But you didn't have to clean it. Something cultural and personal compelled you. — schopenhauer1

"have tos" or needs always hinge on wants. I want to do it.

"have tos" or needs always hinge on wants. I want to do it. — Terrapin Station

Cool..and why?

If this is a roundabout way to argue that it's a dilemma, it's only a dilemma if you think about it in those terms.

If you don't consciously think that, it's not the case. That's the whole point.

Same thing for thinking about anything negatively.

If you don't consciously think that, it's not the case. That's the whole point. — Terrapin Station

I am not arguing it's a "dilemma". But please, what is the reason you are washing the dishes?

Taking this more existentially, and less mythical-dramatically, life is striving-after, always in a deprived state. The sooner people realize this,the more empathy we have for our state as fellow-strivers, how we treat each other, and how we respond to each other. — schopenhauer1

This here, I agree with. Absolutely. It’s where you take it from here that I find difficult to understand from my perspective. But up to this point, I’m with you.

There is nothing to get after, nothing to be, nowhere to go. Those are culturally-created and perpetuated values that are promoted by many who want to keep it that way. Rather, we are sufferers in and by existence. — schopenhauer1

Where you see nothing here, I see potential. Where you see culturally created values, I see attempts to map a value structure that reflects our current level of awareness, connection and collaboration with reality. And where you see the promotion of insufficient value structures by many who want to keep it that way, I see fear, denial and avoidance of the striving-after - the pain, loss and humility - that informs our existence.

Where you see nothing here, I see potential. Where you see culturally created values, I see attempts to map a value structure that reflects our current level of awareness, connection and collaboration with reality. And where you see the promotion of insufficient value structures by many who want to keep it that way, I see fear, denial and avoidance of the striving-after - the pain, loss and humility - that informs our existence. — Possibility

Force-recruiting more people into an inescapable game to strive-after, deal with that "informs existence" is all that matters here. The burdens of the "thrownness" of our situation (what is already-established and cannot be changed at all or readily changed by one person certainly), is all that matters. Potential is a propaganda tool to recruit yet more people to this existential scheme.

Force-recruiting more people into an inescapable game to strive-after, deal with that "informs existence" is all that matters here. The burdens of the "thrownness" of our situation (what is already-established and cannot be changed at all or readily changed by one person certainly), is all that matters. Potential is a propaganda tool to recruit yet more people to this existential scheme. — schopenhauer1

It clearly matters to you, but it doesn’t matter to everyone - not necessarily because they’re ignorant of the ‘prison’ they’re in, but because they’ve found a way to escape the value structure you believe is a permanent fixture. There is no ‘already-established’ that cannot be changed, except that your subjective value structure renders it so. You’re actually railing against a system that it is within your capacity to deconstruct for yourself, and for others, simply by increasing awareness, connection and collaboration with anything that challenges its reality.

But all your ranting about ‘propaganda’ and ‘force-recruiting’ only reinforces what you find so abhorrent. It’s like a prisoner constantly claiming their innocence, declaring that they shouldn’t even be in jail and complaining about the walls and the guards and the restrictions - it does nothing to change the reality, it only becomes tiresome to those around you. It’s not like we don’t see this already.

Whether we agree with your interpretation or not makes no difference - we’re all in the same physical situation. If you believe there is nothing that can be done about that, then why even bring it up? If others choose to interact with the world in a way that brings a more satisfying structure to their experience of the same situation, who are you to say that it’s false, when the structure within which you continue to interact with the world renders you a prisoner? Is it because the sense of purpose and joy they may express as a result only reinforces your feeling of hopelessness?

You seem to be a prisoner of society’s apparently ‘already-established’ value systems. I’m not. I cannot change what others do, but I can demonstrate a way to experience reality that strips the so-called ‘recruiting’ of its apparent force, rather than just complaining about it.

hey’ve found a way to escape the value structure you believe is a permanent fixture — Possibility

No one has escaped anything.

There is no ‘already-established’ that cannot be changed, except that your subjective value structure renders it so. You’re actually railing against a system that it is within your capacity to deconstruct for yourself, and for others, simply by increasing awareness, connection and collaboration with anything that challenges its reality. — Possibility

We cannot change our natures, and we cannot change larger social and economic structures. Yes we definitely habituate in them.

But all your ranting about ‘propaganda’ and ‘force-recruiting’ only reinforces what you find so abhorrent. — Possibility

Le me be clear- "force-recruiting" here means the act of procreating new participants. By procreating new people, that is forcing more players into the game by default.

It’s like a prisoner constantly claiming their innocence, declaring that they shouldn’t even be in jail and complaining about the walls and the guards and the restrictions - it does nothing to change the reality, it only becomes tiresome to those around you. It’s not like we don’t see this already. — Possibility

This I don't care about. I will complain about the conditions of the game.

Whether we agree with your interpretation or not makes no difference - we’re all in the same physical situation. If you believe there is nothing that can be done about that, then why even bring it up? If others choose to interact with the world in a way that brings a more satisfying structure to their experience of the same situation, who are you to say that it’s false, when the structure within which you continue to interact with the world renders you a prisoner? Is it because the sense of purpose and joy they may express as a result only reinforces your feeling of hopelessness? — Possibility

I can let people know the wiser choice of antinatalism. I can let people know that indeed, existence itself is the problem and that more minutia mongering isn't going to dig your way out of the existential situation.

You seem to be a prisoner of society’s apparently ‘already-established’ value systems. I’m not. I cannot change what others do, but I can demonstrate a way to experience reality that strips the so-called ‘recruiting’ of its apparent force, rather than just complaining about it. — Possibility

Unfortunately, you experiences come on the behest of people who need to focus on widgets. You think this modern standard of living comes from only happy circumstances, for example?

Force-recruiting more people into an inescapable game to strive-after, deal with that "informs existence" is all that matters here. The burdens of the "thrownness" of our situation (what is already-established and cannot be changed at all or readily changed by one person certainly), is all that matters. Potential is a propaganda tool to recruit yet more people to this existential scheme. — schopenhauer1

It's basically true that existence has been a bitch for us and all creatures for the last umpteen million years.

The heart, like tapers, takes at beauty’s eyes 
A flame, and lives by that whereby it dies; 
And beauty is a flame where hearts, like moths, 
Offer themselves a burning sacrifice. 

Take heart! Long in the weary tomb you’ll lie,
While stars keep countless watches in the sky,
And see your ashes molded into bricks,
To build another’s house and turrets high.

For me, heaven’s sphere no music ever made,
Nor yet with soothing voice my fears allayed;
If e’er I found brief respite from my woes,
Back to woe’s thrall I was at once betrayed.

Thrust into life, we seek the depths to know
The plots beyond the curtains of the show,
Learning naught but a whisper from the waste:
‘We came as water and to dust we blow.’

The bowl of life will drain you from your soul,
And hence you’ll part the veil or be as coal,
So, you might as well drink the wine of life;
One knows not what’s writ, or if, on Fate’s scroll.

What shall be, remedy or pain, or mix?
No contest, for we’re wise to change’s tricks,
So, can expect sorrow and joy alike;
But who cares! They’ll pass; we all go to bricks.

From birth we can look forward to being host
To woe, and then to giving up the ghost.
Happy are they who quickly burn to toast,
And blessed are they who ne’er came to the roast.

Creation’s smoke burns evermore thy meat,
E’en ‘fore you cinder from the deeper heat.
Ah, shun what bane you may of the kitchen;
Take no stock in trade; all sweet profits eat.

(These quatrains above are only half mine, or less, for they were retransmogrified into English from Omar's Persian/Arabic originals.)

But please, what is the reason you are washing the dishes? — schopenhauer1

Is this a joke? Are you pretending to be someone from another planet?

Is this a joke? Are you pretending to be someone from another planet? — S

Stop trolling. In the context, it was about what is motivating the action. That's all I am getting at. Discomfort, dissatisfaction of some kind. To take the argument that cleaning the dishes is no big deal, thus life has no big deals is a red herring and you know it. However, I was reversing this argument and saying, even mild dissatisfactions add up. So there.

Stop trolling. In the context, it was about what is motivating the action. That's all I am getting at. — schopenhauer1

How is that trolling? The answer is still obvious, clarification not withstanding. So the real question is why you're asking stupid questions.

Discomfort, dissatisfaction of some kind. To take the argument that cleaning the dishes is no big deal, thus life has no big deals is a red herring and you know it. However, I was reversing this argument and saying, even mild dissatisfactions add up. So there. — schopenhauer1

The dishes are being cleaned for good hygiene, obviously.

Yes, mild dissatisfactions add up. But that still doesn't justify your ridiculous conclusions.

Yes, mild dissatisfactions add up. But that still doesn't justify your ridiculous conclusions. — S

No, this whole course of reasoning that Terrapin and now you are following is ridiculous. He used an example of something that wasn't a "dilemma" to prove that life isn't that bad or something like that, and now you are picking up his mantle. No rather, the bigger conversation here, is at root there is dissatisfaction as motivating factors. In other words, we are always in a "dealing with" situation when born. That is how we are oriented towards things to be done. This is pervasive in every aspect, even washing the dishes. However, to take "washing the dishes" as all that there is in life or all the kinds of activities that there are in life, is itself a red herring or straw man, and that is what I object to here really. But we can keep discussing it.

washing the dishes — schopenhauer1

I use paper plates, but, after a week, I have to take out the trash.

Boring. Yes, we deal with things. And? No, wait, let me guess: this is terrible! Oh my god! The dishes! What a nightmare! We should all just kill ourselves on the spot! But no, like your namesake, you don't advocate the most logical course of action if life really was that bad. You just complain more, exaggerate more, because that's your thing.

Oh my god! The dishes! What a nightmare! We should all just kill ourselves on the spot! But no, like your namesake, you don't advocate the most logical course of action if life really was that bad. You just complain more, exaggerate more, because that's your thing. — S

So, now who is exaggerating for effect? Again, why are you picking up this shit-pile of a reasoning. So life is just doing dishes only then? Also, EVEN washing dishes "zen-like" doesn't negate my initial claim that life is oriented for "dealing with".

I advocate antinatalism, yes. I believe it is not right to put others in "dealing with" situations, when they don't need to be.. even, gasp, doing the dishes! Other courses of action- there is none. Another reason against it. A lot of these problems are simply structural or too big to change.

So, now who is exaggerating for effect? Again, why are you picking up this shit-pile of a reasoning. So life is just doing dishes only then? Also, EVEN washing dishes "zen-like" doesn't negate my initial claim that life is oriented for "dealing with". — schopenhauer1

I'm not even disagreeing with you that life is oriented for dealing with things. That's obvious and either not a problem at all, or at least not a problem that can't itself be dealt with. My criticism is that here, as in your other discussions, you're just making a fuss about mundane things which are part and parcel of life as though you have something deep and meaningful to say. Underneath the rhetoric, there isn't much depth.

I advocate antinatalism, yes. — schopenhauer1

Oh, you do? I had no idea. Have you considered creating a discussion on the topic?

I believe it is not right to put others in "dealing with" situations, when they don't need to be.. even, gasp, doing the dishes! Other courses of action- there is none. Another reason against it. A lot of these problems are simply structural or too big to change. — schopenhauer1

I don't really care that you believe that it's not right. I don't agree with you, obviously. And if nothing can be done about it (not true), then I say put up and shut up.

I don't really care that you believe that it's not right. I don't agree with you, obviously. And if nothing can be done about it (not true), then I say put up and shut up. — S

Clearly, we disagree. Shocker. But, at the end of the day, I am creating no fuss or mundane things for someone else. Answer me, why is it needed in the first place? But you cannot. You will just fall back on attacking but you won't answer the question. You will mention something about "good" or some other experiences you deem needs to take place for someone else. You will speak on behalf of the democrac council of humanity against schop 1. Yep. Agendas for someone else combined with me making a "fuss about nothing" amounts to shit, when the other side is NO harm, no agendas foisted on anyone else. You have made no case for the other side, but I have made the case for no harm to any future person. Except for dramatics, trolling, and rudeness, you have no case.

And yeah, it sucks for us. We are here and have to... deal with it. Of course we identify with the game chosen for us. Again, the assumption is what is it about the dealing with that we crave? I am asking to look deeper than your own knee-jerk anti antinatalism and pessimism. But you don't engage, so I'll just expect more theatrics from you.

Again, the question in the OP is:
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?

How is this question any different than "why do I exist?"

How is this question any different than "why do I exist?" — matt

It's very closely linked, except existing means something... I am claiming for human existence (human nature?) there is a self-aware "dealing with" orientation and asking, why is this a good thing?

I use paper plates, but, after a week, I have to take out the trash. — PoeticUniverse

:lol: Good point. Deal with now, or deal with later

Answer me, why is it needed in the first place? But you cannot. — schopenhauer1

I've addressed this line of questioning from you about a million times before. You must like going around in circles to the point of absurdity. Absolute (or unconditional) necessity is a nonsense, and conditional necessity in the context of procreation or continued existence or washing the dishes would relate to various desires or practicalities, the more common of which can be quite easily fathomed through common sense, e.g. I want to start a family because of the joy it will bring, I continue to live because I value my life, I need to wash the dishes to make them clean and reusable.

All of this you already know. You are presumably just feigning ignorance as some sort of rhetorical tactic. I know that you have your own answers, and that you disapprove, but why do you feel the need to repeatedly express this? Is that normal behaviour, do you think? Do you think maybe you would benefit from counselling?

Again, the assumption is what is it about the dealing with that we crave? — schopenhauer1

It's not a craving, that's just more rhetoric from you. It's simply our natural inclination towards problem solving. Got a problem? Deal with it. This is, again, something you already know. You are human, are you not? You are from this planet, yes?

I've addressed this line of questioning from you about a million times before. You must like going around in circles to the point of absurdity. — S

Sometimes, only a handful of questions really matters. Everything else stems from those assumptions. I go back to first principles and do not jump to (yawn), why this or that is like this or that, without this crucial one first. Since no one ever has a good answer... I go back to it... But if you look, I do dabble in the other mundane/minutia/trivial shit that we discuss here. Yep, I can have an opinion too, just as you.

I want to start a family because of the joy it will bring — S

That is so myopic. You know the line of argument I will say: no harm to anyone, no deprivation for anyone vs. harm for someone (and unknown amounts of undue harm). As I've mentioned in another post: I have this idea that this world can be characterized as "growth-through-adversity coupled with undue harm".

Growth-through-adversity is defined by challenges faced by someone in order to attain a particular goal. For most people this at least involves survival/work along with goals involving entertainment/family-pursuits outside of survival/work.

Undue harm would be overriding illnesses, circumstances, accidents, disasters, etc. that otherwise would not be asked for outside the usual growth-through-adversity.

To be concise in these posts I am going to call growth-through adversity GTA and undue harm UH.

The GTA-UH model that is our reality, most people think is good to force other lives into. When a parent chooses to have a child, they are really saying, "I approve of the life of GTA-UH onto this new person and believe they should live X number of years of life in this kind of reality". There is no escape from it outside suicide. But no one asks why this is good for someone who doesn't exist in the first place to put this reality onto a new person. Oddly, the parent is an existential missionizer force-recruiting new people who, like religious families tend to do, try to enculturate the new recruit into identifying with the GTA-UH model so as not to regret being recruited.

All of this you already know. You are presumably just feigning ignorance as some sort of rhetorical tactic. I know that you have your own answers, and that you disapprove, but why do you feel the need to repeatedly express this? Is that normal behaviour, do you think? Do you think maybe you would benefit from counselling? — S

Again, first principles. If dissatisfaction and dealing with are our orientation, why should this be embraced because it is the reality? I never understood equating what is the case with simply what is good. I only accept it as what people do as a coping strategy, but certainly not a reason it is deemed "good" or approved.

It's not a craving, that's just more rhetoric from you. It's simply our natural inclination towards problem solving. — S

No problem solving is the response to the situation. So it is not rhetorical, it is how life orients every person. Sometimes things are so obvious, they seem rhetorical. We only answer the details but not the actual question that is posed at us from which all the details are flowing from or to.

@schopenhauer1 , let's clarify which of the below cases are covered by your word "MUST":
1. a child must do homeworks under his mom's push
2. a thief must go to prison due to the sentence
3. one must eat because of hunger
4. the driver must take a right turn to avoid falling off the cliff
5. the roulette ball must fall in one of the 38 slots

I guess you asked why there are imperatives? or most fundamentally why things interact at all so there will then be reactions?

If considering only for conscious agents, then you have constraints from the society and environment that you'd better follow. As you have free will you can opt not to, say opposite of #4 and the consequence may be severe.

If considering only for conscious agents, then you have constraints from the society and environment that you'd better follow. As you have free will you can opt not to, say opposite of #4 and the consequence may be severe. — Dzung

I agree there are constraints by society and environment/circumstances. So why put people in these restraints in the first place by having them be born?