That's certainly a dilemma that one can face. I suppose I'd want to live forever. I can always choose to die if I wanted to; but, again that's futile. Schopenhauer and moreso Camus talked about the futility of death.

More truth than mumbo-jumbo, or otherwise? — Posty McPostface

For me the truth or mumbo-jumbo is only real or alive in the person making use of the tradition. A book, for instance, only really exists for a living, breathing reader.

I think it's sincerity. — Posty McPostface

Yeah, that's a good word for it. A serious fool will persist in his folly and become wise. There's an old quote: people usually get what they want. As a rule-of-thumb (and allowing for time and chance), I think that's roughly true. And you find out what you really wanted to some degree by seeing what you ended up with and thinking about how you actually spent your time to get there. It's quite common to think one wants one thing and all along act toward some other goal. These things become clearer, though, usually when it's just about too late.

What do you mean? — Posty McPostface

For me it's never about some dead system of statements or rituals. On their own they are neither true nor false, profound nor mumbo-jumbo. They merely set the stage for a certain kind of existence, and setting the stage is not going to magically get the job done. I can't say exactly what gets the job done. I think the traditions are hints, poems, technologies that have helped others exist in the certain way.

But I think there is a limit to what can be formulated.

That's certainly a dilemma that one can face. I suppose I'd want to live forever. I can always choose to die if I wanted to; but, again that's futile. Schopenhauer and moreso Camus talked about the futility of death. — Posty McPostface

I don't understand what you mean by the futility of death. IMO, Schopenhauer's notion that suicide was futile was an attempt to plug a fundamental defect in his system* and a kind of hypocrisy that haunted his life. I still think he was a truly great philosopher.

And Camus took a ride with a known speed-devil, and he probably liked that proximity to death. It probably made him feel sexy and alive.

*The defect I mean is that Schopenhauer's cosmic vision is very close to the suicide's cosmic vision. Life is a stupid stage on which meaningless pain stalks. It is a bad thing to be dealt with. But I don't think Schopenhauer was sufficiently conscious of the immense pleasure he took in being the guru of pessimism. He loved his complaint. He would have (in his heart of hearts) kept humanity alive and suffering only so that they could read his books and appreciate his genius. 'Oh that Schopenhauer really tells it like it is. Ouch! Ouch ! Ouch!'

Basically Schopenhauer's vision is 'essentially' suicidal, which makes 'selling' it a little absurd.

There's an old quote: people usually get what they want. As a rule-of-thumb (and allowing for time and chance), I think that's roughly true. — macrosoft

Or they become satisfied with what they have?

I don't understand what you mean by the futility of death. — macrosoft

I mean, that it's unavoidable and always present. One cannot escape the confines of mortality. If one attempts for the greatest of goods, such as contentment and satisfaction, that's all that can be asked for in the end.

Or they become satisfied with what they have? — Posty McPostface

Yeah, that too. Sometimes life can proceed smoothly and pleasurably for stretches at a time. Life does not have some big 'hole' in it. The world feels pretty good. All is well.

Then things go to hell. And then we usually adapt and get things going smoothly again. Repeat. Eventually they go to hell and we can't fix them. But that's OK. The children are there to replace us in the game, not really different from us.

I mean, that it's unavoidable and always present. One cannot escape the confines of mortality. If one attempts for the greatest of goods, such as contentment and satisfaction, that's all that can be asked for in the end. — Posty McPostface

Oh, OK. Yes, it seems futile to try and escape death. I agree. And I'd say that impermanent satisfactions and contentments are all we have, but also they are enough (if we get enough of them.)

Yeah, that too. Sometimes life can proceed smoothly and pleasurably for stretches at a time. Life does not have some big 'hole' in it. The world feels pretty good. All is well. — macrosoft

Ok, glad you're not suicidal. Joking aside, life is pretty good nowadays. We don't have to worry about being drafted in some war. We have most of our needs (apart from housing) readily supplied. Opportunities abound for a good life. We enjoy a great deal of freedom. I suppose, too much freedom to some extent.

Oh, OK. Yes, it seems futile to try and escape death. I agree. And I'd say that impermanent satisfactions and contentments are all we have, but also they are enough (if we get enough of them.) — macrosoft

Let it come naturally, is what I think I'm trying to say.

What are your thoughts about attitudes, @macrosoft? Can they be changed, and how?

An attitude is everything after all.

Ok, glad you're not suicidal. Joking aside, life is pretty good nowadays. We don't have to worry about being drafted in some war. We have most of our needs (apart from housing) readily supplied. Opportunities abound for a good life. We enjoy a great deal of freedom. I suppose, too much freedom to some extent. — Posty McPostface

Hmm. Did you think I was suicidal? Oh no. I'm usually happier than most even. In the most suicidal moods (thankfully rare) I have an absolute contempt for talk. One is too disgusted by the futility of communication to talk about it, which leads to people being even more surprised. There are the doers and the threateners.

On the contrary, I'm usually especially happy when I'm typing out my little thoughts on existence or my thoughts on thoughts about existence.

And, yeah, things are good on average.

And, yeah, things are good on average. — macrosoft

:)

Here's Schopenhauer on suicide in case anyone is wondering.

What are your thoughts about attitudes, macrosoft? Can they be changed, and how?

An attitude is everything after all. — Posty McPostface

You know they are central for me. They are sort-of what philosophy is really about. They can be changed. Lots of people well out of their 20s look back on their 20s as a series of experiments with a sequence of basic poses toward existence, often conveniently summarized by the heroes one took at a particular time.

Usually disaster forces us to change. But there is also just the gradual seduction of other, adjacent attitudes.

I'm really liking our conversation, but I've been putting off some work. So I must go. I do hope to talk more in the future.

Likewise.

Thanks!

But, there is a constant lacking present in everyone's life. This lack is the source of frustration, anger, and sadness. Therefore, what can be done about this apparent lacking in or life? — Posty McPostface

The constant lacking is typically covered up by busyness of various kinds, but yes, underneath the busyness the lacking is there. The lacking is a waste product of thought, which suggests at least two partial remedies.

1) Do less thinking. The majority of our thinking is just aimless random wandering accomplishing nothing too constructive. A great deal of thinking can be set aside without risking any important projects. Very generally speaking, this approach has often been highlighted in the East.

2) Shift the focus. A key product of thought is the "me". The "me" is defined by a perceived division from everything and everyone else. The resulting isolation and "lacking" can be overcome to a degree by shifting the focus from ourselves to others, an approach often highlighted in the Christian West.

Both #1 and #2 above involve basically the same process, an act of surrender. Jesus called this "dying to be reborn".

Attempting to analyze and figure out all this stuff about our personal situations may be misguided (while being very normal) because such a process is the opposite of #1 and #2 above, in that it keeps the focus on thinking and on "me". The cure you are working on may actually be the disease.

Over thinkers like you and me can be like the alcoholic who tries to cure his addiction with a case of scotch. It's our over thinking, and the resulting excessive focus on "me", which got us in to trouble in the first place, so poring more of that fuel on the fire is not always the ideal remedy. Like with the alcoholic, it's what we want to do, but not always what we need to do.

Interesting post. Therefore philosophical quietism?

@macrosoft, shall we continue our discussion?

We left off on attitudes.

Sure. I may be interrupted, but I may not.

To me that's almost the central question.

Who should I be? Who can I manage to be?

Sure. I may be interrupted, but I may not. — macrosoft

What are your thoughts on philosophical pessimism? Is it perfunctory?

Who should I be? Who can I manage to be? — macrosoft

Indeed. I think, attitudes are paramount to philosophical talk.

I learned from it. I like that it is has the guts to face the monsters.

I learned from it. I like that it is has the guts to face the monsters. — macrosoft

But, you didn't become a philosophical pessimist yourself? Kudos.

To me there's never really been a stable system. Maybe this is a Hegelian idea, but I think every position tends to manifest some gap or blindspot.

What I think 'really' happens is that individuals just get more and more complex. They understand more and more positions from 'the outside,' with a kind of simultaneous appreciation and distance.

Or at least this can happen for some individuals, maybe the irritable ones and those thirsty for the frontier.

To me there's never really been a stable system. Maybe this is a Hegelian idea, but I think every position tends to manifest some gap or blindspot. — macrosoft

What do you mean by that?

Two big revolutions for me were (1) self-consciousness with respect to the 'pose' and (2) meaning holism. And of course they are related. Meaning holism is opened up more and more as one lets go of the idea that philosophy is word-math because one starts to see that the word-mathematician is not the best role or pose available.