I don't think constant joy and happiness would necessarily be boring either.

It would be an inhuman condition so I don’t think we can say much about it at all.

:up: Probably not.

With all that in mind, some philosophers have exaggerated the importance of suffering and restless agitation, as a characteristic of life. They have turned it into a neccesary evil that should be embraced with open arms to improve ourselves. When in fact, it is almost always destructive. Sustained suffering leaves your body searching for death, as it consumes your soul without destroying it. — Sirius

I have seen this kind of thing a few times. I feel the issue is more or less about equating ‘struggles’ in life with ‘suffering’. To have something in life to tackle is what makes life what it is. To refuse the trails and tribulations in life because they are tough is to not live at all.

Hedonistic views will culminate in an understanding that peak pleasure is attached by prolonged pain. Water is the best drink in the world if you are parched, yet if you are a little thirsty it will not give the same pleasures.

Note: Pleasures are all about ‘relief’ in some form. Generally we all need variety (relief from monotony).

‘Goals’ that can be reached are not our true guiding stars. You will lie and deceive yourself everyday, so just guard against this as best you can and accept that the struggle will continue - enjoy :)

There is no such thing as constant ‘joy and happiness’ and if this is an unreachable goal you have then maybe ask why this is so?

I have been in such a state a few times (prolonged periods). It will end in a crash if did not begin with one.

What goes up must come down.

I mean it sounds nice to me, but I don't think it makes sense to pursue it anxiously because that's counter-productive to the goal -- at least for me I have to accept who I am and live with that, and who I am is not that. I have my various anxieties and strange attachments and wanting to be content does not change this. But I still want to be happy and content with life. Why wouldn't I?

The problem, as you note, is that this can be harder to do than it seems.

But at the least I think that striving for contentment is counter-productive. Indeed, contentment strikes me as a lack of striving at all!

 

Many of us seem to be persecuted by the idea that we should be more serious, more transcendent, more ethical. I'm somewhat simplistic - I think we should just get on with living and try not to be a cunt. — Tom Storm

:D

What makes you think I would have such a goal? Such a goal would make itself unattainable.

It is logical to have an unattainable goal.

You introduced the idea of constant joy and happiness as a goal, whereas as I have not addressed that question, or the OP's question, at all except in response to you. You are merely repeating what I already said, which was that the goal of attaining constant joy and happiness would be self-defeating, so what exactly is your point?

Ok. Ignore me then.

If that is what you want...

There are no worthwhile goals. If life is the goal, it is already achieved; if extinction is the goal it will be achieved eventually in every case. Set up the goal posts wherever you like and kick a can between them, or just kick a a can down the road. Or ask a stupid question and get some answers. Remember to breathe, or forget.

There are no worthwhile goals. — unenlightened

Interesting goals perhaps, or at least goals that enable interesting journeys?

There are no worthwhile goals. — unenlightened

Damn, this so far feels like some really melancholically pessimistic stuff. Maybe it’s not. Maybe you’ve obtained a state of being devoid of both needs and wants. In which case, bravo and keep it up. Still, in my experience, day to day wants such as that alleviating thirst, or hunger, or an itch, or of getting sufficient sleep sure amount to worthwhile aims when held for good reason, and generally pleasure-producing when the goals are not obstructed.

Here’s two poems for you, whose vibe I generally hold only in the best of times, but they seem a worthwhile state of mind to express all the same:

-----

A SAIL

White is the sail and lonely
On the misty infinite blue;
Flying from what in the homeland?
Seeking for what in the new?

The waves romp, and the winds whistle,
And the mast leans and creaks;
Alas! He flies not from fortune,
And no good fortune he seeks.

Beneath him the stream, luminous, azure,
Above him the sun’s golden breast;
But he, a rebel, invites the storms,
As though in the storms were rest.

(by Mikhail Lermontov; translated by Max Eastman (I like this translation but can’t find it online))

-----

“Let me live out my years in heat of blood!
Let me lie drunken with the dreamer’s wine!
Let me not see this soul-house built of mud
Go toppling to the dust a vacant shrine!”

(by Jack London, from the opening of his book, Martin Eden)

-----

Potentially noble and thereby worthwhile goals, I say. At least, if one’s into this kind of thing.

Damn, this so far feels like some really melancholically pessimistic stuff. — javra

Now a poem, one gives thanks for, but one does not ask for it to have a goal, not even to comfort the melancholy. But they illustrate my point. One does not denigrate the lives of others who choose a different path, not even a poet, not even a bad poet. Yet the op in sublime ignorance passes judgement over not one but two venerable traditions because they fail to satisfy his own feeble criteria of instrumentalism. It's a piece of egregious "what's-the-point-ism?" that deserves to be exposed for the depressing elitist nonsense that it is.

So I repeat, there is nothing about goals that make them worthwhile. Once get that into your head and you can begin to live a life in freedom.

If you want me to be completely honest. I have felt and do feel the diminishing returns thanks to my depression. — Sirius

That's not the recognition of diminishing returns I'm talking about. I'm talking about someone who works hard in order to be able to afford the proverbial eating, drinking, and making merry, and who realizes that the eating, drinking, and making merry don't compensate for the hard work needed in order to be able to afford the eating, drinking, and making merry. I'm talking about people who, for example, one day realize that they need to work for an entire day in order to earn the money to be able to go to the cinema, and that the pleasure of watching the film doesn't outweigh the hardship needed to earn the money to be able to go see the film.

I know what is it like for nothing to satisfy you, not even an hour long meditation session, medication, a dedicated study of the religious scriptures of all major world religions does the job for me

Why am l bitter ? Cause the medicine l was given didn't cure me of my illness.

Who gave you that medicine?

In the Hindu system, for example, you'd need to be some 75 years old, having accomplished everything a person is supposed to accomplish in this world in terms of raising a family and building a business, and only then could you even begin thinking about "moksha".
In the Buddhist system, you're supposed to either ordain as a monastic, or live as a productive lay person. And it's only as a monastic that one might think about pursuing nirvana. Everyone else is supposed to be busy earning money in as ethical a way as possible.

The problem has more to do with how it's projected or sold as a goal to everyone, which included myself. I firmly believe it's incredibly unhelpful and even harmful to become a Buddhist for the purpose of attaining nirvana. It's akin to studying maths to win the fields medal or solve one of the 7 millennium problems. I can almost guarantee disappointment to anyone who does this.
— Sirius

It's 'projected and sold' to those who want to it to be, of which there are many. — Wayfarer

It's often 'projected and sold' in a decontextualized manner, especially socio-economically decontextualized. Eastern religions are often being presented here in the West as something one can and should do on one's own, alone, in the midst of a socio-economic environment in which those Eastern religions are alien, while the Western socio-economic environment is actually often even hostile to those religions.

So it's not merely the seeker's own fault, his greediness, his "spiritual materialism" or "spiritual consumerism".

Many Western people interested in Eastern religions are trying to do something (such as "attain moksha") for which they have no socio-economic basis, and they aren't even aware of this lack.

Older, more experienced "seekers" owe the newcomers the courtesy to make them aware of that, so that they wouldn't waste time.

It's often 'projected and sold' in a decontextualized manner, especially socio-economically decontextualized. Eastern religions are often being presented here in the West as something one can and should do on one's own, alone, in the midst of a socio-economic environment in which those Eastern religions are alien, while the Western socio-economic environment is actually often even hostile to those religions. — baker

I agree. But I was responding to an OP which was basically dismissing the whole idea on the basis of it being unreal. I'm well aware of the challenges of integrating such traditions into another cultural framework but that ought not to be used to simply write off any such attempt. What Buddhism and Hinduism do provide are radically different ways of framing the problems of the human condition.

So I repeat, there is nothing about goals that make them worthwhile. Once get that into your head and you can begin to live a life in freedom. — unenlightened

So, according to you no goal is worthwhile even if pursuing it leads to interesting, enlivening or inspiring experiences or enlightening insights?

Are you confusing a goal with a gateway? Goals are ends, gateways are beginnings. They can look similar.

A subtle distinction? Say I want to be an artist and I see my goal is to be the best artist I can be. Or my desire to go on a journey of artistic discovery is seen instead as a gateway. A worthwhile goal or a worthwhile desire? Mere semantics?

A subtle distinction? — Janus

Mere semantics? — Janus

They can look similar. — unenlightened

Do you think we are going to arrive at more clarity with these questions? I think I explained things clearly enough. A goal that leads somewhere, and end that is a becoming? Yeah, mere semantics.

Are you asking whether you or I will arrive at more clarity? I find clarity in drawing any distinction that seems valid. I don't find the sweeping judgement that no goals are worthwhile to be clear or convincing.

I remember a key phrase from one of the first Zen books I read, Zen Mind Beginner's Mind. That is to practise meditation with 'no gaining idea'. It's quite a challenging maxim, as the act of Zazen and the discipline undertaken in Zen training is very strenuous. So it is natural to think that all this training must have some result, must 'bear fruit' as the saying has it. But that is still, according to Sōtō, a 'gaining idea' - it is the idea that 'I' am getting somewhere, moving towards something, enlightenment, in this case. I think the principle is, not to get something or somewhere, but to learn to appreciate what is already so - no matter what that is - as if really we've already been bestowed with supreme enlightenment, but we've forgotten how to appreciate it. So training becomes more like Plato's 'anamnesis', an exercise in unforgetting.

But as long as you think, "I am doing this," or "I have to do this," or "I must attain something special," you are actually not doing anything... when you do not try to do anything special, then you do something. When there is no gaining idea in what you do, then you do something. — Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind

This may be true in the "quest" for enlightenment, but in the context of everyday pursuits, and the enrichment of life in terms of interest, it doesn't seem to follow. Goals can be effective motivators in those contexts.

Sure, 100%, but I think it has bearing on the question posed in the OP.

Yes, I agree it does. I guess I was still caught up in the exchange with @unenlightened.

What is even more terrible is this spiritual tradition sets one up for a lifetime battle against oneself. It's a cult of self-overcoming, rooted in self-hatred, unrealistic goals and struck by a fear of relapse into all that enables one to identify with other human beings, i.e our innate weaknesses. — Sirius

In the main I agree. Though I would add that I think one can, actually, win or 'win' this battle and not longer have the parts of oneself one had. One has successfully dis-identified them to such a degree that the neurons involved have withered - take that as a metaphor or literal description depending on your paradigm. That's not a path for me. I have sympathy for people who want to eradicate parts of themselves they associate with pain. And I actually believe that if you follow the practices for a long time you can end up in less pain. But also less who you were. If you don't like those parts of yourself, well, go for it. If you do, well, then it's probably going to be just as you described.

There is a universalization of both the goal and process where one cuts off parts of oneself. I don't think it is a universal. But I don't feel much urge to stop people who decide that's what they want to do.

No civilisation was ever built on forgoing suffering and pleasure, neither was any great theory of science formulated, or any great building built. I want power, I want money, I want knowledge, I want beautiful women, because it is in my nature just like the cat that, even when well fed, wants to hunt. Every youthful person has war in them because it is the human drive to wish to achieve things — then we grow old in mind and "make peace with things" not because we are somehow wiser but because we no longer have the power to change the things that ought to be changed. We are not pandas who are glad with sitting around and eating bamboo. To deny suffering is to spit on every drop of blood our ancestors bled.
If we want to deny that part of our nature, why don't we go ahead and deny the desire to drink water and to eat food?