3 ms·
>> (the comments suck however - they basically try to deny the fact that for humanity as a species, the last century has been the best ever) Part of me says th
by OGinparadise 14y ago
>> (the comments suck however - they basically try to deny the fact that for humanity as a species, the last century has been the best ever)
Part of me says that the added stresses from never being happy, always want more, do rain on that parade. Maybe being "a dumb peasant" somewhere with a full stomach but otherwise no larger goals is best.
>> The basic idea stands - too many people have more comfort, want too many things, and are harder to control - and now than ever.
Yeah but they are not organized, at least not in USA. Those making bank are kicking back to the politicians that decide what system /laws us suckers have to follow. The greatest investment ever is in the political process, a million dollar donation can easily yield billions.
- guylhem 14y agoTry buddhism or stoicism (I read Seneca) and you'll be happy my friend, even with less :-) You'll even be happier to see everyone in the human race is getting more. It even beats being dumb with a full stomach, because how good is happiness if it is based on ignorance?
- chii 14y agobut it is this unhappiness that drives progress - if people are content, there would be no new innovation to try and improve the status quo. If there is no selfishness, there would be no incentive and desire to outdo your neighbour (or competitor).
- OGinparadise 14y agoOn the macro level I totally agree. But on a personal level it may be different, even though we're all benefiting from inventions of those that went nuts and lost many years of sleep
- orasis 14y agoSo? Why should progress be a goal in and of itself? Shouldn't progress be in the service of something else? If that something else is solving unhappiness, then why do you have a problem if unhappiness is solved through other means and progress becomes obsolete? Perhaps you are just addicted to progress and future-oriented thinking and thus cannot stay happy for long.
- chii 14y agoso you assume that "solving unhappiness" is the end goal - to which i m arguing that its not. Unhappiness is but a symptom of some problem (currently, its the lack of wealth and material for 90% of the population). If for some reason, everyone managed to get converted into buhdism and not feel any of the unhappiness that they'd otherwise have felt, did the situation really improve? Aren't they just tricking themselves into thinking they are in a state of enlightenment?
- mikecane 14y agoThere will never be a shortage of malcontents. The rebellion of the 60s sprung from the prosperity of the 50s.
- eli_gottlieb 14y agoAlso from the hideously repressive, reactionary and paternalistic social norms of the '50s.
- eli_gottlieb 14y agoThis really strongly depends on how you define words like "content" or "unhappiness". If you define them using the lower-brain functions, then your point stands and Total Happiness means everyone has sufficient amounts of beer and television to avoid realizing how empty and stupid their lives are. If you define them using higher-brain functions, your point falls apart precisely because scientific progress is itself a source of potential contentment.
- bayesianhorse 14y agoI don't think there is anything wrong with rent-seeking in buddhism. Ask Steve Jobs. There is spiritual value in "rent-seeking" beyond greed. It's just not that obvious in our "rich is evil" kind of culture.
- eli_gottlieb 14y agoI find it interesting how often extremist capitalist beliefs justify themselves as producing more for everyone and then preaching Buddhist spirituality to individuals as a way to be happy with less.