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.
Are the ass-whoopings of life all trying to convey a more important message from the powers that be or is suffering just a random part of life?
I don't have evidence that there are no powers-that-be, but I do have some standards when it comes to lessons learned from ass-whoopings. One standard of mine is if there is some specific lesson that I need to learn, then the lesson plan designer needs to be very specific about the goals, like bullet-point specific. Otherwise, I have to personalize my own lesson that fits into my environment. Since those bullet-point specific goals are nowhere to be seen, that makes the suffering random. My standards remain. Random just means not personal although some of it can be preventable. That's the lesson to be learned.
again, for me, the thing is not a deity type thing. The suffering could be the same as the "suffering" we experience in training. I can image all the little muscle cells saying "Its a mystery" or "no way a loving thing would do this to us."
The characteristics and traits of the thing are in question.
The meta-question to the OP is "how does one make sense of suffering and adversity" and I have come to think that this is the wrong question because it assumes too much (that there is any sense to it in the first place). The better one is "how does one make the best of suffering and adversity", as in, how does one determine to what extent it was avoidable and leverage that for an improved future experience; and, how does one find "take-aways" in the experience and thus wring something positive from it. How does one put it into the larger perspective of your life as a whole so that you don't lose sight of the good things in your life?
To properly do this, you must remove any vestiges of entitlement that we humans are so prone to here; any talk of "fairness" or "justice" or "meaning" is inherently either a statement that this thing "should not have happened" or a demand for a better experience without effort on our part going forward. Being special, protected, treasured, or cosseted cannot be assumed.
For some adversity, there is no "going forward". The loss of a loved one is final, and in some cases there's no "next time". When you lose a spouse you might remarry, for example, but you may well by then be a very different person from the person your late spouse married and your new spouse is going to be at least somewhat different and you're going to be inherently less starry-eyed about "forever love" because now you know first-hand that nothing is permanent. If you lose an only child who left no children of their own and you are past the age of having more children yourself, that may be a completely closed door with no obvious outlets. So sometimes loss is just a big obscene 500 pound gorilla in the room and that is that. This, too, is something you have to accept (which does not mean approving of it or finding it trivial; it just means not fighting the reality of it).
Now to circle back to the OP, religion can often help (or hinder) this process but it is at root a human process. Some people do a great job of accelerating their acceptance and integration of their "new normal" after setback, adversity or loss by using the tools of their belief-system. Religion can after all be pretty good -- arguably better in important ways than anything else -- at providing belonging and refuge, and group support and encouragement can be very helpful during a grieving process, especially if you were already well plugged-into the group dynamic and had other relationships through it. Others don't find religion all that helpful and in fact if you're in a group that tends to victim-blame, that is acutely uncomfortable simply being present and bearing witness to member's pain, that tends to see a righteous, pious life as a substantially trouble-free life -- then it might not be so easy to have adversity "make sense from a religious/spiritual perspective".
Or put another way, our individual response to adversity varies, and the effectiveness of our support systems vary.
So I prefer to step back a bit and see the handling of adversity as essentially a human problem with human solutions, some of which may involve religion and spirituality, some of which may not. And I also am very careful about assuming that there is or must be inherent higher meaning or purpose in all suffering at all times.
The meta-question to the OP is "how does one make sense of suffering and adversity" and I have come to think that this is the wrong question because it assumes too much (that there is any sense to it in the first place). The better one is "how does one make the best of suffering and adversity", as in, how does one determine to what extent it was avoidable and leverage that for an improved future experience; and, how does one find "take-aways" in the experience and thus wring something positive from it. How does one put it into the larger perspective of your life as a whole so that you don't lose sight of the good things in your life?
To properly do this, you must remove any vestiges of entitlement that we humans are so prone to here; any talk of "fairness" or "justice" or "meaning" is inherently either a statement that this thing "should not have happened" or a demand for a better experience without effort on our part going forward. Being special, protected, treasured, or cosseted cannot be assumed.
For some adversity, there is no "going forward". The loss of a loved one is final, and in some cases there's no "next time". When you lose a spouse you might remarry, for example, but you may well by then be a very different person from the person your late spouse married and your new spouse is going to be at least somewhat different and you're going to be inherently less starry-eyed about "forever love" because now you know first-hand that nothing is permanent. If you lose an only child who left no children of their own and you are past the age of having more children yourself, that may be a completely closed door with no obvious outlets. So sometimes loss is just a big obscene 500 pound gorilla in the room and that is that. This, too, is something you have to accept (which does not mean approving of it or finding it trivial; it just means not fighting the reality of it).
Now to circle back to the OP, religion can often help (or hinder) this process but it is at root a human process. Some people do a great job of accelerating their acceptance and integration of their "new normal" after setback, adversity or loss by using the tools of their belief-system. Religion can after all be pretty good -- arguably better in important ways than anything else -- at providing belonging and refuge, and group support and encouragement can be very helpful during a grieving process, especially if you were already well plugged-into the group dynamic and had other relationships through it. Others don't find religion all that helpful and in fact if you're in a group that tends to victim-blame, that is acutely uncomfortable simply being present and bearing witness to member's pain, that tends to see a righteous, pious life as a substantially trouble-free life -- then it might not be so easy to have adversity "make sense from a religious/spiritual perspective".
Or put another way, our individual response to adversity varies, and the effectiveness of our support systems vary.
So I prefer to step back a bit and see the handling of adversity as essentially a human problem with human solutions, some of which may involve religion and spirituality, some of which may not. And I also am very careful about assuming that there is or must be inherent higher meaning or purpose in all suffering at all times.
So I prefer to step back a bit and see the handling of adversity as essentially a human problem with human solutions, some of which may involve religion and spirituality, some of which may not. And I also am very careful about assuming that there is or must be inherent higher meaning or purpose in all suffering at all times.
Sound and thoughtful analysis of the problem of pain and suffering, which are not the same. It is a human problem that requires human solution, yes.
The texts of religion, if studied closely and with understanding, provide a pathway towards reconciling with adversity, if other means, such as therapy and drugs, are not available to them. It is a lone path, not the community based one you are referring to. Healing can only come from within, community only helps, or hurts, so much. The same texts can clarify the mind so one can understand the cause of suffering as well as gain the strength to bear it. That brings peace, and peace is what heaven is.
Are the ass-whoopings of life all trying to convey a more important message from the powers that be or is suffering just a random part of life?
As I just posted in another thread about this sort of thing...
"... reminds me of when my brother-in-law had a stroke (at our home on Thanksgiving day many years ago). Soon after he was out of the hospital, he asked "what did I do to deserve this?" I have great sympathy for people who have convinced themselves that when bad things happen due to no fault of their own, they somehow feel responsible anyway. Or that they are being punished by "something out there." Call that something whatever you like.
Add this to my list of why thinking in such ways are not the way I think about such things. Now a rather long list at that..."
As I just posted in another thread about this sort of thing..."... reminds me of when my brother-in-law had a stroke (at our home on Thanksgiving day many years ago). Soon after he was out of the hospital, he asked "what did I do to deserve this?" I have great sympathy for people who have convinced themselves that when bad things happen due to no fault of their own, they somehow feel responsible anyway. Or that they are being punished by "something out there." Call that something whatever you like. Add this to my list of why thinking in such ways are not the way I think about such things. Now a rather long list at that..."
Responsibility is not blame.
they are not the same.
it is an important distinction to make.
no matter what happens to a person, we are responsible for how we respond to it.
as adults, we are responsible for our thoughts, our speech, our action, our feelings.
in response to whatever is swirling in our daily circumstances.
that's what responsibility is. our ability to respond. how we respond.
it is not blame. blame keeps a person stuck. taking responsibility moves a person forward in well-being.
blame and responsibility. very different. not the same. very important not to conflate the two.
Responsibility is not blame.
they are not the same.
it is an important distinction to make.
no matter what happens to a person, we are responsible for how we respond to it.
as adults, we are responsible for our thoughts, our speech, our action, our feelings.
in response to whatever is swirling in our daily circumstances.
that's what responsibility is. our ability to respond. how we respond.
it is not blame. blame keeps a person stuck. taking responsibility moves a person forward in well-being.
blame and responsibility. very different. not the same. very important not to conflate the two.
You're right, they are different. But you can't discuss every topic based on semantic differences.
Sound and thoughtful analysis of the problem of pain and suffering, which are not the same. It is a human problem that requires human solution, yes.
The texts of religion, if studied closely and with understanding, provide a pathway towards reconciling with adversity, if other means, such as therapy and drugs, are not available to them. It is a lone path, not the community based one you are referring to. Healing can only come from within, community only helps, or hurts, so much. The same texts can clarify the mind so one can understand the cause of suffering as well as gain the strength to bear it. That brings peace, and peace is what heaven is.
Yes, I agree that ultimately it is a personal, individual journey. No one can achieve acceptance or serenity on your behalf, you can only do it for yourself.
Life, to me, is a weird amalgam of the fact that we are hyper-social, interdependent creatures with real felt need for each other, and at the same time, as the old saying has it, "god has no grandchildren"; there are some things you can only learn first-hand, from direct contact with life itself and you personally.
Yes, I agree that ultimately it is a personal, individual journey. No one can achieve acceptance or serenity on your behalf, you can only do it for yourself.
Life, to me, is a weird amalgam of the fact that we are hyper-social, interdependent creatures with real felt need for each other, and at the same time, as the old saying has it, "god has no grandchildren"; there are some things you can only learn first-hand, from direct contact with life itself and you personally.
Other than orgasm I cannot think of very many things one cannot learn from several sources, including technology, that requires direct contact "with life itself." In any case they far outnumber the direct kind.
I am also not so sure about "the real felt need" for hyper-social interdependency in all life stages.
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.
