5 ms·

> There is nothing in the universe that implies life was ever meant to be anything but a struggle to keep surviving. "Meant to" implies some intelligence other

by slirpee 11y ago

> There is nothing in the universe that implies life was ever meant to be anything but a struggle to keep surviving. "Meant to" implies some intelligence other than our own guiding life and the universe, I think. Do you posit such a thing? I happen to believe in one, which may have something to do with assumptions and attitudes I've expressed. So, are you one of the ones that considers death worse than "struggling to survive"? Why? > Simply wishing it weren't so won't change it. True on some levels, and yet I'm arguing we are the most empowered we have ever been, to actually change it. If we achieve the "Star Trek" future of cheap food replicators etc. we will be even more so. Would you argue we shouldn't look forward to such things, because "life is meant to be a struggle where most people barely survive"? > I'd be frankly shocked if we could even manage the basics like "No one should die of diseases we cured in the 1800s". That's one of the things we can change. I'm not going to argue about how realistic that is, or how it should be done. I guess the essence of the differences between you and me/others, is that you seem unwilling to even give it much consideration. Why do you refuse to entertain the possibility of aligning "the world as we might wish it to be" with "the world as it is"?

Ntrails 11y ago
No, I don't believe in a God/Purpose/etc. If you do, and take from that a greater meaning, then it's a good thing! I'd question why such a being would leave humanity to spend thousands of years in suffering before reaching the general happiness part - but I'm glib. Death is not worse than struggling to survive imo and death can be a perfectly rational choice, I simply choose to go on because of family and a sense of responsibility for their pain. Why do you refuse to entertain the possibility of aligning "the world as we might wish it to be" with "the world as it is"? I don't argue against change. I don't impede action. Occasionally I giveto/support both. I think that when your expectations of what life really is are unrealistic then you're doomed to be unhappy. I think that's the reason religion focusses on rewards in another life that is un-knowable, because that does not result in unhappiness in the short term due to being "short changed" (and indeed improves the acceptance of current lot in life). This is all perspective, it's all my point of view. I'm no great/deep thinker - and I don't claim mine is the only way. I do like discussion though :)
- mercer 11y ago
  I think it's important to separate making peace with the state of things from accepting it. On the one hand, I consider it a personal goal to practice the ability of being happy despite my circumstances, accepting things as they are (and perhaps changing those things that I think I can change). On the other hand, whether 'nature or nurture', I wish to make things better as well, to fight things I think are wrong, and build things that I think are right. Keeping the latter from affecting the former is difficult sometimes, but fundamentally I see them as two completely separate matters.

by slirpee 11y ago

Ntrails 11y ago

No, I don't believe in a God/Purpose/etc. If you do, and take from that a greater meaning, then it's a good thing! I'd question why such a being would leave humanity to spend thousands of years in suffering before reaching the general happiness part - but I'm glib. Death is not worse than struggling to survive imo and death can be a perfectly rational choice, I simply choose to go on because of family and a sense of responsibility for their pain. Why do you refuse to entertain the possibility of aligning "the world as we might wish it to be" with "the world as it is"? I don't argue against change. I don't impede action. Occasionally I giveto/support both. I think that when your expectations of what life really is are unrealistic then you're doomed to be unhappy. I think that's the reason religion focusses on rewards in another life that is un-knowable, because that does not result in unhappiness in the short term due to being "short changed" (and indeed improves the acceptance of current lot in life). This is all perspective, it's all my point of view. I'm no great/deep thinker - and I don't claim mine is the only way. I do like discussion though :)

mercer 11y ago
I think it's important to separate making peace with the state of things from accepting it. On the one hand, I consider it a personal goal to practice the ability of being happy despite my circumstances, accepting things as they are (and perhaps changing those things that I think I can change). On the other hand, whether 'nature or nurture', I wish to make things better as well, to fight things I think are wrong, and build things that I think are right. Keeping the latter from affecting the former is difficult sometimes, but fundamentally I see them as two completely separate matters.