A night post. This means that I feel not so good. So strange how people's mood can just change throughout the day. Usually I'm kind of happy in the morning, then sometimes sort of pissed in the afternoon, and depending on how the day goes down at night. Which just goes to show how emotions are transitional and are hence not a true representation on your outlook on life?

Does this mean then that a purely logical and practical outlook on life is the way to go? So it would seem that the best way to approach any decision or philosophy is to look it from a third party's perspective, and not to get emotionally engaged in your subject.

On the other hand, one is never truly divorced from emotion. Even detatchment is sort of an emotion, one of aloofness. This would then mean that no decision or thought is truly objective. Everything is clouded by emotion. So even when you fail at something and decide 'objectively' to just give it up and forget about it, it would be a decision clouded by disgruntedness. So since there are no 'logical' decisions, and our decisions are based on emotions and seeing that emotions change constantly and quickly, it would seem that no decision is permanent. Since no decision is permanent, and decisions are rooted in the moment they are made, while emotions, on which decisions are based on, are transistant, would mead that every decision made will be guaranteed to be regretted at one point or another.

Since every decision will be regretted, and nothing can be done to change the past, it will lead me to two options. The first is what I will call the root mean square decision, and the other, 'never looking back'.

For the first, examine the fact that emotions changes throughout the day, or week or month, and that at each emotion we will probably make a different decision regarding a situation. Assuming that one's emotion run the gamut of all possible emotions, it will then be technically possible to have a potential reaction for each emotion. This leads to the mean emotion theory. The 'correct' decision will be the decision made by the majority of your emotions, including time as a factor. For example, to make it really simple, let the decision be a simple yes or no, and the emotions happy and sad. Say happy equates to a 'yes' and sad to 'no'. Then assume that in 16 hours of decision time, 10 hours are 'happy'. This would mean that the ratio of happiness to sadness is 5:3, and if one point of yes or no was awarded per hour, yes would outweigh no by 2 and hence the decision would be arbitually 'yes'.

While this would work in certain cases, intensity of the emotion is not included into the equation. What if you were sad only 6 hours out of 16 but in the 6 hours you were really really sad? Other factors include a variable response, Mixed responses while having the same emotions among others. This leads me to the second method, the cliched and hackneyed 'don't look back'. I was actually reminded of this phrase while watching 2fast2furious and one of the characters uttered it. I was struck that this would be a potential solution to this decision problem. Since the whole thing is so darn complicated, why not do what seems right at the time? You could then shield yourself from regret by using the phrase not to look back to cushion the blow when you regret your decision. However, I propose a slight tweak to the message. Instead of 'Don't look back, live life without regrets', it should be 'Don't look back, you'll regret it anyway'. This is much more revelant and realistic.

Now of course the great question would be that since I have written an objective analytical post on the existence of objective analysis, have I done any meaningful analyzing at all? Or is all this writing the deluded works of someone influenced by his current feeling? I can so feel the irony...