Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've only partially understood the "requirement" for people to take care of each other. I mean sure there are survival, and quality of life aspects to collaboration, where pulling together can be beneficial, but all too often it also means a few carrying everyone else, which isn't really motivating nor fair to the few. Striking a balance between personal accomplishments and group protections, seems all too often to favor the group over the individual. (I.e. the takers over the makers). IMO the same people that say there is no such thing as unalienable rights (and they are correct), also declare basic universal "rights", which is wholly inconsistent.
The “requirement” to take care of each other is the same “requirement” as in “do unto others”. Both safeguards one’s own security. We dont live in isolation. Poverty affects all of us, even if we are not in poverty. Children born in to poverty have set backs in education, job opportunities, income, finding a partner, a stable life, and being responsible parents and raising healthy children. All of this is required for communities to be safe and healthy. One cannot live in safety and in health if everyone is not safe and healthy. This is not just platitude. It takes a village is a fact.
Nobody propers by his own efforts, it is a false claim.
The “requirement” to take care of each other is the same “requirement” as in “do unto others”. Both safeguards one’s own security. We dont live in isolation. Poverty affects all of us, even if we are not in poverty. Children born in to poverty have set backs in education, job opportunities, income, finding a partner, a stable life, and being responsible parents and raising healthy children. All of this is required for communities to be safe and healthy. One cannot live in safety and in health if everyone is not safe and healthy. This is not just platitude. It takes a village is a fact.
Nobody propers by his own efforts, it is a false claim.
I completely agree.
I’m also not opposed to the idea of hope. Blind hope, sitting-around-waiting-for-miracles hope, sure. But measured optimism in conjunction with proactivity, to the extent one has control over a given situation, why not? Sometimes, hope is what keeps us going. Hope never changes outcomes, but it can aid with maintaining positive outlooks, and when used in appropriate, measured doses, what’s the harm in that?
Last edited by ElijahAstin; 01-24-2023 at 03:38 PM..
I’m also not opposed to the idea of hope. Blind hope, sitting-around-waiting-for-miracles hope, sure. But measured optimism in conjunction with proactivity, to the extent one has control over a given situation, why not? Sometimes, hope is what keeps us going. Hope never changes outcomes, but it can aid with maintaining positive outlooks, and when used in appropriate, measured doses, what’s the harm in that?
It is true that things tend not to turn out as badly as we fear they will, that we can let go of things we thought we couldn't, that we can absorb blows we thought would be our death or at least ruination, more than we know. In those times, just deciding that everything will somehow be okay (for some given value of "okay", lol), so long as you understand that is what you are doing -- basically duping your subconscious mind into not giving up or panicking -- can be a valid strategy. But even there, you should be sure you've truly done everything you know to do, to bring the desired outcome to realization. After you have put in that effort, then it will just have to be whatever it will be. In different situations I have adopted a stance that could be, by turns, described as hopeful, fatalistic, or serene.
I don't think that's the same thing as trying to will something to happen because it's "supposed" to or you somehow deserve it or have been promised it by someone who is both real and has any actual ability to back up that promise.
I suppose I am particularly sensitive to this because I've been left "holding the bag" so to speak a few too many times, when god, life, or some expected qualia of justice in the world was "supposed" to come through for me, and I was dumb enough to believe it to the point that I felt I had no role of my own to play in realizing my goal or the avoidance of some harm or other, and perhaps more importantly, did not understand that there wasn't some metaphysical balance sheet somewhere keeping track of things that had to come out to a positive balance for me personally.
I think my mother started that particular ball rolling for me with her sincere(ly wrong) belief that the world is basically a friendly place that makes sure to reward good little boys, lol.
"Has a person truly done everything they know to do" is a good question to consider. I guess it depends on how important the outcome is to me. If the outcome is very important to me, then I may put more effort to avoid disaster, or I may choose a better partner. But if my relationship with the other person is more important to me than the outcome, in other words, if my interjection means interfering with another person's autonomy, then I may not do everything I know to do. This is at a personal level where we are more than likely to form relationships with people who can fall back on us should they need help. It is easy to hope in these situations where resources can quickly be pulled to save the day.
Hope at a societal level is trickier because it is full of people who are not like us. The resources may be there, but it will take more time and effort to divert them. If many people need the same resources, then more time is spent waiting in some kind of line, filling out some kind of application. Then knowing the right people or institutions to ask takes time and effort. It is sometimes easier and more practical to just accept your position in life and hope for the better.
There might be situations where we believe that if they just made this choice, things could have turned out better. No need for an institution or government to save you. I find this has the same tone as "God saves those who save themselves" or "pull yourself up with your bootstraps". Doing something to the point that we know we have done everything requires time and manpower, and sometimes they are just not there.
I see an America awash in drug addiction. I don't know why, but it seems to me that stressed, depressed, and desperate people often turn to drugs to forget their plight.
I think if more Americans were able to hold out hope for a brighter future during down times, maybe they would be less likely to turn to drugs. If people are hopeful -- despite any current action -- at least maybe they would be in the frame of mind necessary to take a future action, rather than commit suicide or bury themselves in drugs and alcohol.
I see an America awash in drug addiction. I don't know why, but it seems to me that stressed, depressed, and desperate people often turn to drugs to forget their plight.
I think if more Americans were able to hold out hope for a brighter future during down times, maybe they would be less likely to turn to drugs. If people are hopeful -- despite any current action -- at least maybe they would be in the frame of mind necessary to take a future action, rather than commit suicide or bury themselves in drugs and alcohol.
Conversations like this are tricky because it is easy to over-simplify the reasons people self medicate. It is also easy to overlook physician-supervised medication. I have seen Xanax way over-prescribed to the point where a doctor becomes little more than a pusher. Currently methylphenadine is being abused enough that it is difficult to obtain it for legitimate purposes (e.g., as a treatment for ADHD) because DEA enforcement is screwing up the supply chain of raw materials.
We have always had addiction. Would widespread hope and optimism help? In the short term, sure, and if said hope were well-founded and quickly realized, it would lift everyone, addicted or not. But true addiction doesn't vanish in such situations. It's just an epigenetic reality for addicts. A workable life sets them up for success, but they still will have to do the work and will still need support.
I see an America awash in drug addiction. I don't know why, but it seems to me that stressed, depressed, and desperate people often turn to drugs to forget their plight.
I think if more Americans were able to hold out hope for a brighter future during down times, maybe they would be less likely to turn to drugs. If people are hopeful -- despite any current action -- at least maybe they would be in the frame of mind necessary to take a future action, rather than commit suicide or bury themselves in drugs and alcohol.
Hope is nothing but desire. Desire is attachment to things that are not real. There is no such thing as a future, bright or not, nor past which is dead. All there is now, this moment, the present. We can only deal with the present. And that requires a healthy mind free of delusion, focused on action that is least harmful to the self and others. That is all that matters.
It is true that things tend not to turn out as badly as we fear they will, that we can let go of things we thought we couldn't, that we can absorb blows we thought would be our death or at least ruination, more than we know. In those times, just deciding that everything will somehow be okay (for some given value of "okay", lol), so long as you understand that is what you are doing -- basically duping your subconscious mind into not giving up or panicking -- can be a valid strategy. But even there, you should be sure you've truly done everything you know to do, to bring the desired outcome to realization. After you have put in that effort, then it will just have to be whatever it will be. In different situations I have adopted a stance that could be, by turns, described as hopeful, fatalistic, or serene.
I don't think that's the same thing as trying to will something to happen because it's "supposed" to or you somehow deserve it or have been promised it by someone who is both real and has any actual ability to back up that promise.
I suppose I am particularly sensitive to this because I've been left "holding the bag" so to speak a few too many times, when god, life, or some expected qualia of justice in the world was "supposed" to come through for me, and I was dumb enough to believe it to the point that I felt I had no role of my own to play in realizing my goal or the avoidance of some harm or other, and perhaps more importantly, did not understand that there wasn't some metaphysical balance sheet somewhere keeping track of things that had to come out to a positive balance for me personally.
I think my mother started that particular ball rolling for me with her sincere(ly wrong) belief that the world is basically a friendly place that makes sure to reward good little boys, lol.
Hope is nothing but desire. Desire is attachment to things that are not real. There is no such thing as a future, bright or not, nor past which is dead. All there is now, this moment, the present. We can only deal with the present. And that requires a healthy mind free of delusion, focused on action that is least harmful to the self and others. That is all that matters.
Interesting. I never saw you as a nihilist.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
