GM HWS Round Robin 2017 Round 4 – Given the choice as an individual who is a typical, healthy 30-year-old, this house would elect to never again feel the emotion of sorrow.

0
140

Dan Lahav, HWS Round Robin 2017 Round 4 Member of Government

Here’s the video: https://youtu.be/KR9RfcjOcqI?t=1866

Opening

Being sick is part of nature. It is therefore part of the human experience. The flaw for Opening Opposition, however, is that the fact that something is part of human nature necessarily makes it a good part of your nature.

This is the fallacy of naturality. Unlike sadness, or grief, or fear of having so much emotions of losing a debate round, this as said in the infoslide, actually underlined in the infoslide, sorrow is a deep source of sadness or of regret.

We’re going to claim this is likely to be and actually completely change the course of my life as they suggest because it’s going to overtake any other emotion for a long period of time as suggested by the Opening Opposition.

It is a parasitic emotion likely to warp me out of my humanity and my autonomy because it’s going to make me subjective to external forces which are not myself and therefore limit my autonomy.

Three claims from the Closing Government

  1. Why this actually trivializes other emotions. Why it’s actually likely to make you more numb contrary to the fact that they try to claim on the Opening Opposition.
  2. Why it actually makes me subjective to external forces which are not myself.
  3. Why it’s actually likely to lead to less empathy.

Note, if we’re able to prove them we essentially flip the case of the Opening Opposition because we’re able to show you that we’re going to have less of an emotional spectrum, therefore less of the human experience, therefore less of a growth which is also what’s hinted by the case of CG from POIs. Rebuttal is therefore integrated.

Arg #1

This is overexposure. Let’s make an analogy and then explain. This is not sadness, in a sense, it’s marijuana, however, this is heroin in the way that overexposure actually works. The tendency of individuals is to be risk-averse in many cases and care much more about what they have to lose, and as they say in the Opening Opposition, this is something which is likely to be predominant of your life for a long period of time.

Even if this is something which is eventually going to fade away in the emotional reserve, the complete obsession and the course that my life has taken at essentiality is something which is likely to be completely changed as they accept by the Opening Opposition.

And now note what it essentially does to me. If I now experience an emotion to that degree, I’m likely to trivialize any other emotion on the spectrum. Here is the logic of that. If I am in the army and have killed another individual, the likely scenario is that every other experience might seem trivial to me because I just don’t understand why it matters after having that experience.

Because I just don’t understand why regular sadness is something that I should take into account after having the experience of losing a loved one. A day to day experience is something which is likely to be completely trivialized and numb.

Note, this also has a basis in empirics, right, because people have undergone trauma in many cases loses meaning, in many cases, of other regions of their lives. Essentially, it just tells you, for the vast majority of us, right, because the vast majority of lived experiences are the day to day experiences, the mere fact that this is something that this is something that is likely to make them look less meaningful, less subjective, less of a way to actually try and have this life, actually is likely to make you more numb rather than more open.

But now it leads to a second interesting point in our extension. You know what, yes, before that.

POI: Should we not attend the Round Robin because every other debate tournament (unintelligible)

Answer: It is not about attending the Round Robin. It is about losing your loved ones in many cases or about having a feeling that your individuality is at the stake, right.

Arg #2

Let’s continue to the second claim here. Because look. In many cases, and this is an unfortunate thing about how society is constructed. Many of my goals, my identity, and things that happen to me are actually not self-dependent. Let’s give two examples from two different regions, right.

If I am someone who is likely to lose a loved one in a car accident, I don’t have control over the fact that this is happening to me. If I am someone that by the design of my parents, or even if it’s something that is part of the human experience and part of my nature still, a lot of sorrow is dependent upon the expectation caused by others, right.

If I am made to be the youngest partner of Goldman Sachs ever, I’m likely to feel sorrow if I am not actually likely to achieve my identity in the end of the day. But note, here is the kicker of this point.

Because if a lot of what is essentially ourselves, if a lot of our identity is likely to be placed upon external factors, if I’m likely to encore(?) them and to overemphasize what others have dictated to me, and if I’m unlikely to be able to adapt myself to the situation that later follows in the rest of my life, I am likely to be subjective to external forces which are not myself. I am actually likely to lose part of my autonomy as a response because I am unable to construct my own identity based on the continued experiences that are likely to follow later on. Yes.

POI: So autonomy is like, probably an illusion, because we are subjected to all sorts of forces from our emotions. Why are you comfortable with any illusion to (unintelligible)

Answer: Here’s the fallacy. The fact that something is a spectrum doesn’t make it an illusion. The fact that you have some sort of an influence by external forces doesn’t mean that you should have more of an influence by external forces. We simply don’t accept it and if you’re going to run no free will, good luck, right.

So let’s continue here. So essentially look what it does to me. If I’m dictated by external forces on the philosophical level, right. The basis of the rest of the emotions, the basis of my capacity to make my own decisions. The basis of my ability to shape my own life is something which is likely to be dictated by many others’ decisions which are not myself.

The fact that I am likely to obsess over time, the fact that I am likely to, even if the feeling is going to fade away, change the course of my life and being oversensitive for something is likely to make me not me, based on what I’m undergoing through. It makes me more subjective to external forces which essentially means I’m going to be less of a human, therefore less likely to change it.

Arg #3

Moreover, now, let’s see what it does to my relationship with others. Because they say, but empathy is something which is better. So a couple of things here.

So firstly, as said, Opening Government on when they said this is something which is going to happen later on and I still have the capacity to feel other negative emotions, so we simply don’t understand why empathy is going to go away.

But look. The mere fact that I’m now going to be more aversive towards people that I love and actually need me because I know I’ve lost a loved one before, I’m going to have less of a capacity to try to expose myself to a new wife later on, or to try to have a dependency upon other people.

Because if I have overarching memory that is going to know that everyone is essentially going to die, my capacity, my willingness to actually try to have dependency upon other people is something which is going to be significantly reduced.

Note, this is something which is horrible. Why?

Because essentially, the dependency upon others, as they say, something which is crucial for the vast majority of positive experiences, as they again hint in a POI from CO as well, and most of the case of OO. And the fact that in order to actually have maintained empathy and to have construct of other feelings is something which is also dependent upon others. If this is something which is likely to happen to me, this is bad.

Let’s add another thing here. This is something which happens at an early age. I do not have the capacity to know if this is something which is going to happen to me. These experiences are likely to be so bad, so the moment of making the decision, I need to have the understanding that is something that might happen to me and the expectation of these events are so horrific.

Because of which, this essentially means that the point I make the decision, the logical thing is to be able to maintain my autonomy and to make sure that my agency is preserved, because note. If what they care about is my capacity to actually be myself and have agency to be part of the human experience, let’s remove the parasite that is actually not allowing us to do so.