You posted on a public forum, with an audience, knowingly. Who else are you complaining to, if not us? Yourself? — S

I interpreted the response a bit differently.. He may have been simply giving an explanation rather than an admonition. I was thinking there was a sly ad hom in there, that may have not.. Either way, "us" threw me off.

Idiots and psychopaths? Yeah right. It's just a common reproach to people who complain too much instead of trying to help themselves.

"Do something about it" is the Cosmos doing us. Either we attend to existence or die as our 'attendance'.

You interpreted it a bit differently? No shit.

You interpreted it a bit differently? No shit. — S

What the hell is your problem... You approached and are now worse than Terrapin levels of debate etiquette.

The idea is, no one existed prior to their existence (whatever that might mean, conception, gestation, birth, consciousness, self-consciousness one or all of them). — schopenhauer1

Yeah, we agree with that.

In my opinion, if we're doing philosophy we should not do so by throwing in colloquialisms that don't amount to much in terms of anything that's literally the case.

Say what?

Idiots and psychopaths? Yeah right. It's just a common reproach to people who complain too much instead of trying to help themselves. — S

Again, miss the point which was broadening the very assumption of "dealing with" in the first place that generally, people (I guess like yourself) like to assume is default a "good" thing in the first place. Dealing with, and creating new people to deal with is taken as default good. I am questioning that. So this isn't really about the phrase qua phrase as it is often used, though it tangentially has to do with that. Rather, I am showing how it reveals a bigger picture of assumptions about how we think "dealing with" is a good thing in the first place.

For example, people rather say, "No pain, no gain" or "what doesn't kill us makes us stronger" than say, "life is inherently flawed due to structural suffering". It is enculturated to identify with that which causes the suffering than to call it out as bad.

You know I don't agree on the inherent suffering in life but I do agree that many people identify themselves with the actual suffering and it fucking gets to my nerves because it apparently enables them to be assholes because they've gone through so much pain. It's as if they gained more dignity or something.

Yeah, well, seeing the same old shit over and again can sort of make that happen. Sorry, but you've long since worn away most of my patience.

You haven’t noticed that people have taken to making derogatory statements about you but directed to others instead of you?
Still think S probably generates a bit more hate but youre getting there lol

This is metaphysical as, once born, and become an autonomous, self-conscious being, we must always deliberate with how to deal with a situation. We are presented with challenges, discomforts, obstacles, and then we deliberate and act accordingly. This is what I mean with "dealing" with the situation. In other words, we are presented with existence, and then we have to "Do something about it!". There is no other option. Non-action is still doing something about it. — schopenhauer1

Okay, so the next point: this sounds like "overthinking" a bit. I don't think that most situations are dilemmas in the way that you're describing it. It sound like you're describing someone rather neurotic, who would find even the slightest thing stressful for some reason, rather than being able to just go with the flow without worrying about most things. Certainly everyone has to work through some things that are dilemmas for them, but most things won't be dilemmas for most people I don't think.

I've been around people who constantly worry and stress and find everything difficult to deal with. They tend to be "psychic vampires."

C'mon. Everyone loves me. :joke:

That you're even addressing it as "an assumption" is telling. So, I haven't really thought it through, and you're full of valuable insight with the potential to turn my world around? Nah, I don't think so. You're not full of insight, you're full of spin. You're not really questioning it, as though you have an open mind, as though this could go either way and warrants exploration. This is just another attack. It's more of the same. It's boring and predictable.

Yeah, well, seeing the same old shit over and again can sort of make that happen. Sorry, but you've long since worn away most of my patience. — S

Then don't respond.

No, I'll respond if I feel like it.

You know I don't agree on the inherent suffering in life but I do agree that many people identify themselves with the actual suffering and it fucking gets to my nerves because it apparently enables them to be assholes because they've gone through so much pain. It's as if they gained more dignity or something. — Alan

Agreed. Suffering apparently gives you more credibility. It's used in various ways too. For example, because someone is starving in Africa, your pain shouldn't be so bad. Rather, it is revealing that despite not being an even worse pain, it just feels that much relatively worse when you go up the hierarchy of needs.. it doesn't disappear, the little is now the big thing as you move up. Also, how screwed up is that that in order to negate someone else's negative experiences, you have to point to someone with yet worse negative experiences.

The point is, we live in a world where we are constantly having to "do something about it". There is no way out of it. That I am saying is bad, and should be a good reason to not bring others into this state. — schopenhauer1

How can you decide having to deal with stuff is bad if there hasn't been any other way ever? This is my point when I talk about ideals. It seems bad to you because there's a completely idealized idea and then you just compare it to the real thing!

Also, how screwed up is that that in order to negate someone else's negative experiences, you have to point to someone with yet worse negative experiences. — schopenhauer1

Yes. You perfectly got my point. I only compare the suffering of others to myself to realize that what I'm going through is not the great deal. However, I don't think others have the right to do the same to me nor do I do that to others.

Why are we assuming it is good to "deal with" anything at all? Why is this such an ingrained baseline notion that this is a right/good existential state, besides the fact that it is inescapable? — schopenhauer1

In my opinion, there are three components “to dealing with it": the agony of having the problem, the cost of dealing with that problem, and the satisfaction having dealt with the problem. The first two components are usually associated with negative feelings. The third component is usually the only positive one. I think it is often the case that the displeasure of having a problem and dealing with it, is greater than the brief pleasure of solving the problem. So I would agree with you that having to deal with problems is overall not a good thing. (Or I might have totally misunderstood you.)

He'll never take my crown. :lol:

Okay, so the next point: this sounds like "overthinking" a bit. I don't think that most situations are dilemmas in the way that you're describing it. It sound like you're describing someone rather neurotic, who would find even the slightest thing stressful for some reason, rather than being able to just go with the flow without worrying about most things. Certainly some things are dilemmas for everyone, but most things won't be dilemmas for most people I don't think. — Terrapin Station

Well, I don't think I am overthinking it. Rather, I am analyzing what people don't perhaps analyze. I believe in existentialist literature at least, there is talk about an "aboutness" to consciousness. I see a similarity here in terms of there being a "dealing with-ness" to normal waking life. We deal with all the things mentioned. And yes, if just very "low grind" activities like getting out of bed, it isn't so bad, but added to the complexity of how humans live and interrelate and survive, there is very much a stressful dealing with in even the most mundane of lives. However, I don't want to downplay the initial "dealing with" that is deemed as good in the first place. What is it about overcoming situations and challenges that need to take place? Of course, if someone wants to sit it all out.. well, that is not an option. At least not without suicide or making someone else deal with it, thus transferring the dealing with situation to someone else.

The world is saturated with people who "complain too much" while complaining to others they "complain too much".

How can you decide having to deal with stuff is bad if there hasn't been any other way ever? This is my point when I talk about ideals. It seems bad to you because there's a completely idealized idea and then you just compare it to the real thing! — Alan

Well right, and you hit on an interesting issue. I think people identify with the terms of this existence (like suffering, and "dealing with") because it is the only existence that they know or can know. Thus since it is all there is, it must be excepted and not critiqued. You can critique specific instances, but never the reality background the show takes place in itself it seems. Again, that is perhaps because it is the only one we know. But as you point out, we do have ideal notions. There are notions of possibilities, contingency, ideals, and better possible worlds.

The current world is one with undue suffering (i.e. exceeds what one would have asked for to "grow") and growth-through-adversity (pain to a point that one supposedly "grows" from it). The world also has an orientation to "dealing with" situations, decisions, problems, challenges, etc. These are the facts. A better world might be one where one can dial down or up the pain to grow as much as one wants, or even a world where one doesnt' have to grow or find meaning in any pain, and one doesn't experience undue harm. Or a better world might be where one can transfer to all various kinds of worlds with amounts of pain and suffering at one's will. Of course the only way those worlds exist are through imagination. Instead we have this world- a world where we are always oriented with "dealing with". My normative claim here is that we should not just accept this as "good" simply because it is the reality.

Right, so we should both stop complaining and do something about it. Thanks for inadvertently bringing me back to reality. Only I can't really do anything about his complaining, except either try to make him see the error of his ways, also known as mission impossible, or basically just walk away.

I'll go with the latter.

So I would agree with you that having to deal with problems is overall not a good thing. (Or I might have totally misunderstood you.) — Purple Pond

No, you understood very well. I agree with your assessment too. And if we add to the fact that problems will not cease to need to overcome, that is a lot of negative in regards to the first two parts of your model.

Right, so we should both stop complaining and do something about it. Thanks for inadvertently bringing me back to reality. Only I can't really do anything about his complaining, except either try to make him see the error of his ways, also known as mission impossible, or basically walk away. — S

Hey I guess you just have to "deal with" the situation :lol: .

Well, I don't think I am overthinking it. Rather, I am analyzing what people don't perhaps analyze. I believe in existentialist literature at least, there is talk about an "aboutness" to consciousness. I see a similarity here in terms of there being a "dealing with-ness" to normal waking life. We deal with all the things mentioned. And yes, if just very "low grind" activities like getting out of bed, it isn't so bad, but added to the complexity of how humans live and interrelate and survive, there is very much a stressful dealing with in even the most mundane of lives. However, I don't want to downplay the initial "dealing with" that is deemed as good in the first place. What is it about overcoming situations and challenges that need to take place? Of course, if someone wants to sit it all out.. well, that is not an option. At least not without suicide or making someone else deal with it, thus transferring the dealing with situation to someone else. — schopenhauer1

Are they dilemmas if people don't think of them as dilemmas?

Are they dilemmas if people don't think of them as dilemmas? — Terrapin Station

I will grant you that a lot of mundane habit-behaviors are not dilemmas nor seen as problems to overcome. That is unless something goes wrong, missing, etc. But even the most mundane stuff can be seen as mildly annoying to deal with and will simply have to be done again and again and again adding up to a lot of mildly annoying deal with situations. Like human desires itself, it is endless.

we are thrown into the world — schopenhauer1

I believe you got that idea from Heidegger. Link. :grin: