Philosophy Now Forum

Same for me and Elisabeth Kubler-Ross tbh.

.







.................................................







.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:...which is why I've NEVER quoted Martha Washington.

Naturally, you only quote the people who say things that reflect or support your outlook. And yet your outlook is but a tiny facet of the total view. You seem to ignore/forget that , perhaps so you can claim to be seeing more than you actually do . It's just YOUR TRIP, Bill. Always is. We're all free to experience life many different ways than you do. And many people may not be intrigued to linger or obsess where you do.

It's probably not suffering if you like it so much.

Responding to OP.

It's an evolved response to learn from suffering. Our minds become intent on finding out how to make the suffering stop and, if we are not too panicked, we want to know why the suffering occurred to avoid recurrences. From there, greater learning can lead to greater meaning and this is the process of growing wiser through experience.

.





That was a very thoughtful response.


Thank you for taking the time to offset the rather sophomoric responses that appear right above your.







.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.




You may not be suffering today...but you will feel suffering.

To suffer is to be human.






.

I hope you are not trying to be speaking for Me here bill?

Terrapin Station wrote:

ken wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:Why wasn't he happy all the time just in case some folks were? Just what sort of "I commune with my fellow man" message is that?

If others are suffering, then how could you be (truly) happy?

If others are happy, then how could you be (truly) suffering?

Why does it work one way and not the other?

Who said it did work ONLY one way?

If ALL others are happy, then how could you be (truly) suffering?

But, if only some others are happy, then there will be others who are suffering.

And, if (some) others are suffering, then how could you be (truly) happy?

Lacewing wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:

ken wrote: If others are suffering, then how could you be (truly) happy?

If others are happy, then how could you be (truly) suffering?

Why does it work one way and not the other?

That's beautiful logic! It is MY DUTY to live as joyfully as I can. That is what I contribute to the whole... and surely that ripples throughout the whole, as all energies seem to. We need BALANCE to people's suffering. To suffer along with them helps no one and demonstrates nothing noble. Rather, we can remind them of what else there is, and that might just inspire them to be lifted out of whatever they feel stuck in.

I am not sure if you saw My first post here?

"In a meaningful life there is no suffering.

After learning how to live a life full of meaning I now have no suffering."

So, I NEVER suffer along with others.

.



From Wikipedia:


Suffering occurs in the lives of sentient beings in numerous manners, and often dramatically. As a result, many fields of human activity are concerned with some aspects of suffering. These aspects may include the nature of suffering, its processes, its origin and causes, its meaning and significance, its related personal, social, and cultural behaviors, its remedies, management, and uses.





....................................................







.

I agree that suffering is inevitable. There's no escape unless you have an amazing way of looking at things. It's the fundamental problem of life.

The problem is not suffering.

The problem is suffering, elevated.

The problem is the wallowing, the handwringing.

The problem is viewing suffering as a source of meaning when suffering is a problem to be solved.

Simply: the problem is not seeing problems, not tackling problems.


The most beautiful people we have known are those who have known defeat, known suffering, known struggle, known loss, and have found their way out of those depths.
~ Elisabeth Kubler-Ross ~

ken wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:

ken wrote:
If others are suffering, then how could you be (truly) happy?

If others are happy, then how could you be (truly) suffering?

Why does it work one way and not the other?

Who said it did work ONLY one way?

If ALL others are happy, then how could you be (truly) suffering?

But, if only some others are happy, then there will be others who are suffering.

And, if (some) others are suffering, then how could you be (truly) happy?

Why does only one side receive an "all" qualifier?

Bill Wiltrack wrote: From Wikipedia:


Suffering occurs in the lives of sentient beings in numerous manners, and often dramatically. As a result, many fields of human activity are concerned with some aspects of suffering. These aspects may include the nature of suffering, its processes, its origin and causes, its meaning and significance, its related personal, social, and cultural behaviors, its remedies, management, and uses.

What do you see that as being a response to in the context of this thread?

Greta wrote:I agree that suffering is inevitable. There's no escape unless you have an amazing way of looking at things. It's the fundamental problem of life.

Maybe you'd give a less evasive answer: what are some specific ways that you regularly experience suffering (if there are any for you)?