then i enjoy things more i change my brain... but hows it work what generally will bring more happiness or not honestly?

Where did you get this idea that happiness, in its most basic form, only exists in legend?? Maybe this is a Theory of Mind problem?

Happiness is not some legendary unicorn. It's the assumed baseline state of a healthy person whose physical needs are met and who hasn't recently suffered a loss or bereavement. When a person's baseline state is sadness, it's considered a disorder (like dysthymia or depression.) If you have a hard time identifying or naming your own emotions, that's alexithymia. Autistics seem to be prone to these negative baseline states, either because of their own brain chemistry or because of experiences like abuse or bullying (or both.)

The social difficulty of recognizing the internal states of others is wrapped up in body language, and the autistic inability to read it. NTs see the facial expressions (and microexpressions) and posture of other people and, taken together with what the person's voice sounds like and the topics they choose to focus on, deduce whether that other person is happy or sad. People on the spectrum can't make use of this channel of information, and may or may not care whether other people are happy or sad. It's also difficult for many spectrumites to convey their own emotions through their expressions (even when they are trying) and so others percieve the slack facial muscles and lack of expression and tone of voice as sad, sullen, bored, etc.

basically from reading many times various place 'people think X (career,new car) would bring them happiness'.

but you should probably change the authoratitive manner of writing as you give me your information because you do realise it's just semantics... and the average person uses words confusingly as with 'happiness' vs 'happy' - such variation in what those two words mean when they're used it seems.

it makes sense that the word 'happy' could be used for just a regular state. like are you happy with that? are you happy? yes.. i'd just call that state normal.. so when it's refered are you happy/sad you're telling it's referring to whether they're fine or whether they're depressed?

i don't think normal people 'TRY' to convey their own emotions they just do. I don't think autistics are prone to negative baselines states... isn't that common for normal people to be in a negative state that's why they can't be on their own and all needy?

to me i use the word sadness with it's classical meaning. basically you're sad over the end of something that is gone which you enjoyed... but actually the sadness doesn't feel bad it's kind of like a celebration... so i definately wouldn't use the word sad to correlate to that general long term bad feeling. because i understand there isn't a lexical difference in meaning between happiness and happy it's the same meaning just different form of word... i've become confused by people wrongly using those words. basically 'happiness' is usually writen about when you know pursuit of happiness like the other poster said big goals, and happy is used when referring to just not in a bad state at any point... so it's basically semantics... and people not paying attention to how words/semantics works. if i didn't value lexical structure ie the system of a language itself then probably by chance i'd have actually guessed the meaning rather than strictly following the language actually being used. (not a case of literall thinking but a case of respecting the lexical system more than the average writer/person).

what i understand from it now is basically people wondering whether you're healthy or not. whether you're fine or completely unknowably to me bad for some reason. happy/sad are such basic duality. sounds like good/bad - very unfeeling words themselves. from my research i think the sensory autistis are very happy people - they're practically what normal people are trying to achieve with their in the moment mindfullness and meditation.

i definately agree about the autist not getting the micro expression channels. because classic autism sees the world in 2d patterns (so i wonder whether they pick on voice well because when they don't understand words it's because they're so focused on the actual sound of it) and from my logical and reflection i think if you're too verbal a thinker and think a lot of independent thought you get a lot of 'thought noise' in your mind which stops the raw visual information coming in; your eyes simply don't track and look or eager to see the raw visual information needed to give you that knowing of the other persons state - vicariously experience them.

do you get the same feeling their feeling eg as your eyes are on their visual information (posture, micro expressions, movement etc) you're feeling/knowing what they're feeling in that point in time, when it comes to seeing people in videos or reading a manga book ie drawings? because i can get into a thoughtless mode that is really nice to be in and excited and then i get all that raw sensory states and i feel people and it also makes general aesthetics give a feeling too like abstract word art/art. just basically everything starts to have a feeling to it but especially people obviously...

I think you have to ask yourself why you're being asked that question?

Generally, it means our faces don't express these emotions like NTs do. We naturally give a blank or "stoned" face to them.

This is part of the body language training we need to do to function in NT society.

But, I do agree, NTs have a different way of looking at happiness than we do.

i'm not being/don't get asked that question i just had the confusion between 'happiness' and then just seeing that question read as i read forums and just hear that phrase 'whether you're/they're happy or sad' . if someone asked me it i'd be like what are you talking about i'm not a robot with some on/off like emotional states... if they said are you ok/are you alright that's kind of different that's just a greeting based around the idea.

also i've really researched it and done it and i think one's baseline state can vary in excitement (which is what is the word i used for when i feel well euphoria type just really happy - way beyond fine, normal, happy). and that excitement baseline is dependent on your brain operates in what format - if you think a lot deductively logically then your baseline will be low (still fine there's no negative emotions but it's not as excited so if anything could call it emotional fatigue or something) but if you have a mind that mentally sees, tastes, touches ie thinks in actuality then this makes your excitement go up and your baseline state more excited and your real perception ie senses become more visceral.

f**k people saying you look stoned... you could tell them they look like they've taken a fake e pill as a lot of them have those forced exagerated expressions (even when they're not in that excited state - i don't know i haven't seen that type of people when in the mode so I can't be sure but that general overly happy fakeness if you know what i mean). trying so hard to animate their face.

it's a really scary thought that i can just change my brain by mental sensation thinking in actuality - i've done it a few times now but my comfort zone is learning just hearing words and logic - but i'm having the strange realisation that even you understand words and all that's said you don't really understand comprehend the concept whatever it is unless you're thinking in actuality which means understanding what it must be in reality it's sensible form whatever the concept. this applies for everything apart from learning a language or maths (mathematical language) as that is merely learning symbols themselves.

when i feel people's state or get something from their expression i noticed my face just began smiling without me helping it from excitement... (not excitement at joy of being able to empathise but that was just the common state feeling picked up). yeah i guess you had a similar thought that 'happiness' is the end all emotion the goal of life... but f**k it that isn't an aspie non normal thing to think it's written everywhere 'pursuit of happiness' other books everything i've read/heard a lot so i know... the problem is i took the word happiness and related it to 'happy' what a crime... literally that was the source of my understanding but it makes sense now because i knew the phrase 'are you happy [referring to some thing]?' aka 'are you happy with that?' is the meaning of basically are you ok? ok = happy. but 'okness' 'fineness' certainly doesn't equal 'happiness' as those words are as i saw it.

but yeah try mentally visualising and touching and all that getting all sensory information mentally and then that should put you in a here in the now mode... (just coz i want to see how it works for other people who are probably similar to me... if you're logical/aspie- like).

' It's the assumed baseline state of a healthy person whose physical needs are met and who hasn't recently suffered a loss or bereavement

also this... this is surely what's wrong if most people think this. this makes me think if normal people think this they're not in touch with emotions. just because physical needs are met doesn't mean emotional needs are then automatically met... otherwise physical needs = emotional needs.

if you think physical goals make you happy then you're wrong i think. physical needs are primitive they're not what gets you happy they're just neccesary. just because you eat food and exercise and (sexual needs aren't needs... it's sexual) that just makes you normal. i think people use the word happy as a denial thing... just use the word, ok, normal, fine because that's all it is is.

Well, like I was saying, what makes us have a positive mental state is different, often done being stimulated, deep within our special interests. It's just how we are. But, also we tend to have some mild depression, which I believe is both biological in nature and as a result of higher intelligence, as the more intelligent people are, the more depressed they tend to be, due to having way too much awareness of the world (the antithesis of "ignorance is bliss"). Personally, I've always taken it that I define what makes me feel good, and the word "happiness" is a reflection of that good feeling, even if I'm just reading versus some sort of NT definition. I seek to build a life the way I want it to be, and while that isn't "smiles for miles", it's something that will please me in the end and make me content, which is sort of like what "happy" means, even if it isn't so typical. No one will define how I feel or how I care to live my life. Obviously, I'm an ethical person, but you get the point.

it's interesting that antithesis you mention. i agree but i think the causes for the actual mild depression (emotional fatigue also is a phrase i use but i'd still put 'normal' along that or just about ok even) are different to just being more aware of the world (i guess you mean too much awareness on the problems).

my thinking is that the more people think the harder it becomes to think perfectly... say when you read a really abstract thing and you think you've understood it but then you gotta think what has actually been talked about referred too. it's like the really clever people today understand how light works and it took them difficult conceptual thinkign to undertsand it but in the future with the photon camera people will be able to learn it way easier simply by watching light itself. as a logical person who's made social nerves his goal to overcome and thinking all about that i've tested myself and realised when one is a sensory non thinking state one is open to those information channels you literally see more hear more it's not sensory overload because you're attracted to the sense and therefore have control. the harder, more intuitive a concept the harder it is to actually comprehend what it is you understand. like if you learn a language you're not actually learning anything hyou're just learning a different set of symbols, same with maths and i think same with all logic. if you focus on logic too much you may forget actual thinking. i think your baseline state is changed by having a balanced brain or if anything having a less logical brain and more of an experiential brain and i came to this conclusion myself but then bam this video this study just said everything i'd thought - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf6Q0G1i ... 1353513060

say there is this idea of 'intelligence' = someone who is able to do really good at whatever style of task he's given (as different tasks are reltaed to different types of intelligence basically creativity vs analysis). well then under school system which is objective deductive tasks - this is the right answer do it. even language themselves is firstly a cognitive process. but yeah this means that because of schools the intellligent people will become lopsided as because they're Able to do the tasks set and because those tasks are so lopsided in intelligence nature it litearlly plasticises the doers brain into overly left brained thinking.

i never stay away from knowledge or anything for fear it would be bad for me. but hey i guess that's why i never understood the what the word ignorance actually means (until now hehe). i'm sure that word is used wrongly for derogatory reasons rather than a real concept anyway.

'it's something that will please me in the end and make me content, which is sort of like what "happy" means, even if it isn't so typical' - i've got to say watch out - the scary thing is i'm realising that happiness isn't a result from something it is simply a state that one side of the brain gets to enjoy and the other side doesn't. but that's more spiritual than you may think because activating one side of the brain over the other is an incredible concept how there's this duality of perception of our life. and did you know even if someone had a hemisphere taken out of their skull at a young age they'd still develop both 'ways' of thinking ie two hemispheres in that smaller brain. whatever it is you've concieved for doing it won't bring an actual physical alteration of state (talking essentially that emotions are like drugs - a surge of anger, a swell of nerves, a rise of excitement etc). to me happy i'm going to remember the phrase 'are you happy with that' and realise it goes no further than that basic normal ok feeling which is practically just a thought rather an a feeling. i guess if you're 'excited' all the time you'll forget how much more excited (happy) you are than others and you'll still feel you need a goal... all i know is you i don't think doing something once you do/get to that thing you'll in a state of good feeling always after that or at all. even if there's a feeling of relief that's not a good feeling that's just noticing a bad feeling going away eg it's a lesser bad feeling.

i think being in the happy state is just the first step and then doing what you do after won't change your state it's just what you'll do because after all you have to do something. for me i sound a bit weird but because i have so much left brain all i need to do is get the right brain (mode of excitement/sensation/inner feeling) and that makes me happier the question and then i've realised literally what puts me in the mode of sensory thoughtless is not thinking... but then how do you that you can't you have to change you think... and so I realised when mentally create sensations understand things by it's raw sensory information ie imagination this really puts me in that mode naturally - if you think sensorily you'll perceive sensoryily and yeah. it could be i just need to exercise my brain into that state and then it'll just happen be like that for more as i've accidentally exercised it too much in the left brained state but exercise would eb the wrong word becaue it didn't feel like exercise i did it naturally...). are you a verbal thinker? i think ones needs to think verbally just like hearing/reading but then convert what you've just understood in words into actual and then mentally sense it to actually understand it...

also just so you know because you were calling them spectrumites and just a bit derogatory... normal people are now basically copying autism as they sit there meditating doing nothing just on their own with their mind getting into the sensory state.

like generally it's just a really happy state to have a mind that's giving you images and sensation the whole time rather than words. guess it depends on you're task you're doing. also imagine if you could see everything in the universe - if you could see atoms and maybe say you could see multiple things happening at once in different screens in your mind then you wouldn't need words and you wouldn't need concept you'd just observe and naturally all the links would be obvious and without words just pure understanding. also dyslexic people that i've come across firstly being able read a page upside down as fast reading it normally is practically superpowers to me and seeing letters jump about is too and colours on the page and then dyslexic people i know and in videos they seem really excited and they have great imaginations and so i think literally elusively the way you think the format of your thinking decides your baseline excitatory state. if you think about it what someone does and how they think about it pretty much is what one is.

also i use the word excitement because if you think about 'happiness' aka 'contentment' doesn't grow/increase into euphoria (aka ultimate happiness?) but excitement does the more excited it is essentialy it goes into euphoria territory. and actually i'd use the word content for the lowest level of excitement but it's still there.

also does anyone know any dsylexia vloggers because i want to just hear them speak and then ask them to talk about how their mind works because did you know they don't ever have an inner voice it's all pictures at age 7 when you learn to read by speaking it mentally they never got that (which is not a bad thing) as they can still read anyway.

got you mixed up with what the other commenter said specutrmitse and his/her whole tone. soz about that.