it's goes with the phrase 'by their fruits ye shall know them'. Essentially, I have abandoned all the 'ideas' I once held that bore un-delightful fruit. Regardless of how, 'true' or 'objective' I once believed these ideas to be as I was just as capable of coming to an idea that rings much more true, and objective as I had abandoned the previous idea.

Nietzsche had similar ideas, that the true is the life-affirming, whatever helps the organism thrive. And that was pre-Darwin. Freud once said he avoided reading Nietzsche because he got depressed when he found out all his ideas had been pre-thought by him!

What does that idea do for us, what is it's outcome? If I believed the world was going to end in an apocalyptic scenario (I once did), with a whole lot of 'empirical' evidence to support my claim, what was the outcome? I was depressed, unmotivated, irritable, and unwilling to create a future for myself (because there was no point, right?).

That also resembles consequentialism: the idea that the ethical is whatever leads to good consequences. (Kant opposed this: he thought the intention matters.)

Consider many philosophers who had 'brilliant' ideas. Many of these great men (I can think of several right off the top of my head) lived horrible (to my standard) lives. Often dealing with depression, misery, lack of loved ones, etc. So, as brilliant as their philosophies were (and I was once attached to many, Nietzsche to name one.) What was the outcome? How do people live who believe as he did?

Interesting. I guess I'd have to say I'm in the "depressed" camp then! I mean, it would be total chaos if I just believed in whatever made me happy, or productive. I just can't think that way. I don't have many "irrational" beliefs, but I believe (or try to) that if something is objectively true, it will somehow lead to good results down the line. It's like scientists who spend billions on hadron colliders and what not, because they believe that science will always confer some practical benefit.

It's generally an ancient saying in philosophy, that it's better to be an unhappy Socrates than a happy pig. I've met and read many philosophers in my life, and I've come to believe they (we) share some psychological traits, and among these are 1. the quote i just gave and 2. their very intense need for certainty, which is what breeds their (often extreme) skepticism.

They say ignorance is bliss, but that is not the case. Bliss is bliss, ignorance is ignorance... Sometimes you can be ignorant and blissful and sometimes you can be ignorant and miserable. "ignorance is bliss" is merely a statement that creates a feeling of logical superiority to justify the feeling of misery for those who feel as though they are not ignorant.
That may have been one of my favorite statements in my past. As I needed a method to justify my unhappiness....

You sounded like a philosopher or scientist right there! .. I often say that statement too (that ignorance is bliss). I have no way of knowing whether it's true. It's more like a complaint than a belief, or maybe partly also what you said, about the reason you used to say it. But some studies do show that increased intelligence is associated with melancholy, and the ancients also said it: they associated being intelligent and artistic with black bile (melancholy), also in Latin, atrabilious (again, black bile) temperament. They also called them Saturnine, since they were ruled by the planet Saturn that rules Capricorn that again is associated with melancholy, etc.