3 ms·

Is there a mistake in this logic: "If you can't figure out how to stop suffering (to no end), you are not actually so smart." ? In anticipation of objection th

Is there a mistake in this logic: "If you can't figure out how to stop suffering (to no end), you are not actually so smart." ? In anticipation of objection that the question of one's own suffering is somehow outside the realm of analysis: I am not a Buddhist but having tasted the freedom from emotional suffering that was the result of his (the buddha's) analysis of the situation of being alive and his logical derivation of what then to do about it - from his Program, like Hilbert's, to find the solution to suffering - these days when I think of who is a "genius", I think of the buddha. That may have been rare genius but in this era you don't need to work the answer out from scratch you only need to be smart enough to notice the problem and research a solution (since at least one exists), hence the claim.

snet0 5y ago
I'd broadly say the same thing to friends, but I don't think it really survives scrutiny. It's a useful tool for sure, in that it might inspire "smart" people to try use their "smartness" to solve their personal issues in a way they wouldn't have considered, but I think I disagree that you can't be smart if you can't solve your own problems. Intelligence is obviously very broad, but if Terence Tao didn't know how to boil an egg, I'd still call him intelligent. Being able to solve internal personality/philosophical issues relies a lot on experience, whether through life experiences or reading other people's life experiences/analyses. You can be smart as all hell, but if you haven't read much Western philosophy, I wouldn't fault you for not coming up with useful conclusions from first principles. I suppose a counter is that, if you're smart enough, you'll recognise that a lot of people have had your problem before, and probably a few of them have come up with a solution, and maybe a couple of those few have written about it. Like the egg case, if Terence Tao was smart he'd Google "how to boil an egg" when presented with the problem.
GavinMcG 5y ago
It's a rhetorical statement, not a logical one. Koans aren't logical either: they're meant to prompt inquiry.
smolder 5y ago
Avoiding personal suffering is not necessarily anyone's #1 priority in life. I don't think it's a reflection on one's intelligence whether or not they suffer, as suffering could be a cost paid for a higher purpose they've prioritized. Of course, it could be a cost of stupidity as well.

snet0 5y ago

I'd broadly say the same thing to friends, but I don't think it really survives scrutiny. It's a useful tool for sure, in that it might inspire "smart" people to try use their "smartness" to solve their personal issues in a way they wouldn't have considered, but I think I disagree that you can't be smart if you can't solve your own problems. Intelligence is obviously very broad, but if Terence Tao didn't know how to boil an egg, I'd still call him intelligent. Being able to solve internal personality/philosophical issues relies a lot on experience, whether through life experiences or reading other people's life experiences/analyses. You can be smart as all hell, but if you haven't read much Western philosophy, I wouldn't fault you for not coming up with useful conclusions from first principles. I suppose a counter is that, if you're smart enough, you'll recognise that a lot of people have had your problem before, and probably a few of them have come up with a solution, and maybe a couple of those few have written about it. Like the egg case, if Terence Tao was smart he'd Google "how to boil an egg" when presented with the problem.

GavinMcG 5y ago

It's a rhetorical statement, not a logical one. Koans aren't logical either: they're meant to prompt inquiry.

smolder 5y ago

Avoiding personal suffering is not necessarily anyone's #1 priority in life. I don't think it's a reflection on one's intelligence whether or not they suffer, as suffering could be a cost paid for a higher purpose they've prioritized. Of course, it could be a cost of stupidity as well.