Life is strife. You hate to suffer but you need it.
It's a catch 22 - everyone wants a better life for their kids but that's what turned us into a race of fat, weak, lazy whining fucks in the first place.
Then you die!
In some sense...
if it were the whole story then those that suffer the most would be those that are most alive, and that seems wrong on the face of it.
The way I see it the suffering is fuel for the art. If you survive the suffering without becoming consumed by it, without succumbing to the flames, in doing so you return, charged with the art and with it you create your own paradise. However, if you spend too long in paradise your spirit starts to rot.
Luxury and bliss are necessary but without torment they become a torment in and of themselves. Heaven and hell must be in balance. I suspect the best life would be one where pleasure and pain are experienced in equal measure but I'd have to admit that some other ratio may be nearer the mark.
Life is absurd.
Therefore...
And then Pent was a Buddhist.
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on July 16, 2011, 01:19:59 AM
And then Pent was a Buddhist.
I just got a mental image of one of those golden Buddha statues... not the fat laughing Buddha, but the thin one, and with P3nT's leering mug instead of the usual serene face.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 15, 2011, 09:06:05 PM
Life is strife. You hate to suffer but you need it.
It's a catch 22 - everyone wants a better life for their kids but that's what turned us into a race of fat, weak, lazy whining fucks in the first place.
Then you die!
NO! Then YOU die! YOU DIE!
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on July 16, 2011, 01:19:59 AM
And then Pent was a Buddhist.
I met the Buddha on the road. I killed him. I'm a smart fucker. I got away with it. Stick your karma up your arse :ECH:
Quote from: Cainad on July 16, 2011, 01:46:23 AM
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on July 16, 2011, 01:19:59 AM
And then Pent was a Buddhist.
I just got a mental image of one of those golden Buddha statues... not the fat laughing Buddha, but the thin one, and with P3nT's leering mug instead of the usual serene face.
Dammit Cainad....
Twid,
Making it happen
Is in WOMP-ertainment
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on July 16, 2011, 03:07:22 AM
Quote from: Cainad on July 16, 2011, 01:46:23 AM
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on July 16, 2011, 01:19:59 AM
And then Pent was a Buddhist.
I just got a mental image of one of those golden Buddha statues... not the fat laughing Buddha, but the thin one, and with P3nT's leering mug instead of the usual serene face.
Dammit Cainad....
Twid,
Making it happen
:banana:
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 15, 2011, 10:17:22 PM
Luxury and bliss are necessary but without torment they become a torment in and of themselves.
Why would endless bliss be a torment?
So what you're saying is that the Universe is kinky.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 16, 2011, 02:30:00 AM
Quote from: ☄ · · · N E T · · · ☄ on July 16, 2011, 01:19:59 AM
And then Pent was a Buddhist.
I met the Buddha on the road. I killed him. I'm a smart fucker. I got away with it. Stick your karma up your arse :ECH:
"Karma" is just about meaningless because of the variety of definitions it has. ("Cause and effect" does not fit in my ass, for the record. :( The good news is that reincarnation does.)
All I'm saying is, this thread sounds a lot like the Middle Way and a focus on accepting suffering, two things that IIRC are Buddhist bedrocks regardless of the particular school of thought.
I don't think we need suffering. I do think we need strife; we need to struggle for things, work for what we want, and to be disappointed at times. People often mistake not getting what they want for "suffering", though, because they're too spoiled to know any better.
is there a clear delineation of the two?
Quote from: Iptuous on July 18, 2011, 05:33:39 PM
is there a clear delineation of the two?
No, of course not. But I really don't have any patience for such retarded semantical/philosophical discussions, because they lead to the argument that a wealthy child who doesn't get the color of Porche they wanted for their 16th birthday suffers as authentically as the impoverished child who grows up neglected, beaten, and starved, and is raped by her dad on her 16th birthday.
I think that most of us can apply some measure of relativity to various forms of strife, and use our intelligence to determine whether something is suffering or mere disappointment.
yeppa.
it's all relative.
(i did think this was meant to be a retarded semantical/philosophical discussions, but i wouldn't have expected anyone here to give the argument stated. :eek:)
I've heard it.
Interesting point. Maybe suffering is a subjective reaction to varying degrees of objective strife? The pain may be the same but we all have different thresholds.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 18, 2011, 06:33:48 PM
Interesting point. Maybe suffering is a subjective reaction to varying degrees of objective strife? The pain may be the same but we all have different thresholds.
For the sake of science we must subject a rich kid to something awful.
I'm really glad you don't have my address.
Question: Is being subjected to a moderate level of discipline "suffering"?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 18, 2011, 06:48:14 PM
Question: Is being subjected to a moderate level of discipline "suffering"?
I don't think so, I don't think being subject to a strict discipline can be called suffering.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 18, 2011, 06:33:48 PM
Interesting point. Maybe suffering is a subjective reaction to varying degrees of objective strife? The pain may be the same but we all have different thresholds.
Pure wankery. Some people learn to tolerate pain better after they've been exposed to it, is all, but a coddled brat simply does not hurt as much from bruising his shin as, say, an 18-year-old soldier hurts from being shot in the leg.
Want evidence? No matter how sheltered someone has been, people do not experience clinical trauma disorders after being denied a luxury, but they do after being starved.
To me, the clearest delineation of the existence of suffering vs. disappointment is the presence of fear. Real fear generated from your brain's limbic system, not "Oh noes I'm afraid I might not be able to get a reservation on Friday".
Luckily, science today tells us a lot about trauma, suffering, fear, and how the brain reflects and reacts to them.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 18, 2011, 06:48:14 PM
Question: Is being subjected to a moderate level of discipline "suffering"?
When you say "discipline" do you mean "punishment"? Most people do, although the words are not synonymous.
If yes, then by "punishment" do you mean "hitting"?
it seems readily apparent to me that 'suffering' is a broadly flexible term and only has specific meaning in context.
so, i would say that, in some sense, any discipline can fall under the term.
why not?
of course, i know that you don't suffer fools easily, so you may disregard my view as deemed necessary. :)
Quote from: Nigel on July 18, 2011, 07:05:27 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 18, 2011, 06:48:14 PM
Question: Is being subjected to a moderate level of discipline "suffering"?
When you say "discipline" do you mean "punishment"? Most people do, although the words are not synonymous.
If yes, then by "punishment" do you mean "hitting"?
Discipline, in my view, does include punishment. Spanking, grounding, time outs, etc, as appropriate.
(I am a firm believer that spanking doesn't work after age 5. Note that I differentiate between "spanking" and "knocking the kid into next week".)
I wrote a long reply, but it kind of turned into its own thing - http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=29742.0
Nigel, I have encountered something interesting: I witnessed someone go full bio-survuval mode (like a base level "threat to survival" reaction) in response to checking their bank and seeing a negative balance.
That is to say, they were not under any direct physical threat to their existence, but they had (or something had made them become) trained their brain and body to treat the abstract concept of "money" as a physically tangible thing.
While we can rationally say that having a negative bank balance would not be classified as physical suffering, this person had all the mannerisims and adrenaline-fueled mania normally associated with fear of imminent death.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (deceased) on July 18, 2011, 07:34:36 PM
Nigel, I have encountered something interesting: I witnessed someone go full bio-survuval mode (like a base level "threat to survival" reaction) in response to checking their bank and seeing a negative balance.
That is to say, they were not under any direct physical threat to their existence, but they had (or something had made them become) trained their brain and body to treat the abstract concept of "money" as a physically tangible thing.
While we can rationally say that having a negative bank balance would not be classified as physical suffering, this person had all the mannerisims and adrenaline-fueled mania normally associated with fear of imminent death.
Maybe he's about to get evicted with 3 kids to worry about, or has to pay off his dealer or something?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 18, 2011, 07:08:24 PM
Quote from: Nigel on July 18, 2011, 07:05:27 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 18, 2011, 06:48:14 PM
Question: Is being subjected to a moderate level of discipline "suffering"?
When you say "discipline" do you mean "punishment"? Most people do, although the words are not synonymous.
If yes, then by "punishment" do you mean "hitting"?
Discipline, in my view, does include punishment. Spanking, grounding, time outs, etc, as appropriate.
(I am a firm believer that spanking doesn't work after age 5. Note that I differentiate between "spanking" and "knocking the kid into next week".)
What discipline includes depends on the context; in the context of parental discipline, I do not believe that spanking necessarily equals suffering, as long as the parent is consistent about how and when the spanking is administered, and doesn't ever even once spin out from spanking into beating. If that ever occurs, the child will anticipate each spanking with the fear of unknown potential harm.
And I agree that spanking is no longer useful after about five or six; it just breeds resentment instead of being a wake-up call.
Quote from: Nigel on July 18, 2011, 08:07:38 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 18, 2011, 07:08:24 PM
Quote from: Nigel on July 18, 2011, 07:05:27 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 18, 2011, 06:48:14 PM
Question: Is being subjected to a moderate level of discipline "suffering"?
When you say "discipline" do you mean "punishment"? Most people do, although the words are not synonymous.
If yes, then by "punishment" do you mean "hitting"?
Discipline, in my view, does include punishment. Spanking, grounding, time outs, etc, as appropriate.
(I am a firm believer that spanking doesn't work after age 5. Note that I differentiate between "spanking" and "knocking the kid into next week".)
What discipline includes depends on the context; in the context of parental discipline, I do not believe that spanking necessarily equals suffering, as long as the parent is consistent about how and when the spanking is administered, and doesn't ever even once spin out from spanking into beating. If that ever occurs, the child will anticipate each spanking with the fear of unknown potential harm.
And I agree that spanking is no longer useful after about five or six; it just breeds resentment instead of being a wake-up call.
Sure. A kid 5+ years old can listen, and process what you tell them.
Before age 5 or so, they are industriously trying to kill themselves, and reasoning with them won't do a damned thing, because they aren't yet capable of reason. That's why we call them "children", instead of "tiny adults".
One thing that always sets me off laughing is being told that I'm a monster because I spanked my kids. The ones who tell me this invariably fall into two catagories:
1. They don't have kids (babysitting doesn't count), or
2. They - in the same breath - complain about how their kids are unmanageable (or alternatively, how they're "special" in behavior).
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (deceased) on July 18, 2011, 07:34:36 PM
Nigel, I have encountered something interesting: I witnessed someone go full bio-survuval mode (like a base level "threat to survival" reaction) in response to checking their bank and seeing a negative balance.
That is to say, they were not under any direct physical threat to their existence, but they had (or something had made them become) trained their brain and body to treat the abstract concept of "money" as a physically tangible thing.
While we can rationally say that having a negative bank balance would not be classified as physical suffering, this person had all the mannerisims and adrenaline-fueled mania normally associated with fear of imminent death.
I don't even know if I can explain this one to you in a way that will make sense to you, although I was just reading a psychology book that was talking about how people whose survival has never been threatened by poverty
don't have that reaction to a negative bank balance, which I found interesting since it's never occurred to me that there could be any other reaction.
It's basically a trauma response. Poverty is a life-threatening condition. Anyone who has ever been in a position of poverty is permanently conditioned with a fear response to not having enough money.
In childhood, abandonment is also life-threatening, which is why people who had very insecure childhoods may still react with extreme fear to the threat of being abandoned even as adults.
Quote from: Iptuous on July 18, 2011, 07:06:06 PM
it seems readily apparent to me that 'suffering' is a broadly flexible term and only has specific meaning in context.
so, i would say that, in some sense, any discipline can fall under the term.
why not?
of course, i know that you don't suffer fools easily, so you may disregard my view as deemed necessary. :)
Suffering is a flexible term, sure. Generally speaking though, it differs from "disappointment" or "struggle" in that actual suffering triggers the trauma centers of the brain and is something that the sufferer is, or feels, helpless over. People "struggle" to feed a family, but they "suffer" from famine.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 18, 2011, 07:37:16 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (deceased) on July 18, 2011, 07:34:36 PM
Nigel, I have encountered something interesting: I witnessed someone go full bio-survuval mode (like a base level "threat to survival" reaction) in response to checking their bank and seeing a negative balance.
That is to say, they were not under any direct physical threat to their existence, but they had (or something had made them become) trained their brain and body to treat the abstract concept of "money" as a physically tangible thing.
While we can rationally say that having a negative bank balance would not be classified as physical suffering, this person had all the mannerisims and adrenaline-fueled mania normally associated with fear of imminent death.
Maybe he's about to get evicted with 3 kids to worry about, or has to pay off his dealer or something?
Having a negative bank balance can set off a horrible chain reaction of financial disaster that, if insufficient resources are available, can be unrecoverable, or take years to recover from.
It can mean not getting to eat, having your gas shut off, your kids taken away, losing your car, and a host of other really really bad stuff.
RAW has a big section of Prometheus Rising about how our biosurvival hardware imprints resources. If you've grown up under capitalism, you've imprinted those green slips of paper as a route to biosurvival instead of, say, dead deer and boar. LMNO's ATM anecdote is a good example of how those ancient biosurvival systems are still very real and intact. That's why some people need to be escorted out of the building by security when they get the pink slip. While a lack of money is an intangible threat to survival (it's not like we EAT money), it still triggers those hard wired fight or flight responses.
Quote from: Nigel on July 18, 2011, 07:03:38 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 18, 2011, 06:33:48 PM
Interesting point. Maybe suffering is a subjective reaction to varying degrees of objective strife? The pain may be the same but we all have different thresholds.
Pure wankery. Some people learn to tolerate pain better after they've been exposed to it, is all, but a coddled brat simply does not hurt as much from bruising his shin as, say, an 18-year-old soldier hurts from being shot in the leg.
Want evidence? No matter how sheltered someone has been, people do not experience clinical trauma disorders after being denied a luxury, but they do after being starved.
To me, the clearest delineation of the existence of suffering vs. disappointment is the presence of fear. Real fear generated from your brain's limbic system, not "Oh noes I'm afraid I might not be able to get a reservation on Friday".
Luckily, science today tells us a lot about trauma, suffering, fear, and how the brain reflects and reacts to them.
Not what I meant. You administer a punch of equal strength, directly to the face of two people. One of them freaks out and thinks you're going to kill them, the other one laughs and shouts "hell yeah, it's on!"
Same strife, different suffering?
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 18, 2011, 09:23:53 PM
Quote from: Nigel on July 18, 2011, 07:03:38 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 18, 2011, 06:33:48 PM
Interesting point. Maybe suffering is a subjective reaction to varying degrees of objective strife? The pain may be the same but we all have different thresholds.
Pure wankery. Some people learn to tolerate pain better after they've been exposed to it, is all, but a coddled brat simply does not hurt as much from bruising his shin as, say, an 18-year-old soldier hurts from being shot in the leg.
Want evidence? No matter how sheltered someone has been, people do not experience clinical trauma disorders after being denied a luxury, but they do after being starved.
To me, the clearest delineation of the existence of suffering vs. disappointment is the presence of fear. Real fear generated from your brain's limbic system, not "Oh noes I'm afraid I might not be able to get a reservation on Friday".
Luckily, science today tells us a lot about trauma, suffering, fear, and how the brain reflects and reacts to them.
Not what I meant. You administer a punch of equal strength, directly to the face of two people. One of them freaks out and thinks you're going to kill them, the other one laughs and shouts "hell yeah, it's on!"
Same strife, different suffering?
So it's all in how you respond, not how much it hurts?
That's what I'm thinking - suffering is subjective. I mean, yeah, you amputate a leg with no anaesthetic then pretty much everyone is going to experience peak-suffering but on a sliding scale the experience varies. Lose your car keys? Rank it 1-10. I'll bet if you ask ten different people you'll get ten different answers.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 18, 2011, 10:20:35 PM
That's what I'm thinking - suffering is subjective. I mean, yeah, you amputate a leg with no anaesthetic then pretty much everyone is going to experience peak-suffering but on a sliding scale the experience varies. Lose your car keys? Rank it 1-10. I'll bet if you ask ten different people you'll get ten different answers.
I understand what you are saying. And since attitudes and the ways we deal with situations is directly related to our environment, then a rich kid whining about losing his phone is the same to that kid as a poor kid crying because they have no food. Yes one is much much worse than the other, but they are equally upset because of their environment.
Or am I way off?
It's subjective, of course. What else could it possibly be?
How much suffering is triggered by an event has a lot to do with preceding events. This is why a prank that is funny to one person may be traumatic to another. Even the degree of pain perceived is tied to previous events in an individual's life. I don't think that proves that we can't be happy without suffering, but it depends on whether you are redefining suffering to include inconvenience and disappointment.
Quote from: Nigel on July 18, 2011, 10:51:28 PM
It's subjective, of course. What else could it possibly be?
How much suffering is triggered by an event has a lot to do with preceding events. This is why a prank that is funny to one person may be traumatic to another. Even the degree of pain perceived is tied to previous events in an individual's life. I don't think that proves that we can't be happy without suffering, but it depends on whether you are redefining suffering to include inconvenience and disappointment.
That's not what I'm doing at all, aside from maybe ranking inconvenience and disappointment as really REALLY low-level suffering. The reason I think you can't be happy without suffering is because without suffering you have no frame of reference with which to experience happy. You'd just be neutral, maybe even depressed. You can't appreciate a good meal unless you're hungry. The hungrier you are the better you enjoy it.
I think that my definition of suffering is very different from yours. I don't rank inconvenience, disappointment, or low-level discomfort as suffering at all. See, to me being hungry isn't suffering, it's just a biological function. But being hungry isn't the same as going hungry. Going hungry is suffering. But you don't ever have to experience chronic hunger or starvation in order to appreciate a good meal. You don't ever have to be raped to appreciate good sex, or be beat up to appreciate cuddling.
I do think people need to work, to strive, to struggle, in order to be, overall, happy people. They need to experience inconvenience and disappointment and not always get what they want. I don't think they need to suffer.
(Unless, like I said, you define suffering to include inconvenience and disappointment.)
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 18, 2011, 11:06:00 PM
That's not what I'm doing at all, aside from maybe ranking inconvenience and disappointment as really REALLY low-level suffering. The reason I think you can't be happy without suffering is because without suffering you have no frame of reference with which to experience happy. You'd just be neutral, maybe even depressed. You can't appreciate a good meal unless you're hungry. The hungrier you are the better you enjoy it.
is that strictly true?
isn't happiness just a brain state? just chemicals? (not to take 'just' as a minimizing modifier)
Quote from: Iptuous on July 18, 2011, 11:38:50 PMis that strictly true?
isn't happiness just a brain state? just chemicals? (not to take 'just' as a minimizing modifier)
If we assume consciousness and memory and mind and all that reside exclusively in our brain, then of course by definition it needs to be "a brain state". But not a very simple one, not really.
There's serotonine levels, but afaik those just make you feel like everything's OK and be complacent, not happiness.
Then there's the pleasure centre in your brain and according to reports from idiots that actually did it and put an electrode there, it's like having sex but never reaching orgasm. Pleasurable, but not very fulfilling, and after a while, very frustrating.
Yet when you put such an electrode in a monkey (or was it mice, I forget), they'll keep stimulating that electrode over
everything else, even food and water.
But apparently this doesn't happen with humans. At least, not with those people. Apparently humans really need some sort of "fulfilment", a conclusion, maybe a storyline, or perhaps indeed suffering. They need
something extra, just stimulating the pleasure centre doesn't seem to do the trick, at least not for very long. I dunno what exactly that something extra must be, maybe it's related to the same discussion in the other thread. But calling it "freedom" sounds really trite in this context, probably not it.
Quote from: Iptuous on July 18, 2011, 11:38:50 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 18, 2011, 11:06:00 PM
That's not what I'm doing at all, aside from maybe ranking inconvenience and disappointment as really REALLY low-level suffering. The reason I think you can't be happy without suffering is because without suffering you have no frame of reference with which to experience happy. You'd just be neutral, maybe even depressed. You can't appreciate a good meal unless you're hungry. The hungrier you are the better you enjoy it.
is that strictly true?
isn't happiness just a brain state? just chemicals? (not to take 'just' as a minimizing modifier)
We are entirely made out of "just chemicals".
Quote from: Triple Zero on July 18, 2011, 11:56:26 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on July 18, 2011, 11:38:50 PMis that strictly true?
isn't happiness just a brain state? just chemicals? (not to take 'just' as a minimizing modifier)
If we assume consciousness and memory and mind and all that reside exclusively in our brain, then of course by definition it needs to be "a brain state". But not a very simple one, not really.
There's serotonine levels, but afaik those just make you feel like everything's OK and be complacent, not happiness.
Then there's the pleasure centre in your brain and according to reports from idiots that actually did it and put an electrode there, it's like having sex but never reaching orgasm. Pleasurable, but not very fulfilling, and after a while, very frustrating.
Yet when you put such an electrode in a monkey (or was it mice, I forget), they'll keep stimulating that electrode over everything else, even food and water.
But apparently this doesn't happen with humans. At least, not with those people. Apparently humans really need some sort of "fulfilment", a conclusion, maybe a storyline, or perhaps indeed suffering. They need something extra, just stimulating the pleasure centre doesn't seem to do the trick, at least not for very long. I dunno what exactly that something extra must be, maybe it's related to the same discussion in the other thread. But calling it "freedom" sounds really trite in this context, probably not it.
We need challenges and accomplishment. Challenge is the brain's aphrodisiac; it's literally what makes us learn. Challenge and new situations. Accomplishment is overcoming challenge and it stimulates our reward center. This is why people on unemployment often become depressed and apathetic; take away people's challenges and goals, and their brain and eventually will to live just sort of goes dormant. This is also why people in college are (usually) smarter than people ten years after college, and why going back to school makes you smarter; stimulation and challenge. Hardship is a type of challenge, but extended hardship also causes depression and apathy because people feel or become helpless.
One of the reasons I can't agree that suffering is necessary for happiness is that it goes directly contrary to pretty much all recent brain research on happiness. At least if you're talking about actual suffering, and not challenge, frustration, discomfort, inconvenience, or disappointment.
In fact, suffering often leads to depression, drug addiction, and destructive behavior. Prolonged suffering, especially in childhood, causes permanent changes in the brain structure that make people less able to be happy even after their environment has changed to one which is conducive to happiness.
interesting info, Trip. imma have to look into that later.
Good points, Nigel.
Quote from: Nigel on July 18, 2011, 11:35:44 PM
I think that my definition of suffering is very different from yours. I don't rank inconvenience, disappointment, or low-level discomfort as suffering at all. See, to me being hungry isn't suffering, it's just a biological function. But being hungry isn't the same as going hungry. Going hungry is suffering. But you don't ever have to experience chronic hunger or starvation in order to appreciate a good meal. You don't ever have to be raped to appreciate good sex, or be beat up to appreciate cuddling.
I do think people need to work, to strive, to struggle, in order to be, overall, happy people. They need to experience inconvenience and disappointment and not always get what they want. I don't think they need to suffer.
Yeah we definitely have a different definition. Suffering to me is feeling bad. It's a sliding scale from mild hay fever at one end to extreme torture at the other. Is it accurate to say that you don't count it as suffering until it reaches a certain level or criteria?
Quote from: Nigel on July 19, 2011, 01:30:35 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on July 18, 2011, 11:56:26 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on July 18, 2011, 11:38:50 PMis that strictly true?
isn't happiness just a brain state? just chemicals? (not to take 'just' as a minimizing modifier)
If we assume consciousness and memory and mind and all that reside exclusively in our brain, then of course by definition it needs to be "a brain state". But not a very simple one, not really.
There's serotonine levels, but afaik those just make you feel like everything's OK and be complacent, not happiness.
Then there's the pleasure centre in your brain and according to reports from idiots that actually did it and put an electrode there, it's like having sex but never reaching orgasm. Pleasurable, but not very fulfilling, and after a while, very frustrating.
Yet when you put such an electrode in a monkey (or was it mice, I forget), they'll keep stimulating that electrode over everything else, even food and water.
But apparently this doesn't happen with humans. At least, not with those people. Apparently humans really need some sort of "fulfilment", a conclusion, maybe a storyline, or perhaps indeed suffering. They need something extra, just stimulating the pleasure centre doesn't seem to do the trick, at least not for very long. I dunno what exactly that something extra must be, maybe it's related to the same discussion in the other thread. But calling it "freedom" sounds really trite in this context, probably not it.
We need challenges and accomplishment. Challenge is the brain's aphrodisiac; it's literally what makes us learn. Challenge and new situations. Accomplishment is overcoming challenge and it stimulates our reward center. This is why people on unemployment often become depressed and apathetic; take away people's challenges and goals, and their brain and eventually will to live just sort of goes dormant. This is also why people in college are (usually) smarter than people ten years after college, and why going back to school makes you smarter; stimulation and challenge. Hardship is a type of challenge, but extended hardship also causes depression and apathy because people feel or become helpless.
Thank you. I was searching for words and challenge and accomplishment seems to fit the picture perfectly!
QuoteOne of the reasons I can't agree that suffering is necessary for happiness is that it goes directly contrary to pretty much all recent brain research on happiness. At least if you're talking about actual suffering, and not challenge, frustration, discomfort, inconvenience, or disappointment.
This is not very meaningful as long as you won't draw a line between discomfort and "actual suffering", especially given the wildly varying perceptions of the two mentioned ITT.
And I'm not saying this just to be pedantic, but if [according to brain research] "actual suffering" leads to depression and addiction and destructiveness, while "challenge, frustration, discomfort, inconvenience, or disappointment" are [in some sense] necessary for really enjoying pleasure and feeling happiness, that's two nearly opposite outcomes, that means there has to be a line, right?
Quote from: Nigel on July 19, 2011, 01:30:35 AMProlonged suffering, especially in childhood, causes permanent changes in the brain structure that make people less able to be happy even after their environment has changed to one which is conducive to happiness.
While interesting [especially how permanent those changes exactly are], I think these effects are happening on a very different timescale than we've been discussing up to now ITT.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 08:42:27 AM
Quote from: Nigel on July 18, 2011, 11:35:44 PM
I think that my definition of suffering is very different from yours. I don't rank inconvenience, disappointment, or low-level discomfort as suffering at all. See, to me being hungry isn't suffering, it's just a biological function. But being hungry isn't the same as going hungry. Going hungry is suffering. But you don't ever have to experience chronic hunger or starvation in order to appreciate a good meal. You don't ever have to be raped to appreciate good sex, or be beat up to appreciate cuddling.
I do think people need to work, to strive, to struggle, in order to be, overall, happy people. They need to experience inconvenience and disappointment and not always get what they want. I don't think they need to suffer.
Yeah we definitely have a different definition. Suffering to me is feeling bad. It's a sliding scale from mild hay fever at one end to extreme torture at the other. Is it accurate to say that you don't count it as suffering until it reaches a certain level or criteria?
I don't really count it as suffering if one of those other words I used; inconvenience, frustration, discomfort, annoyance, etc. is a more accurate description. Suffering is a word that means physical or, more commonly, mental pain. Hay fever is not really "pain" per se, and certainly not mental pain, and is also already better described as "uncomfortable" and "annoying". Things can feel bad or unpleasant without causing mental pain and anguish.
So is there a better word we can use here? One that would encompass all extremes? Suckage maybe? I mean physical and mental pain aint a trigger criteria for me. It'd have to be a level of pain that made me think i was suffering but pain is a sliding scale. Cracked ribs and torn muscles aren't suffering IMO, they're just things that happen when I'm out having fun. Pain is more an annoyance than real suffering if we're using your definition, whereas I'd class it as low-level suffering, discomfort or annoyance Which may become high level suffering depending on how sore it was.
Ooooh, I think I might have it. Suffering is when it's more than you can handle?
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 05:54:51 PM
Ooooh, I think I might have it. Suffering is when it's more than you can handle?
Long suffering is considered a Primary virtue in some beliefs. this is the demonstration of
ability to handle great suffering over long periods...
Quote from: Iptuous on July 19, 2011, 05:57:35 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 05:54:51 PM
Ooooh, I think I might have it. Suffering is when it's more than you can handle?
Long suffering is considered a Primary virtue in some beliefs. this is the demonstration of ability to handle great suffering over long periods...
It's certainly a primary virtue in my belief. If you can't handle a bit of pain then you're a pussy. Plain and simple. I've been on trips where one guy will start freaking out and go to pieces. These people are invariable fucking useless and only serve to make a tight situation even worse, cos you now have a stupid bag of skin to keep alive, on top of whatever fucked up situation you already have to deal with.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 05:54:51 PM
Ooooh, I think I might have it. Suffering is when it's more than you can handle?
That's probably a good definition. If it's more than an annoyance or an inconvenience, and it causes mental anguish, then it is suffering.
I get hurt doing stupid shit all the time, but I don't suffer from it 99% of the time; it doesn't cause anguish. On the other hand, things have happened that did not physically hurt me, but caused anguish, and anguish is mental suffering.
Quote from: Iptuous on July 19, 2011, 05:57:35 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 05:54:51 PM
Ooooh, I think I might have it. Suffering is when it's more than you can handle?
Long suffering is considered a Primary virtue in some beliefs. this is the demonstration of ability to handle great suffering over long periods...
Yes, but "long-suffering" basically means "highly tolerant". The context changes the meaning. "A life of suffering" does not mean the same thing as "long-suffering". There are many, many words in the English language that, despite being the same word, have different meanings in different contexts.
Quote from: Nigel on July 19, 2011, 06:03:58 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 05:54:51 PM
Ooooh, I think I might have it. Suffering is when it's more than you can handle?
That's probably a good definition. If it's more than an annoyance or an inconvenience, and it causes mental anguish, then it is suffering.
I get hurt doing stupid shit all the time, but I don't suffer from it 99% of the time; it doesn't cause anguish. On the other hand, things have happened that did not physically hurt me, but caused anguish, and anguish is mental suffering.
Yup I can get behind that. So maybe instead of saying you need suffering I could have said you need a certain amount of pain/stress, the more the merrier up to a point?
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 06:09:26 PM
Quote from: Nigel on July 19, 2011, 06:03:58 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 05:54:51 PM
Ooooh, I think I might have it. Suffering is when it's more than you can handle?
That's probably a good definition. If it's more than an annoyance or an inconvenience, and it causes mental anguish, then it is suffering.
I get hurt doing stupid shit all the time, but I don't suffer from it 99% of the time; it doesn't cause anguish. On the other hand, things have happened that did not physically hurt me, but caused anguish, and anguish is mental suffering.
Yup I can get behind that. So maybe instead of saying you need suffering I could have said you need a certain amount of pain/stress, the more the merrier up to a point?
Yes, I would agree that stress and challenge and a certain degree of pain are all necessary for development and happiness!
Some of the most inspiring people I've met or read about have been through things that I couldn't even imagine but it's make or break. One person may come out of an experience kick-ass cool and another might roll over and die. Kinda where I was going with the OP - it aint some kind of safe-environment day trip, it's fucking tough and only the tough survive but that's life.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 06:27:22 PM
Some of the most inspiring people I've met or read about have been through things that I couldn't even imagine but it's make or break. One person may come out of an experience kick-ass cool and another might roll over and die. Kinda where I was going with the OP - it aint some kind of safe-environment day trip, it's fucking tough and only the tough survive but that's life.
I've been through shit most people can't imagine and I may be a stronger person for it, but not necessarily a better or happier person. I can understand rolling over and dying, honestly.
I guess I have a problem with the idea that suffering makes you happier or better because I'm on the other side of that, and just, no. It's a little too close to "everything happens for a reason" and other vapid platitudes that are designed to make people feel better about a world that is just fucking brutal and monstrous.
You know what's awesome? Well-adjusted people who have dealt with challenges but never suffered from trauma. It's amazing how people like that are usually pretty nice to each other, and don't beat or rape each other or kill themselves with drugs.
Pleased to meet ya!
LMNO
-Sheltered, Challenged, non-Traumatized.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (deceased) on July 19, 2011, 07:32:15 PM
Pleased to meet ya!
LMNO
-Sheltered, Challenged, non-Traumatized.
You seem both awesome and happy, and frankly, I would like to see a whole world full of you.
Quote from: Nigel on July 19, 2011, 07:23:40 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 06:27:22 PM
Some of the most inspiring people I've met or read about have been through things that I couldn't even imagine but it's make or break. One person may come out of an experience kick-ass cool and another might roll over and die. Kinda where I was going with the OP - it aint some kind of safe-environment day trip, it's fucking tough and only the tough survive but that's life.
I've been through shit most people can't imagine and I may be a stronger person for it, but not necessarily a better or happier person. I can understand rolling over and dying, honestly.
I guess I have a problem with the idea that suffering makes you happier or better because I'm on the other side of that, and just, no. It's a little too close to "everything happens for a reason" and other vapid platitudes that are designed to make people feel better about a world that is just fucking brutal and monstrous.
You know what's awesome? Well-adjusted people who have dealt with challenges but never suffered from trauma. It's amazing how people like that are usually pretty nice to each other, and don't beat or rape each other or kill themselves with drugs.
I've been through some pretty fucked up shit myself. Early childhood trauma blew up into full blown psychosis later in life, years of shit I'd defo describe as suffering (although some people may describe it as self indulgent wallowing) followed. If I could go back and choose not to have those experiences I don't think I would. In dealing with it I became stronger, that strength makes me happy.
Personally I don't buy into that "everything happens for a reason" bullshit either. Everything happens, you either rise above or you roll over. But you're right - the world is brutal and monstrous. That'll never change. Being strong is the safest way to deal with it. "Well-adjusted people who have dealt with challenges but never suffered from trauma" are always at risk of having something traumatic happen to them. I'd hate to be the age I am right now and not be able to deal with the kind of shit that, in my current position, I'd shrug off. The idea of that is truly horrific to me.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 08:00:23 PM
Quote from: Nigel on July 19, 2011, 07:23:40 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 06:27:22 PM
Some of the most inspiring people I've met or read about have been through things that I couldn't even imagine but it's make or break. One person may come out of an experience kick-ass cool and another might roll over and die. Kinda where I was going with the OP - it aint some kind of safe-environment day trip, it's fucking tough and only the tough survive but that's life.
I've been through shit most people can't imagine and I may be a stronger person for it, but not necessarily a better or happier person. I can understand rolling over and dying, honestly.
I guess I have a problem with the idea that suffering makes you happier or better because I'm on the other side of that, and just, no. It's a little too close to "everything happens for a reason" and other vapid platitudes that are designed to make people feel better about a world that is just fucking brutal and monstrous.
You know what's awesome? Well-adjusted people who have dealt with challenges but never suffered from trauma. It's amazing how people like that are usually pretty nice to each other, and don't beat or rape each other or kill themselves with drugs.
I've been through some pretty fucked up shit myself. Early childhood trauma blew up into full blown psychosis later in life, years of shit I'd defo describe as suffering (although some people may describe it as self indulgent wallowing) followed. If I could go back and choose not to have those experiences I don't think I would. In dealing with it I became stronger, that strength makes me happy.
Personally I don't buy into that "everything happens for a reason" bullshit either. Everything happens, you either rise above or you roll over. But you're right - the world is brutal and monstrous. That'll never change. Being strong is the safest way to deal with it. "Well-adjusted people who have dealt with challenges but never suffered from trauma" are always at risk of having something traumatic happen to them. I'd hate to be the age I am right now and not be able to deal with the kind of shit that, in my current position, I'd shrug off. The idea of that is truly horrific to me.
One standout statistic I've seen a bunch of times as I've been reading about trauma recovery is that people who are traumatized/victimized are, while strong in some ways, 80% more likely to end up in traumatizing situations again because we have damaged boundaries. People who have never been traumatized are actually MUCH better able to protect themselves from trauma and victimization, and better able to heal from it when it does happen.
It feels nice to tell ourselves fairy stories about how the bad shit we've gone through makes us superior, but it's not true. We're awesome because we made it through, but it didn't give us any special powers.
Yeah, I've heard about that kinda thing. Comes from not learning the lesson, maybe? Same thing with the - cycle of abuse - scenario. Those people are damaged. Surviving is easy (with luck factored in there). The hard bit is healing.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 08:19:39 PM
Yeah, I've heard about that kinda thing. Comes from not learning the lesson, maybe? Same thing with the - cycle of abuse - scenario. Those people are damaged. Surviving is easy (with luck factored in there). The hard bit is healing.
Trauma causes damage, partly in the form of a loss of self-confidence and boundaries. It's not "not learning the lesson". Part of it is when your high-alert switch gets stuck on "on", your body is reacting to everything as if it's danger, and you get used to living that way, so you don't have an alert to act differently when there really IS danger.
There are a lot of factors. A lot of things about your brain chemistry change when you're traumatized, and it can take a long time and a lot of work to repair them.
Quote from: Nigel on July 19, 2011, 08:24:05 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 08:19:39 PM
Yeah, I've heard about that kinda thing. Comes from not learning the lesson, maybe? Same thing with the - cycle of abuse - scenario. Those people are damaged. Surviving is easy (with luck factored in there). The hard bit is healing.
Trauma causes damage, partly in the form of a loss of self-confidence and boundaries. It's not "not learning the lesson". Part of it is when your high-alert switch gets stuck on "on", your body is reacting to everything as if it's danger, and you get used to living that way, so you don't have an alert to act differently when there really IS danger.
There are a lot of factors. A lot of things about your brain chemistry change when you're traumatized, and it can take a long time and a lot of work to repair them.
Couldn't agree more. But unless you put in that time and work you haven't healed, you're still there, in that shit place. Some people never make it out. Those people aren't the ones I'm identifying with when I say I feel my life made me better. I can sympathise, hell yeah, "There but for the grace..." and all that
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 08:33:51 PM
Quote from: Nigel on July 19, 2011, 08:24:05 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 08:19:39 PM
Yeah, I've heard about that kinda thing. Comes from not learning the lesson, maybe? Same thing with the - cycle of abuse - scenario. Those people are damaged. Surviving is easy (with luck factored in there). The hard bit is healing.
Trauma causes damage, partly in the form of a loss of self-confidence and boundaries. It's not "not learning the lesson". Part of it is when your high-alert switch gets stuck on "on", your body is reacting to everything as if it's danger, and you get used to living that way, so you don't have an alert to act differently when there really IS danger.
There are a lot of factors. A lot of things about your brain chemistry change when you're traumatized, and it can take a long time and a lot of work to repair them.
Couldn't agree more. But unless you put in that time and work you haven't healed, you're still there, in that shit place. Some people never make it out. Those people aren't the ones I'm identifying with when I say I feel my life made me better. I can sympathise, hell yeah, "There but for the grace..." and all that
But is this an aside, or is it anything to do with the OP? I'm confused. Trauma fucks people up, and some people heal and some people don't. I'm not sure whether you're just relating a personal anecdote, or trying to claim that trauma is beneficial in general, or what.
Because, seriously, there are things that if I could erase from my history, I absolutely would in a heartbeat, as well as the scars they left. That doesn't mean I haven't healed from them, but I don't think they made me a better person or benefitted me in any way, nor would I ever wish them on anyone else.
My OP was about the necessity of strife to provide a valid experience. Aside from the semantics surrounding "suffering" which I'm still not entirely sure we disagree on, my point is that the optimum amount of strife/suffering/pain would appear to be as much as you can take and still completely recover from. That isn't to say as much as you can take and still recover from in a week or a month, cos that aint much at all. All the other stuff, the good fun happiness stuff is more important as something to be striven for or remembered when you're in the pits of your own private hell. What I'm railing against is the notion of "happy ever after". Although that's the one thing that we all aim for and maybe it would be fun to spend the last few years there I honestly feel that a whole life like that would be empty and meaningless.
I can't agree about the optimum amount of suffering, but here are some thoughts on suffering that I wrote to Mr. Language yesterday, thought you might find them mildly relevant/interesting.
QuoteI wish I could help you! The world is a hard place to navigate. B and I
have been talking a lot lately about sadness, and how to manage it...
it's hard to get easy with sitting with it and just feeling it, and at
first it feels like it will be overwhelming, but it does help to do it.
Some people believe that everything happens for a reason. I don't; I
think that unhappy people do terrible things to other people, and there
is no reason, and no greater good. People treat the people they love
with cruelty, and there is no greater good. Famines happen, and there is
no greater good.
Sometimes, though, people do amazingly good things in the aftermath of a
terrible thing. It's not because it was meant be, to make them a better
person, or because they deserved it, or because they chose it, but
because if we can find the strength, we survive and grow and help other
people. I have to look for the happiness, because without it I'm
immobilized, ineffective. People do terrible things to each other, but
they do beautiful things too. When you strip us down we're just soft
warm vulnerable little animals.
Life has been hard, but it has made me resilient. None of the bad
happened to me for a reason, but I'm alive. My grief runs deep, but I
also have intense joy, because being able to touch my joy is the gift
that allowed me to survive. I'm often sad, but I'm also increasingly
aware that happiness is the thing that frees people and gives them the
strength to be good to each other, and if I can be happy and help people
to love themselves and be happy, then I'm doing the most good I can
possibly do. You may get so caught up in other people's suffering that
you forget that you deserve happiness too, but you do, just for being alive.
I feel like I'm kind of just babbling. But anyway, that's how I try
to deal with the sadness.
There's also a letter I wrote to Dok Howl a few days ago that might be relevant... when he gets it, if it's OK with him, I'll post it.
I know that people can recover from some truly awful things, but that doesn't leave them better off for it. Otherwise, rapists and people who put cigarettes out on their children would be a blessed part of society.
I like it. It seems to me that this part
QuoteSometimes, though, people do amazingly good things in the aftermath of a
terrible thing. It's not because it was meant be, to make them a better
person, or because they deserved it, or because they chose it, but
because if we can find the strength, we survive and grow and help other
people.
is where we might be at loggerheads. I see that as the coolest thing about life whereas you seem to see it as an unfortunate truth?
QuoteOtherwise, rapists and people who put cigarettes out on their children would be a blessed part of society.
That's why it's paradoxical. If you don't mind, let's leave things like fucked up sickos out of this (too emotive a subject) how about we stick to car crashes and earthquakes? They are neither blessed nor evil. They are just part of the cold, unfeeling nature of reality. They happen at random, for no reason beyond physics but, like it nor not, you'd have to accept that they provide an opportunity to grow, to become stronger, to maybe appreciate what you have a little more or to share a selfless act of compassion or heroism.
It aint precise, tho, it's just as likely you'll get caught in something that kills you or maybe fucks you up so bad you never bounce back. Let's face it, ultimately that's all you have to look forward to anyway. Like you said - it aint part of some divine plan, there's no safety net. However, without things like that everyone might be blissfully happy but what would be the fucking point?
The interesting thing for me is that this logic dictates that we should make it as hard as we can for our families and friends but basic human nature makes that ridiculous. Unless you're one of the fucked up sickos, that is. That's a paradox to me - we strive for this utopia that is actually the worst thing that could happen to us.
I guess I'm just a product of the world. I can't image a human race that works as holding any intrinsic value. Maybe faking it, maybe sport instead of war, maybe the quest for knowledge as opposed to the quest to ease the pain would be really cool but I can't for the life of me see it. Maybe I wish I could.
Why do you want to leave the fucked up sickos out of it? They're every bit as much a fact of reality as earthquakes and car crashes, and far more likely to affect the average person. It seems pointless to even have a conversation about suffering if you're not going to take the fucked up sickos into account.
Also, if we are leaving out fucked up sickos, are we also leaving out war?
Quote from: Nigel on July 19, 2011, 10:51:09 PM
QuoteI wish I could help you! The world is a hard place to navigate. B and I
have been talking a lot lately about sadness, and how to manage it...
it's hard to get easy with sitting with it and just feeling it, and at
first it feels like it will be overwhelming, but it does help to do it.
Some people believe that everything happens for a reason. I don't; I
think that unhappy people do terrible things to other people, and there
is no reason, and no greater good. People treat the people they love
with cruelty, and there is no greater good. Famines happen, and there is
no greater good.
Sometimes, though, people do amazingly good things in the aftermath of a
terrible thing. It's not because it was meant be, to make them a better
person, or because they deserved it, or because they chose it, but
because if we can find the strength, we survive and grow and help other
people. I have to look for the happiness, because without it I'm
immobilized, ineffective. People do terrible things to each other, but
they do beautiful things too. When you strip us down we're just soft
warm vulnerable little animals.
Life has been hard, but it has made me resilient. None of the bad
happened to me for a reason, but I'm alive. My grief runs deep, but I
also have intense joy, because being able to touch my joy is the gift
that allowed me to survive. I'm often sad, but I'm also increasingly
aware that happiness is the thing that frees people and gives them the
strength to be good to each other, and if I can be happy and help people
to love themselves and be happy, then I'm doing the most good I can
possibly do. You may get so caught up in other people's suffering that
you forget that you deserve happiness too, but you do, just for being alive.
That was beautiful, thank you for posting that :)
I also liked P3NT's addition to it, it actually seems to agree with that (apart from the leaving out sickos, bit perhaps)
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 11:19:12 PM
The interesting thing for me is that this logic dictates that we should make it as hard as we can for our families and friends but basic human nature makes that ridiculous. Unless you're one of the fucked up sickos, that is. That's a paradox to me - we strive for this utopia that is actually the worst thing that could happen to us.
is it that bad of a paradox, though?
Think of a computer game, what you seem to be saying is that, you're enjoying playing it so much, the worst possible thing that could happen is that you finish the game! :)
Except that I'm pretty sure the human game has no real end-condition, so I wouldn't worry about that too much. Except perhaps the Brave New World scenario?
Quote from: Nigel on July 19, 2011, 07:23:40 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 06:27:22 PM
Some of the most inspiring people I've met or read about have been through things that I couldn't even imagine but it's make or break. One person may come out of an experience kick-ass cool and another might roll over and die. Kinda where I was going with the OP - it aint some kind of safe-environment day trip, it's fucking tough and only the tough survive but that's life.
I've been through shit most people can't imagine and I may be a stronger person for it, but not necessarily a better or happier person. I can understand rolling over and dying, honestly.
I guess I have a problem with the idea that suffering makes you happier or better because I'm on the other side of that, and just, no. It's a little too close to "everything happens for a reason" and other vapid platitudes that are designed to make people feel better about a world that is just fucking brutal and monstrous.
You know what's awesome? Well-adjusted people who have dealt with challenges but never suffered from trauma. It's amazing how people like that are usually pretty nice to each other, and don't beat or rape each other or kill themselves with drugs.
I know what you mean. Trauma's a thief. It steals from you the one thing you can never really get back; the person you were meant to be. Maybe the person you become is a great person. Better in some ways than the person you were supposed to become. Stronger and more humane. Maybe even with empathy born of suffering. It's possible that you might develop insight and creativity that without that trauma, that loss, that suffering....you may never have found within you.
But that's because it's not
you anymore. Not at any rate the
you that you had expected to be. You grow up you know and you have this gradually emerging idea of yourself....of who and what you are....of what your dreams might be....of how you'll live your life. And why. You are, without even being conscious of it, moving in a certain direction...finding an orientation, getting your sea legs I guess for the journey of your life. Then
wham....some fucked up
thing or some fucked up
one leaps out in your path and screws up that carefully drawn map so badly that you don't even recognise it anymore, when you see it. All torn up and dirty around your feet. You certainly can't navigate your way anywhere with it now.
And so a new person grows to cope with the mess. Because human beings seem so determined to survive somehow. Like a Custodian or something. Needed and useful, but not necessarily the sort of person you'd have
chosen to be.
And this new person is often very capable. She goes about clearing the decks. Making sure the neighbours don't get upset about looking out and seeing the carnage in the yard. The ruins of the person who used to live in you. Because she knows, like you know, how ugly that is. And that if people saw it...they'd turn from it in horror. Like a burns victim...you don't want to look away from them, but you have to. It's just too hard to look.
So now you're in some new cosmetic cover. She's made you a veneer to disguise the scars that got left when the old you moved out so suddenly. When that bastard fate kicked the
you out of you. Now no one but you and she can see the exit wound. She's built you this presentable facade to show to the outside world. But it's always a disguise that someone else made for you to wear.
You got a whole new identity. Bought for you by whatever force nearly pushed you off the edge of the world and made to measure for you by whatever force stopped you dropping off it. But the pisser is, since no one ever asked you if it fit properly or if the cut of it suited you, you're never comfortable in the new you. Not the way people can be comfortable when they were left alone to design their own pattern for life.
I more than admire those people who got to be the ones they were supposed to be. I envy them. I'm twisted up and green with envy over how
comfortable they look with themselves. The peace they find in their own thoughts; in their own company. I seek them out, just to observe them and feel the wonder of it. Normality. Wow. What a concept. They seem so at home when they're just with
themselves. Like they know that person really well and actually quite
like them.
You're right. Those people are fucking amazing. And I'm pretty sure the world would be a lot better off if there were a few more like them in it.
I like your take on a different person taking over. Never really looked at it that way before. As for the people who never been tested, sure I envy them a bit but, deep down inside I wouldn't want to be them. I admire strength, bravery, courage and the ability to keep going when all else have thrown in the towel and come out the other end smiling. People who are and have always been happy and contented? I see nothing there that impresses me. I'm not saying they can't be really cool people and I'd get on fine with them but admire? Nothing admirable about having it easy from where I'm standing.
Quote from: Eartha-ly Delights on July 20, 2011, 08:01:01 AM
Quote from: Nigel on July 19, 2011, 07:23:40 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 19, 2011, 06:27:22 PM
Some of the most inspiring people I've met or read about have been through things that I couldn't even imagine but it's make or break. One person may come out of an experience kick-ass cool and another might roll over and die. Kinda where I was going with the OP - it aint some kind of safe-environment day trip, it's fucking tough and only the tough survive but that's life.
I've been through shit most people can't imagine and I may be a stronger person for it, but not necessarily a better or happier person. I can understand rolling over and dying, honestly.
I guess I have a problem with the idea that suffering makes you happier or better because I'm on the other side of that, and just, no. It's a little too close to "everything happens for a reason" and other vapid platitudes that are designed to make people feel better about a world that is just fucking brutal and monstrous.
You know what's awesome? Well-adjusted people who have dealt with challenges but never suffered from trauma. It's amazing how people like that are usually pretty nice to each other, and don't beat or rape each other or kill themselves with drugs.
I know what you mean. Trauma's a thief. It steals from you the one thing you can never really get back; the person you were meant to be. Maybe the person you become is a great person. Better in some ways than the person you were supposed to become. Stronger and more humane. Maybe even with empathy born of suffering. It's possible that you might develop insight and creativity that without that trauma, that loss, that suffering....you may never have found within you.
But that's because it's not you anymore. Not at any rate the you that you had expected to be. You grow up you know and you have this gradually emerging idea of yourself....of who and what you are....of what your dreams might be....of how you'll live your life. And why. You are, without even being conscious of it, moving in a certain direction...finding an orientation, getting your sea legs I guess for the journey of your life. Then wham....some fucked up thing or some fucked up one leaps out in your path and screws up that carefully drawn map so badly that you don't even recognise it anymore, when you see it. All torn up and dirty around your feet. You certainly can't navigate your way anywhere with it now.
And so a new person grows to cope with the mess. Because human beings seem so determined to survive somehow. Like a Custodian or something. Needed and useful, but not necessarily the sort of person you'd have chosen to be.
And this new person is often very capable. She goes about clearing the decks. Making sure the neighbours don't get upset about looking out and seeing the carnage in the yard. The ruins of the person who used to live in you. Because she knows, like you know, how ugly that is. And that if people saw it...they'd turn from it in horror. Like a burns victim...you don't want to look away from them, but you have to. It's just too hard to look.
So now you're in some new cosmetic cover. She's made you a veneer to disguise the scars that got left when the old you moved out so suddenly. When that bastard fate kicked the you out of you. Now no one but you and she can see the exit wound. She's built you this presentable facade to show to the outside world. But it's always a disguise that someone else made for you to wear.
You got a whole new identity. Bought for you by whatever force nearly pushed you off the edge of the world and made to measure for you by whatever force stopped you dropping off it. But the pisser is, since no one ever asked you if it fit properly or if the cut of it suited you, you're never comfortable in the new you. Not the way people can be comfortable when they were left alone to design their own pattern for life.
I more than admire those people who got to be the ones they were supposed to be. I envy them. I'm twisted up and green with envy over how comfortable they look with themselves. The peace they find in their own thoughts; in their own company. I seek them out, just to observe them and feel the wonder of it. Normality. Wow. What a concept. They seem so at home when they're just with themselves. Like they know that person really well and actually quite like them.
You're right. Those people are fucking amazing. And I'm pretty sure the world would be a lot better off if there were a few more like them in it.
I like this. A lot.
I don't dislike the person I've become, but it's taken a lot for me to start to love her, because part of what was taken from me was my sense of being valuable. It's hard to believe that anyone would do those things to someone who is valuable.
BTW Nigel - I meant to post earlier, in answer to your "fucked up sickos" question. Made me think long and hard. I don't have an answer. Currently in the process of rethinking my shit. Pls to consider my opinions so far as applying only to me. I've embraced my experiences - the ends more than justified the means but maybe that's not the same for everyone. Thanks for putting me straight
The meaning of life: One shitburger after another, until you learn. Then, another shitburger.
Quote from: Nigel on July 20, 2011, 07:30:53 PM
I like this. A lot.
I don't dislike the person I've become, but it's taken a lot for me to start to love her, because part of what was taken from me was my sense of being valuable. It's hard to believe that anyone would do those things to someone who is valuable.
[/quote]
It certainly is. That's why I get shitty with people who say "Oh suffering and trauma bring with them strength of character."
No they don't. They bring with them neuroses, insecurities, complexes and a series of bad choices relating to interpersonal relationships.
Quote from: Eartha-ly Delights on July 20, 2011, 10:46:19 PM
Quote from: Nigel on July 20, 2011, 07:30:53 PM
I like this. A lot.
I don't dislike the person I've become, but it's taken a lot for me to start to love her, because part of what was taken from me was my sense of being valuable. It's hard to believe that anyone would do those things to someone who is valuable.
It certainly is. That's why I get shitty with people who say "Oh suffering and trauma bring with them strength of character."
No they don't. They bring with them neuroses, insecurities, complexes and a series of bad choices relating to interpersonal relationships.
Sadly, yes. And maybe at the other end of it a good person, but not an inherently "better" person, and more often than not a less happy person, not a more happy one.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 20, 2011, 08:45:32 PM
BTW Nigel - I meant to post earlier, in answer to your "fucked up sickos" question. Made me think long and hard. I don't have an answer. Currently in the process of rethinking my shit. Pls to consider my opinions so far as applying only to me. I've embraced my experiences - the ends more than justified the means but maybe that's not the same for everyone. Thanks for putting me straight
Thank you.