(no subject)
Mmm, we will all agree that it is the fluxuation of depression that allows us to be happy. For if their were no sadness we could not recognize happiness. But what if rather than just how high you go is related to how low you go, there was a more detailed system?
Perhaps the sadness is like death. By kiling the things that bring happiness to you, more niches are open for population. Thus, when an area of reserved nutrients (the mind in anology here) a flush of new happy thoughts can occur, much like how organisms flock to one area and exponentially grow after a recent devestation such as a commet has killed all the previous existing organisms. So we have a wirlwind of happiness all at once after undergoing the worst of depressions. However, some people may be able to hold onto happiness longer than others, while some may quickly have to exterminate previous happiness for the sake of new memories. I would assume the later would give us a lead into explaining bipolar evolution.
Rather than giving these metaphorical theories... Maybe I should just write in poetic form, so the validity doesn't matter:p.
Heh, this reminds me of an article in the psat's that was similar. Basically it explained how scientists and writers are often one in the same in their operation; utilizing analogy to invision what can not be seen.
Perhaps the sadness is like death. By kiling the things that bring happiness to you, more niches are open for population. Thus, when an area of reserved nutrients (the mind in anology here) a flush of new happy thoughts can occur, much like how organisms flock to one area and exponentially grow after a recent devestation such as a commet has killed all the previous existing organisms. So we have a wirlwind of happiness all at once after undergoing the worst of depressions. However, some people may be able to hold onto happiness longer than others, while some may quickly have to exterminate previous happiness for the sake of new memories. I would assume the later would give us a lead into explaining bipolar evolution.
Rather than giving these metaphorical theories... Maybe I should just write in poetic form, so the validity doesn't matter:p.
Heh, this reminds me of an article in the psat's that was similar. Basically it explained how scientists and writers are often one in the same in their operation; utilizing analogy to invision what can not be seen.