Logic says: either kill yourself or try to make yourself less unhappy. Have you followed this logic where it leads or where you want it to go ("instead of killing myself, I should incessantly complain")? — ZzzoneiroCosm
Why not accept the reality and then attempt to make things better? — Banno
I think you’re right. The technological growth of human history and “progress” could be the evolving effects of our attempts to mitigate this burden. — NOS4A2
I prefer to imagine Sisyphus happy... — Tom Storm
Comply...or die — schopenhauer1
Is that wrong to put someone into that bind? — schopenhauer1
...a philosophical position effete in the face of instinct. A blowing of smoke. — ZzzoneiroCosm
Have you taken responsibility for your unhappiness? — ZzzoneiroCosm
Comply... — schopenhauer1
Hey, we actually agree on this. What is it about this self-imposition? Can you elaborate your thoughts on the fact that we don't just "do", but we have to continually buy into doing?
Okay, it's wrong. It (i.e. natura naturans —> conatus) will continue to be wrong, at least, until the next global extinction event. So given it's both "wrong and intractable", you can either adapt, maladapt, or die – choose bravely, schop1 (just stop fucking whining!) :brow:Is that wrong to put someone into that bind? It is intractable, but is it wrong. — schopenhauer1
Why not accept the reality and then attempt to make things better?
— Banno
Do you think because something is intractable that makes it impervious to moral judgement? If so, why? — schopenhauer1
That is a moral problem — schopenhauer1
I would still like to understand what difference you see between ‘life’ and ‘the game’ if any? I assume you must see a difference or your reasoning falls flat. — I like sushi
It is clearly a ruse to use the term ‘comply’ here if he then says in the next breath that there is no choice. We cannot comply if there is no choice. We either live or die whilst trying to live. There is no ‘choice’ in this matter. — I like sushi
To follow that. The OP is more or less framed at living in civilised society. We can choose to leave one way of life and live another. There are undoubtedly a variety of hurdles that basically boil down to ‘fear’. That is a problem we have to cope with in some manner or another. It is how we falter and learn to imagine a new way and open up new doors. — I like sushi
I prefer my T-Shirt - "Sisyphus was a patsy!" — Tom Storm
because no one is imposing this activity on me — NOS4A2
Okay, it's wrong. It (i.e. natura naturans —> conatus) will continue to be wrong, at least, until the next global extinction event. So given it's both "wrong and intractable", you can either adapt, maladapt, or die – choose bravely, schop1 (just stop fucking whining!) :brow: — 180 Proof
What? That doesn't follow. — Banno
Accepting the reality is not rebelling against it the fundamental problem. Forced to comply or die is a problem to deal with not ignore because its "too late". — schopenhauer1
Yawn. Accepting the things yo cannot change is not unreasonable. — Banno
There are a lot of de factos of life to live in a socioeconomic environment with surviving, getting comfortable, and entertainment. These de factos are in a sense a "force" if you don't want to overcome the fear of death. ALL of this imposition of following the de factos of socioeconomic realities or death, is wrong. — schopenhauer1
I'd like to know at which non-production point would it be sustainable/livable to be. Because I don't think there is in human history a period when all productions halted. This is equivalent to committing mass suicide. So, my question is, do we want to continue to live? If so, do we want to change the socio-economic power structure so that we're not compelled to work in order to produce? I'll tell you that if all workers stopped producing, that would hurt everybody.So I ask you, what might a society look like with a rebellious stance towards production? — schopenhauer1
You've recognised the nature of your existence. Welcome to adulthood. Get over it and keep buggering on.
On the way, you might manage to make things a bit more comfortable for yourself and others. That'd be more worthwhile than what you do here, which is just incessant complaining. — Banno
Imagine Sisyphus happy. Amor fuckin' fati. :strong:Accepting the reality is not rebelling against it the fundamental problem. — schopenhauer1
Maladapt it is. :pray:... you can either adapt, maladapt, or die.
—180 Proof
Nah, I'll continue thanks.
Imagine Sisyphus happy. Amor fuckin' fati. — 180 Proof
There is no god. We make our own purpose.
— Banno
Which is what? To help your fellow man and woman, love and educate your kids, be a force of happiness to all? Why? Seems meaningless to simply make someone's stay as comfortable as possible if you admit there was no reason for them to come and stay in the first place.
It's like being Sisyphus' water boy, tending kindly to him, convincing yourself your altruism and goodness matters, ignoring the fact that you're all involved in a meaningless struggle that will eventually end with your death and then eventually the destruction of the world. — Hanover
There has to be something that comes from this self-imposition.. — schopenhauer1
So I ask you, what might a society look like with a rebellious stance towards production? Answer wisely, and not flippantly as you seem to usually do. I'll just ignore any predictable flippant answer. — schopenhauer1
So, my question is, do we want to continue to live? If so, do we want to change the socio-economic power structure so that we're not compelled to work in order to produce? I'll tell you that if all workers stopped producing, that would hurt everybody. — L'éléphant
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.