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.
Our society is very focused on compassion. I doubt any earlier civilizations were this concerned with it.
It may have started with Jesus, and with Buddha. But they may have gotten the idea from something that came before both of them.
The Old Testament says to love your neighbors (who, exactly, are our neighbors?), but Jesus said to also love your enemies. So that means love everyone. Buddha also wanted compassion for all, no matter how horrible a person might be, everyone has God within, so deserves our respect and love.
Ok, this all sounds great on the surface, but I have been thinking it creates dilemmas and paradoxes, and confusion.
It's a whole lot easier to pretend you love everyone than it is to actually love everyone. And the word "love" gets so diluted it becomes impossible to know what it really means.
And then, the people who "love everyone" wind up hating everyone who doesn't love everyone. And our nature, which is similar to all other social animals on earth, really does not accept the idea that everyone deserves our love and respect.
We are built to judge each thing, person, creature, that comes along, as friend or enemy. That is necessary for basic survival. We can't simply turn that off.
So, this is just I thought I am starting to get -- is the current political divisiveness somehow related to our impossible goal of universal compassion?
I know this is vague. This is not the introduction to a formal dissertation. Just thoughts I have had for a long time but never really tried to express.
I personally would like to see less fake compassion, more honest acceptance of nature and our place in it. I know it doesn't feel like it most of the time, but life is a constant fight to survive. We are constantly seeking love and avoiding hate. Going towards whatever we feel is good, running from whatever we feel is bad.
So compassion for everyone would make us go towards everyone and everything, without discriminating.
Of course there is a common sense middle ground, where we prevent ourselves from hating a person because they are gay or black, or whatever is not their fault. But we simply can't, and shouldn't, force ourselves to love every creature, human or non-human.
But if you are Christian, you are supposed to. If you believe Jesus actually said everything he supposedly said.
Political liberals have soaked up a lot of this idea from Christianity and Buddhism. Even the ones who are not religious at all, usually advocate universal compassion, or at least the superficial appearance of it.
Perfection is the enemy of good. If you're convinced that you MUST love and you fail then you may have convinced yourself you don't even need to TOLERATE.
Toleration is a good enough first step. Then, because you no longer need to run and distance yourself you will interact more with them and that will allow you to learn about them and then you can empathize...and that may lead to love. But many times toleration is enough to at least avoid violence and allow for a relatively smooth running society.
"Neighbors" is a relative term and has changed from the people living next to you to anyone in the world you perceive yourself to be similar to. Obviously it is easier to love those are most like you - the key is to seek and find the ways that we are similar - universality allows us to overcome the perception of differences that seem to separate us from our "neighbors".
Perfection is the enemy of good. If you're convinced that you MUST love and you fail then you may have convinced yourself you don't even need to TOLERATE.
Toleration is a good enough first step. Then, because you no longer need to run and distance yourself you will interact more with them and that will allow you to learn about them and then you can empathize...and that may lead to love. But many times toleration is enough to at least avoid violence and allow for a relatively smooth running society.
"Neighbors" is a relative term and has changed from the people living next to you to anyone in the world you perceive yourself to be similar to. Obviously it is easier to love those are most like you - the key is to seek and find the ways that we are similar - universality allows us to overcome the perception of differences that seem to separate us from our "neighbors".
Yes I know that is the story we are told, and that is what I am questioning here. The same people who say all the things you just said are often seething with hatred for anyone who disagrees on politics, religion, etc.
I am trying to show the paradox. I know what the conventional wisdom says. I think that as our society becomes more compassionate on the surface, the subconscious rage intensifies.
We seem very peaceful now, compared to other times, as pointed out by Steven Pinker. But we are actually the most potentially violent time ever, by far. Held in check by MAD.
Men don't fight duels now, they destroy their opponents' lives in court, or with blacklists. Less physical violence, because of more efficient policing, more subtle psychological violence.
I just wanted to come in and say this is a great thread. I'm sad to see more people aren't participating. You made me think about a lot. I will probably come back once I gather my thoughts.
I just wanted to come in and say this is a great thread. I'm sad to see more people aren't participating. You made me think about a lot. I will probably come back once I gather my thoughts.
I think there are probably some of us who are disagreeing with the basic premise. So...not much to say.
Our society is very focused on compassion. I doubt any earlier civilizations were this concerned with it.
Quote:
So, this is just I thought I am starting to get -- is the current political divisiveness somehow related to our impossible goal of universal compassion?
I decided to zero in on these, otherwise I might be all over the place and you wouldn't understand me.
I agree that we are more compassion-focused than other civilizations. Ideally, each civilization should be better than the next. I'm going to try my best not to mention religion too much so the topic doesn't get moved, but if you believe in that sort of thing...just look at how creation was made. It was done in stages. I think human evolution is done in stages too. We should actually be way more advanced than we are. You mentioned divisiveness. I do believe in the concept of disobedient fallen angels. IMO, this divisiveness is the dominion of those spirits. They try to keep people off the path that will lead them to enlightenment/love. They cater to the lower desires. I can recognize this a lot easier these days in my own life. Things will be going really well...I'll seem to be making progress then *bam*. Almost like clockwork, here comes some roadblock that looks like a roadblock I already moved out of the way. I know it's that low spiritual energy trying to knock me back and keep me from elevating my soul. These are the "tests" you have to pass to reach your higher self. I believe in other planes of existence. I can't figure out whether things are worked out in a higher plane and then manifested here. I say this because I have prayed for certain things, and those things have revealed themselves. Sometimes right away; sometimes not. The challenge for me is to figure out where that "thing" is from. Is it from the negative energy trying to trick me (with something I want) into the low desire? Sometimes it is, and I believe it's our job to learn the difference. I think that's the challenge. There's a song called "Deja Vu" by Teena Marie. A line in the song goes, "If anger is your friend don't you know when you die you'll come back again?" I believe 1000% that's what happens. There are people in my life who I've just gotten a feeling of, "You were sent here to help me elevate." It's a crazy feeling...and sometimes I want to ask them, "Are you an angel sent here to help me?!" but then I don't want to sound like a psycho. This divisiveness keeps us focused on the wrong things and stops us from listening to our intuition. I believe we are here to fine-tune that "inner voice". Most of the stuff we deal with is just noise.
I am sharing it because she has been the only person so far that has explained psychological, spiritual and scientific principles as interrelated and not separate disciplines. She believes in God and the Bible but is not religious. She explains things in a very basic manner and makes a lot of sense. To me at least. I will warn that she rambles a lot...so sometimes it's hard to get through her interviews, but the knowledge she shares is worth it.
Yes I know that is the story we are told, and that is what I am questioning here. The same people who say all the things you just said are often seething with hatred for anyone who disagrees on politics, religion, etc.
I am trying to show the paradox. I know what the conventional wisdom says. I think that as our society becomes more compassionate on the surface, the subconscious rage intensifies.
We seem very peaceful now, compared to other times, as pointed out by Steven Pinker. But we are actually the most potentially violent time ever, by far. Held in check by MAD.
Men don't fight duels now, they destroy their opponents' lives in court, or with blacklists. Less physical violence, because of more efficient policing, more subtle psychological violence.
Okay...I don't know what is correct - conventional wisdom or you. How do we assess "subconscious rage"? What is it exactly? What is a valid measure of subconscious rage? Can we do experiments to see what impacts it? Is it really related at all to compassion or diversity? How can we tell that. Think like a psychologist.
You can question conventional wisdom but that does no good unless you have something to replace it with - it's just daydreaming.
This borders on getting tangled up in living your life according to other people's ideas. First off, if you're going to use their various belief systems as a guide for yourself, find out exactly what those are and validate the sources.
Define your terms. Key words to define would be: love (and there's a variety of different ones), compassion and respect.
If you actually read the Bible and Koran, you'll notice that what's written in there is usually a lot different from what most folks are saying is in there. There's some amazingly huge differences between the written and spoken versions. Frequently, small portions will be taken to mean a lot more than they were probably intended to mean as well. Also, take in context what and when and to whom it was written. When you toss in 'why' it was written, it gets even more interesting. Also, who did the translations and for whom? So, once you've sorted out what the books actually have written in them, and may have figured out what you think you should be doing if you follow those tenets, then you get the task of trying to make it fit in modern times.
It can get pretty complicated. But my advice would be: when in doubt, listen to your mother. Don't bite the neighbors, share your toys and play nice. When given a choice, choose kindness.
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.
