Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 7:48 am
Dimebag wrote: ↑Sat Oct 30, 2021 12:27 am
I doubt just a name is the problem. It’s also the way people are treated, as distinct entities having personal willpower and self control. To have self control means to have a self who is controlling.
So this external demand of the world and society of self control essentially makes that artificial division necessary, such that an apparent controller can stand apart from its own desires, impulses, and the world, etc.
The name itself is simply a way of distinguishing between individuals, of calling attention to a particular individual. I don’t disagree in a way that maybe the name solidifies the sense of individuality to itself, it kind of seals the deal, but the division runs far deeper than just the name.
I'm just saying, that it was the beginning of all woes and problems for humanity, when they became identified with a name, which is another word for self.
Everything after that sense of self just snowballed into a runaway train. There's no stopping the madness now, not until we all develop the intelligence to say this is such a stupid game going nowhere and stop breeding. Hopefully our selfish actions will force the hand of nature, where humans will extinct very soon, lets hope so.
I’m afraid I don’t quite share the same feelings as you regarding the inherent worth of conscious life. But I understand where you are coming from, and your reasons for thinking that way. The sheer amount of suffering can’t be offset by any small moments of purity, of oneness, happiness, peace, etc, so, better none of this self aware or conscious life never existed. Antinatalism.
To me, such an idea would mean there would be no reason for anything in the universe to exist, no universe at all. Consciousness is the one thing which gives the universe any meaning. So what you are essentially arguing for is the absolute non existence of all existence.
Is such an idea even able to be understood? Absolute non existence? The term itself is paradoxical or contradictory. Existence just is. Nothing cannot be. Something must be.
So what you call for is an impossibility. Maybe.
Maybe the universe might have been “tuned” in such a way that no matter could have formed, no life could have formed. But such a universe could never be inhabited, and therefore the ability to entertain such ideas would be impossible. So to me the idea is pointless.
To whom would a lifeless universe be for? The absolute?
I don’t know.
The fact is, we are here, seemingly, and so, I have to think that there is some reason why that must be. Or maybe if there is no reason, the fact that we are here at all simply should be a reason to be thankful. Thankful for existence.
I know not everyone is thankful for existence, and there is so much suffering in this world. For me to constantly think about that, is no way to live. It’s not a burden I was ever meant to shoulder.
Our level of care should expand to what we are capable of holding. If you are only able to care for yourself, then that is who you should care for. If you have room to care for a whole family then that’s who you should care for.
Care as much as your heart will allow. But don’t let guilt lead to self hate. That’s what I sense in you. A hatred of existence? A hatred of mankind? It may be justified in some manner. But what if everyone felt the same way, what would be the outcome? Let’s apply some categorical imperative of Kant.
I suppose your opinion is needed, to call attention to the many flaws of human and natural existence. But there needs to be a positive vision. Without that, there is no hope, and thus, no motivation to positively change and therefore no end to suffering. Just an eventual bullet to the head of all life. Put them out of their misery. Life struggles to exist. That’s what it’s nature is, to exist, despite suffering.
Maybe someday we won't be so afraid... and THEN what might we create?