I don't understand the question....

If I get you right, this is what I would say: the mind (reason) is good at finding the means to satisfy one's interests. It does not, however, produce said interests itself. Those are the result of 'felt' interactions with one's environment and the stuff it's made of. Call that "pre-attentional" thinking, that is, our interests come to be determined (in large parts) in virtue of immediate reactions to our experiences and without the 'help' of reason.
Now, once we have an interest and see the object of our interest in our reach, our reason will secure the means to satisfy that interest. Sometimes, that will mean that reason will more or less "blot out" disquieting or even harmful elements of our experience, make us blind to them, in order for us to focus on the task at hand. It can, in extreme cases, transform a hellish situation into a heavenly one (or at least provide reason to think that our hell is a temporary part of our way to heaven).

Abusive relationships are a good example of that: women (or men) who stay in an abusive relationship because they fear being alone so much (sometimes, if not often, a fear that is due and reinforced by the conditions that prevail in the relationship). Those people will actually come to ignore much that should be a warning that they are in hell so that they can maintain this important belief that they are rather in some part of something that could be heavenly.

Can the mind change hell in heaven? So for example, can you be in a bad situation or something that would make most people desperate but still be happy, without using drugs or anything, just your mind? Can you make yourself happier by just thinking 'be happier!', to simplify it a little?

Cachimbo is on the right track I think, more or less, but I'm more talking about the actual feeling of happiness, so if you are still unhappy but think it will help make you happier later, it doesn't really count to what I mean here.

Sorry, I thought it was a bit clearer than it apparently is.

Read Victor Frankl - Man's Search for Meaning. He talks indepth about the Holocaust (he was a jewish psychotherapist who was in a concentration camp) and how his mind overcame those challenges

If it's still not clear feel free to say so. I'm doing some other stuff as well right now but I'll clarify later.

You worded the question wrong.

From Milton:

"The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven"

I may have expressed myself too quickly...

The interests one has are not always readily understood. That's one thing to consider. For example: fear of being alone is not something one necessarily has awareness of. For consciousness, it can translate into a "I really love him (her)" sorta thing.

I think that what you describe is akin to seeing the silverlining, regardless of the situation, as a means to secure strength of mind and heart. But it's the same idea: one is in a shitty situation, one doesn't believe that there's anything to be gained (no interest in) letting the situation completely determine one's mood, and thus one opts to adopt a positive and happy outlook on things. Stockholm syndrome comes to mind here...

But in all those instances, I think the key is to see that if one chooses to be happy regardless of what goes on around him or her, this is a decision motivated by interest (there's experientially more "profit" to be had in this positive disposition than in a negative one). Once the resolution is taken, and lived, it can indeed alter one's perception of the world (reason will blot out what is in conflict with the satisfaction of your interest, which would be to be "happy", in this case). There would be, I suppose, varying degrees of alteration depending on the level of consciousness in this though process.

I think the point of the thread, SYnapse, is to think what the question opens as a problem, not to criticize the question itself and display your knowledge of literature.

That being said, it is a nice quote from Milton.

Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of human freedoms - to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way. - Victor Frankl

The mind can cahnge hell into heaven, but a well designed hell would instantly change itself to become hell again. Kind of a stalemate between the will and attitutde of the individual and the hell designed by the external power.

Ok then. No, the mind cannot create heaven out of hell.

What the mind often does is create a hell where no hell in fact exists. In those cases it is possible to change your mind and then the false hell can be banished. But when you're really in hell you're in hell, and no amount of happy thoughts can change that. You can possibly delude yourself into thinking the really nasty stuff isn't happening, but the resulting madness is just another version of hell, and the crap you're pretending isn't there hasn't gone away.

I don't know, oct. Some people turn pain into a perverse form of pleasure. That doesn't make them insane. Finding the nuggets of gold amongst the pile of horsecrap we call life could be turning hell into heaven without actually becoming insane or deluded in the process.

Ah, what you're doing there, Draug, is creating a false hell. Pain isn't hell by itself, especially when you're in control of it. Most of the time the nuggets are on clear display and we go to extreme lengths to find enough horsecrap to make life unbearable.

The question you have to ask yourself here, is whether or not such a thing as an "objective hell" or an "objective heaven" exists. This seems to be presupposed by your view, Octavious, insofar as you distinguish between true and false hells. I'm not so sure that there are objective valued realities. I think that value is determined relatively to our experience of reality and its specific determinations. Hence, there might be "human hells" where, all other things being equal, all humans will want to give negative value to a particular kind of experience. But even that is open to counterexamples, as Draugnar pointed out.

OK, so my wife's mentally duress over my mother-in-law's rapid mental decay isn't hell for our family? I agree the nuggest of spending time with her while she still has some mind to spend it with is an obvious heaven, btu I disagree that seeing her rapid decline at 86 is a false hell.

@ Draug

Not hell, no. It is tragic and unfair and painfull and bloody difficult, but all that is insignificant compared to the satisfaction your mother in law will have over a life well lived, being in a family full of love, and knowing a strong legacy will remain when she goes. It is insignificant compared to the joy and love she has given your wife (and I assume you) over the years, and it is insignificant compared to the life and joy that awaits you in the future.

It's a bastard that hurts more than most, but it is a nugget of cruelty in a wider field of heaven more so than a hell.

You really seem to be working with a particular world view where there are determinate "hells" that one can objectively assess as such. Care to detail what the necessary and sufficient conditions are to something being "hell" independently of the manner in which a particular individual undergoes a certain set of circumstances?

@ Cachimbo

Hell is exquisite torture and suffering without hope. That is quite a common definition, is it not?

Suffering without hope... That sounds pretty nice!

Okay... so you have properties that describe the object. So the next question is: how do you assess whether or not a given situation lends itself to that description? Can that be assessed independently of the values and sensitivities of the one undergoing such a situation?

That is the definition of Hell, but not hell. Big difference between the place and the commonplace noun.

And your choice of adjectives for the torture is quite interesting and says a lot about you.

ex·quis·ite /ekˈskwizit/

Adjective

Extremely beautiful and, typically, delicate.

Not really, Draug, I heard it on a radio show last night and rather liked it. Don't try and read too much into things or you'll turn into a leftie without realising it.

I know the term, but it is usually used in perverse references...

The way you made them suffer,
your exquisite wife and mother,
fills me with the urge to defecate!

@ Cach

I am the observer and apply my values and sensitivities which are independent of the chap in hell (unless I happen to be said chap). Is there another way?

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_meaning_of_'exquisite_torture'#page3

@ draug

I disagree with wiki answers :).

I'm not sure that I understand what you mean to say there, Octavious.

My question was, simply put, who gets to decide when those properties aptly describe a given situation. As the observer, you might describe something that way, as hellish, that the persons in the situation would refuse to see as such. If that's possible, then it means that there is no 'objective' definition of hell, one that is independent of how we assess the presence of the relevant properties. The interpretation of the situation under these properties would be subjective, or subject-dependent.
But if you maintain that determining whether or not those properties are indeed objectively assessed, then that is tantamount to determining whether or not a given substance presents the relevant number of oxygen and hydrogen atoms and can thus be defined as "water".

I think "hell", because it is determined through values and evaluation, cannot be recognized objectively.

@Oct - You may disagree. I can't stoip you. You may also disagree that a rainbow is caused by refracted light through water vapor and actually think that there is a pot of gold at the end of one. I can't stop you there either. It doesn't make you right though.

@ Draug

You can either take the words I use with the meaning you know was intended, or you can apply an alternative meaning. You are perfectly entitled to do the latter, but it does make talking to you a bit pointless.

I was just funning you, Oct. I did know what you meant. You really meant extreme and/or inescapable. But I had to have a little fun there.

Hmm, this seems to be going where I wanted it to go, thanks for trying even though I was apparently unclear at first :)

So, first of all, I think, like others have mentioned, there's no such thing as an objective hell or heaven. Even if there is, that's not really what this thread is about I'd say. After all, I don't think you can practically change anything objective with your mind that's not in your mind. Second, hell is just a matter of saying (for me). I'm just talking about (really) bad experiences etc... Likewise, heaven would be good experiences, happiness etc.

So, can you manipulate yourself in such a way that things that are generally considered bad experiences, preferably by you as well (at least before you learn how to change them from hell into heaven, again, as a matter of speaking), make you happy?

I think that it's definitely possible when it's more of a small annoyance, for example, I'm always annoyed by rain, but today I had to go out in the pooring rain to buy fish, and I just told myself as well as everyone else who asked (a lot of people surprisingly, I must have looked quite happy :P) that it was nice and refreshing. I really enjoyed the rain, until I went inside really, since at that point I was pretty soaked, and when the rain stops falling on you, there's nothing refreshing, you're just soaked. Of course that's a very small thingy, but it's about the concept. I don't know if you can change a really bad situation into something you can enjoy with your mind, but I think it's definitely possible to cheer things up a lot with just your mind. I'm not sure if it's comparable, but I think I'm in many if not all ways happier than some people who have a better life in many if not all ways. I feel like I don't need a reason to be happy most of the time, and it takes a really good reason to make me unhappy, or even just not happy. And even then, it sometimes takes a while before I get unhappy. I remember my uncle died, about 9 years ago now, but I wasn't sad the moment I heard it. I remember that back then, as a fairly little boy, I already had a really simple philosophy of "just be happy". So I just smiled and such (not in a disrespective way, more in a supportive "cheer up!" way, or at least that's how I meant it back then, but I don't remember it good enough to know if it actually worked :P), right up until I had to bring some holy water (or however it's called in English? I don't have a Christian background, but my uncle did, and my family wasn't exactly anti-Christian). I cried right there, and spilled most of the holy water. And about ten minutes later I think I was done crying. Even when I was crying, I didn't feel unhappy, just sad. I have had more similar stuff, some more recent, although I must admit it becomes harder the older I get to stay happy when bad things happen. It's definitely a skill or trait or virtue or however you want to call it I'm trying to keep with me though. Does anyone recognise this? Is this some obvious behaviour or something? I'm not trying to imply I'm special in that way or anything, I honestly don't have a clue if this is unusual. I do think it's a good thing though.

It's like Obiwan Kenobi (the character, not the WebDipper) told Luke. "When your father became Darth Vader, Anakin Skywalker ceased to exist and died. So what I told you was the truth, from a certain perspective". It's all about perspective.

@steephie - The reason it gets harder as you get older is that you begin to understand the concept of "future" and time as "eternity". So if a friend moves away when you are a kid, you are living in the moment and sad they are not there, but you don't think about never seeing them again. Whereas, when a friend dies and you are older, you begin to realize you will never see them again, can never see them again. And it go from sad to depressed.

I speak from experience as I have two friends who both passed in the summer so every year, you'll find me getting maudlin and I become quiet off and on whent hey come to mind as I know I will never ever see them again and I wonmder if there is anything I could have done, especially for my friend who committed suicide.

Hmmm... That could very well be the reason. I do wonder though, wouldn't it get easier when it has happened a lot? I mean, don't people realise at some point that it's the end of an often beautiful story, one to think and talk about some more later, one to pass on to children? I honestly don't know if that's true, I don't know where that came from either. It must be getting late... (Oh look! It's almost midnight :P)

To be honest I tried to make sure that that friend didn't come to your mind, but clearly I failed at that. It must be because it's getting late here, and I sort of forgot that I tried to get around death and funerals and memories of dead people by the time my uncle came to mind. So sorry for that. I really hope I didn't just ruin your day (if it helps I definitely wouldn't mind hearing the entire story if you want a listening ear, but on the other hand I'm a stranger on the internet, I don't mean to be creepy).

However stupid it may sound though, I found that it still helps to do things you do as a small child, things that seem stupid now, like crawling around the house. I mean, think about it, if you do it long enough there's got to be some point where you realise how stupid it is, and at that moment you laugh out loud and carry on with the day :)

Anyway, I'm calling it a day now, before I say something stupid, if I haven't already :P

Thinking of the departed, especially the tragically departed, is one of those bittersweet things. I fondly rememberthe time I spent with them while simultaneously mourn for their loss. Gary had his heartattack almost 15 years ago and Martha committed suicide 6 years ago. So the human mind, being as resilient as it is, can handle both set of emotions when it is in a generally healthy state. So I am fine with remembering, and missing, my friends. Sure, the wife will know I'm a bit down when I get home, and if she asks, I'll tell her my beloved friends came to mind today and nothing more will need to be said.

So don't be sorry for bringing about sad thoughts, but understand that both come to mind at the same time. It's just that the sad thoughts take to dominate because they were, in my case, so young and had so much future ahead of them. Gary was barely 40 and Martha only 43.

First of all don't worry, I'm in bed now, just not tired I suppose.

So anyway, I completely understand and sort of expected you are fine with remembering and missing your friends (if one wouldn't accept such things I wouldn't expect them to get old), but I simply thought this may have been a pretty bad timing for you to be sad. I understood that your work got hectic lately, so that was my reasoning behind it; I didn't want to make everything that bit more hectic when you can't use the distraction.

So I just hope you can prevent the sad thoughts from taking over your day/week, but the more I listen to you, the more I think you'll be fine. Now, I'm feeling sleepy so bye, before the sleepiness goes away again :)

Well, that killed the thread...

No more opinions about what the thread is about?

I find it interesting sometimes, while experiencing pain, to remind myself that it is a particular, subjective sensation, and ask myself, "Why do you DISlike this sensation, while you like others?" If you focus on just the experience of the sensation, and try to convince yourself you're arbitrary to dislike it, then up to low-medium stimuli, you can have some success with increasing tolerance and decreasing unpleasantness.

I rarely if ever experience extreme pain, but I suspect this works not at all for that, and that if it did, then over a long term it would have a horrible effect on one as a person (what if you started experiencing pleasure in a detached way, too?)

Agreed on that, if I understand it correctly. So you say that when you realise pain is just a signal that tells you something is going on that hurts you it becomes more bearable and less unpleasant, right?

"bittersweet"
now that's something that you only really understand as part of a grieving process,
after that loss of innocence.
no matter how sweet, how joyous any present or future experience is, there will always be some sadness because there is no longer that person, or persons to share it with

Yes, steephie, essentially. Although I think of it less as "a signal," and more just as, "a bare sensation."

For example, if I press a pencil into my shoulder, I feel a sensation. It is neither pleasant nor unpleasant. It is just a bare sensation. I think something along the lines of, "Here is another sensation, like that one. I wonder why I find this unpleasant." And I start looking at it like just the subjective feeling it is, and it does help alleviate the unpleasantness -- again, imperfectly, and for at most weak-moderate pains.

No one has being in hell or heaven and came back to tell, so any interpretation we willwill give to our hellish situation will be influenced by your growth and experience.
it also depends on your mental health and your own perception of the world.
Some people cut themselves to release tension when they feel they can't handle.
If you talk with some prisoners they will tell you that prision is the best place and that they may feel out of place when they are free in the streets.
Humans tend to see reality as is best serve their subconscious needs.

Yes, well, we are talking about hell and heaven in a proverbal way. Just really good things and really bad things.