Fate.

[Vera]

Nope, you just simply missed the fact that I was joking around. It went over your head.

Yeah, because it was soooooo deep no one but an advanced alien intelligence could've figured out it was a joke

Nope, in this thread and context, your "joke" was something an edgy 11-year-old *might* have thought funny. But hey, water finds its level.

[Rhythmcs]

Fatalism and determinism aren't interchangeable.  Fatalism is the notion that there is some end state that you will reach no matter what path you take in life.  Determinism is the notion that your current (and future) states are decided by all the previous interactions which effect them.

If you were fated to drown, you could move to an alien world with absolutely no water and you would still..somehow, drown.

Well, you're going to die, no matter what path in life you take.

But is that fate, or determinism?   There are biologically immortal organisms, how when and even whether we die does appear to be influenced by past events and circumstances.  One wonders what power a fate would wield, if we were fated.  

How would it would arrange for the man in my example to drown.

[Fireball]

Well, you're going to die, no matter what path in life you take.

But is that fate, or determinism?   There are biologically immortal organisms, how when and even whether we die does appear to be influenced by past events and circumstances.  One wonders what power a fate would wield, if we were fated.  

How would it would arrange for the man in my example to drown.

A person lying on their back, dead drunk, vomits and dies in it. Easy-peasy. John Bonham is living proof of this concept.

[Free]

Nope, you just simply missed the fact that I was joking around. It went over your head.

Yeah, because it was soooooo deep no one but an advanced alien intelligence could've figured out it was a joke

Nope, in this thread and context, your "joke" was something an edgy 11-year-old *might* have thought funny. But hey, water finds its level.

Hey bitch? How about you un-bunch your panties? It may help to make the forum a little less skank, okay?

[Rhythmcs]

But is that fate, or determinism?   There are biologically immortal organisms, how when and even whether we die does appear to be influenced by past events and circumstances.  One wonders what power a fate would wield, if we were fated.  

How would it would arrange for the man in my example to drown.

A person lying on their back, dead drunk, vomits and dies in it. Easy-peasy. John Bonham is living proof of this concept.

Lying on their back dead drunk and vomiting would appear to be determinism, not fatalism.  

Fatalism implies that if a person was going to die in their own vomit they would somehow do so..even in the odd and mind bending event that they didn't drink, didn't lie down on their back..didn't even vomit.....and yet...

Same question again.  How does fate accomplish this? We know how determinism could - the list of past events and circumstances leading up to that moment.
(this, btw, is why fate is so often accompanied by enforcers in fatalistic beliefs, something that can -make- things happen that have no clear avenue for occurring and which do not rely on past states or events or circumstances.)

[Free]

I don't see any real room for free will, but I think it's a useful and meaningful fiction.  Like the idea that economics can be understood as an expression of rational self-interest when there's huge waves of unreason coursing through.

I think this issue of determinism and indeterminism is far more intricate than we can put to words. I have always felt we have a degree of free will kept in check by a "mostly" closed system. I doubt a perfectly closed system can exist, and thereby the determinism that we believe we experience is not assured. Determinism and indeterminism, I believe, are two sides of the same coin, and therefore their state of being intertwined forbids them of being perfect, which means one can affect the other and things can change, and even be forced to change either by randomness, or by limited free will.

Regardless, I find the subject endlessly fascinating.

[Rhythmcs]

Indeterminism and free will are no more interchangeable than determinism and fatalism. It's unclear that things which happen by chance are items freely willed....in addition to it being unclear that we have such a will, even if it were possible.

I always wonder what the free will is supposed to be accomplishing that a regular old will..doesn't, or isn't. It picks a snickers instead of a payday?

[Aegon]

As someone who has suffered a great deal in my relatively young life thus far, I will say that moments others find to be "neutral," I can easily find very joyous.

Good for you. Dismissing or diminishing the suffering of others is still not ok. Not everyone is as "strong" as you and frankly, this is exactly what is wrong with Aliza's (and other religious and apparently non-religious people) brushing away the suffering of OTHERS.

Frankly, this reminds me of one of the most disgusting conversations I've ever had, with this woman who, yes, she did suffer a miscarriage VERY early on in her pregnancy. Apparently, it made her "stronger" or something. So she proceeded to tell me that her friends, parents who were watching their 2-year-old die of cancer, were just being taught a lesson (forget about the kid, it was just god's teaching prop, apparently). FUCK THIS. Also, tell this story about joyousness to women who have been gang raped by soldiers. Tell it to Dennis Mukwege, the nobel laureate, who's treated thousands upon thousands of rape victims in Congo and whose youngest victim was SIX MONTHS OLD. Go on, tell THOSE people about the joyousness of little things or some such shit.

Just because someone has survived something horrible, doesn't mean that the same thing - or even something smaller - won't break someone else.

Excusing away the suffering of others (or a supposed creator of a world full of suffering most of us can't even begin to imagine) is truly repugnant.

I don't understand the point you're making and I don't think you understood mine either. Because I'm definitely not excusing any suffering. I think suffering is inherent to life, it's a byproduct of our advanced consciousness and sense of self. As long as things are different from what we want them to be, we will suffer to some degree. Everyone suffers, even those who appear superficially well off. And yes, obviously some go through incredibly torturous ordeals. I don't believe in God so you can take those points to Aliza. I fully agree that it is really shitty to tell someone their suffering was a good thing because God loves them or whatever.

I would actually argue that the worse the suffering a person endures, the more they need to hear something like: "When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves," and "in some ways suffering ceases to be suffering at the moment it finds a meaning," and "everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way." This is not dismissing someone's suffering or saying it was necessary or any of that. It's simply a different angle to take that is beneficial in the long run. Would you like to guess who I'm quoting and what hardships they experienced?

There is also the Buddhist parable of the two arrows. This is the idea that, any time we suffer misfortune, two arrows fly our way. Being struck by an arrow is painful. Being struck by a second arrow is even more painful. The first arrow symbolizes an external hardship/source of suffering and the second arrow is our reaction to that hardship. There is space between the arrows, and over time with enough practice, we can increase that space and learn to react in a healthier and more mindful manner.

These ideas gradually lead those who have suffered greatly to change the relationship they have with their own sorrows and carve out a healthier and happier existence. I'm not "strong" just because I suffered. I am strong because have suffered and implemented this ideas during and after the fact. Obviously this is not something a six-month baby can do. You and Thingymebob got me there I guess? But it is something the mom of the six-month old could do.

[Rhythmcs]

Liked at the two arrows...though, I would be super surprised if anyone wasnt aware of the analogy in some form or another. / wizard robes and hat off.

[Thingymebob]

Good for you. Dismissing or diminishing the suffering of others is still not ok. Not everyone is as "strong" as you and frankly, this is exactly what is wrong with Aliza's (and other religious and apparently non-religious people) brushing away the suffering of OTHERS.

Frankly, this reminds me of one of the most disgusting conversations I've ever had, with this woman who, yes, she did suffer a miscarriage VERY early on in her pregnancy. Apparently, it made her "stronger" or something. So she proceeded to tell me that her friends, parents who were watching their 2-year-old die of cancer, were just being taught a lesson (forget about the kid, it was just god's teaching prop, apparently). FUCK THIS. Also, tell this story about joyousness to women who have been gang raped by soldiers. Tell it to Dennis Mukwege, the nobel laureate, who's treated thousands upon thousands of rape victims in Congo and whose youngest victim was SIX MONTHS OLD. Go on, tell THOSE people about the joyousness of little things or some such shit.

Just because someone has survived something horrible, doesn't mean that the same thing - or even something smaller - won't break someone else.

Excusing away the suffering of others (or a supposed creator of a world full of suffering most of us can't even begin to imagine) is truly repugnant.

I don't understand the point you're making and I don't think you understood mine either. Because I'm definitely not excusing any suffering. I think suffering is inherent to life, it's a byproduct of our advanced consciousness and sense of self. As long as things are different from what we want them to be, we will suffer to some degree. Everyone suffers, even those who appear superficially well off. And yes, obviously some go through incredibly torturous ordeals. I don't believe in God so you can take those points to Aliza. I fully agree that it is really shitty to tell someone their suffering was a good thing because God loves them or whatever.

I would actually argue that the worse the suffering a person endures, the more they need to hear something like: "When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves," and "in some ways suffering ceases to be suffering at the moment it finds a meaning," and "everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way." This is not dismissing someone's suffering or saying it was necessary or any of that. It's simply a different angle to take that is beneficial in the long run. Would you like to guess who I'm quoting and what hardships they experienced?

There is also the Buddhist parable of the two arrows. This is the idea that, any time we suffer misfortune, two arrows fly our way. Being struck by an arrow is painful. Being struck by a second arrow is even more painful. The first arrow symbolizes an external hardship/source of suffering and the second arrow is our reaction to that hardship. There is space between the arrows, and over time with enough practice, we can increase that space and learn to react in a healthier and more mindful manner.

These ideas gradually lead those who have suffered greatly to change the relationship they have with their own sorrows and carve out a healthier and happier existence. I'm not "strong" just because I suffered. I am strong because have suffered and implemented this ideas during and after the fact. Obviously this is not something a six-month baby can do. You and Thingymebob got me there I guess? But it is something the mom of the six-month old could do.

Could she though? That's a confident statement.
Do you have experience of losing a child or watching a child slowly die in front of you through lack of food?

I've  personally got over some pretty rough times and can smile and laugh and put on a front.. 
But some shit is in my favour, like geography and skin colour.

[Vera]

I don't understand the point you're making and I don't think you understood mine either. Because I'm definitely not excusing any suffering. I think suffering is inherent to life, it's a byproduct of our advanced consciousness and sense of self. As long as things are different from what we want them to be, we will suffer to some degree. Everyone suffers, even those who appear superficially well off. And yes, obviously some go through incredibly torturous ordeals. I don't believe in God so you can take those points to Aliza. I fully agree that it is really shitty to tell someone their suffering was a good thing because God loves them or whatever.

I would actually argue that the worse the suffering a person endures, the more they need to hear something like: "When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves," and "in some ways suffering ceases to be suffering at the moment it finds a meaning," and "everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way." This is not dismissing someone's suffering or saying it was necessary or any of that. It's simply a different angle to take that is beneficial in the long run. Would you like to guess who I'm quoting and what hardships they experienced?

There is also the Buddhist parable of the two arrows. This is the idea that, any time we suffer misfortune, two arrows fly our way. Being struck by an arrow is painful. Being struck by a second arrow is even more painful. The first arrow symbolizes an external hardship/source of suffering and the second arrow is our reaction to that hardship. There is space between the arrows, and over time with enough practice, we can increase that space and learn to react in a healthier and more mindful manner.

These ideas gradually lead those who have suffered greatly to change the relationship they have with their own sorrows and carve out a healthier and happier existence. I'm not "strong" just because I suffered. I am strong because have suffered and implemented this ideas during and after the fact. Obviously this is not something a six-month baby can do. You and Thingymebob got me there I guess? But it is something the mom of the six-month old could do.

And this is EXACTLY what I find repugnant (and no, I got your "point" just fine. I just find it morally repugnant). YOU do NOT get to tell OTHERS what to make of their suffering or how to handle it. This is the height of arrogance and, frankly, incredibly callous.

Next time you meet the mother of a dying two-year-old, do go on and tell her to find the meaning in it and choose her own attitude.

And you can save the woo and the mumbo-jumbo for yourself as well. It must feel so good and self-righteous, grandstanding on the internet - or in a Buddhist monastery, removed from most hardships of life. Do go on and tell a woman who's just been gang raped, who's just watched her child be raped next, about the arrows and her reaction to it and to find meaning in it. I highly doubt even you would do such a thing unless you're a real monster. And if you wouldn't peddle your deep, Buddhist "wisdom" to those who have the greatest need for it, spare us what is, at the end of the day, empty mumbo jumbo.

And btw, we have people on this forum who've lost children. Maybe you should share your profound wisdom with them too.

This is actually infuriating, the utter, oblivious, selfish gall of people who presume to preach about suffering in general, to spout empty platitudes at the face of so much indescribable suffering. But hey, for a couple of seconds you *almost* sounded wise to a handful of strangers on the internet.

[Vera]

Could she though? That's a confident statement.
Do you have experience of losing a child or watching a child slowly die in front of you through lack of food?

I've  personally got over some pretty rough times and can smile and laugh and put on a front.. 
But some shit is in my favour, like geography and skin colour.

And even if he has, he still has ABSOLUTELY no right to tell others how to handle it or to think about it. No right to preach and shove onanistic Buddhist platitudes at them.

Seriously, people like this make my blood boil. The sheer arrogance and utter inability to understand that people see and process things differently and the callous assumption that they have any right to insert themselves into the suffering of others. Some might think it's better because it's "Buddhist" but this crap is the exact equivalent of the Xtian "your baby is in a better place now". Repugnant.

[Thingymebob]

Could she though? That's a confident statement.
Do you have experience of losing a child or watching a child slowly die in front of you through lack of food?

I've  personally got over some pretty rough times and can smile and laugh and put on a front.. 
But some shit is in my favour, like geography and skin colour.

And even if he has, he still has ABSOLUTELY no right to tell others how to handle it or to think about it. No right to preach and shove onanistic Buddhist platitudes at them.

Seriously, people like this make my blood boil. The sheer arrogance and utter inability to understand that people see and process things differently and the callous assumption that they have any right to insert themselves into the suffering of others. Some might think it's better because it's "Buddhist" but this crap is the exact equivalent of the Xtian "your baby is in a better place now". Repugnant.

A lot of people here seem to make comments based on bullshit ideas.
Lot's of gob, but no actual experience.

[Vera]

A lot of people here seem to make comments based on bullshit ideas.
Lot's of gob, but no actual experience.

Well, the internet allows everyone to feel wise and important and interesting for a bit, regardless of reality.

It's just that this particular way really makes my blood boil. Like I said, that conversation about the dying two-year-old is by far the most repugnant, rage-inducing conversation I've ever had in my life and to hear the same kind of bullshit spouted again (this one with a "Buddhist", woo-ish flavour, hers - with a "spiritualism" one (don't ask, a "religion" that combines the worst of both worlds - all the nastiness of Xtianity and suffering teaches and we're all sinners, combined with the utter moral repugnancy that is "karma" and reincarnation and paying for choices made in a "previous life")) is truly infuriating.

IF someone who's gone through the same tragedy you've gone, asks you how you handled it, THEN you might share your experience. WITHOUT telling them to choose their attitude or create their own reality or whatever. You do NOT pass your own personal journey (if you even went on it) as the be-all and end-all of dealing with suffering. My neighbour lost her child when he was a teen to suicide (I think she actually found him hanged on a tree), then her daughter died in her forties of cancer. Should I have gone and explained to her about arrows and reactions and freedoms? That woman was a 7th Day Adventist. Even had we actually gotten to talking about stuff (she was my grandmother's age so we didn't), do you for a second imagine I would have even questioned her faith? Like hell I would have. If she'd told me how she was going to meet her children again in heaven, I would have nodded. Not try to sold her some Buddhist platitude.

Frankly, I think most people wouldn't do the shit they're doing here in real life either (though some, sadly, might do). So, again, why do it here? To sound wise in front of internet strangers? I really don't get it.


The fact that there's at least one person here that has experienced something I can't even begin to imagine makes seeing people blithely spouting supposedly profound platitudes even more repulsive.

[Aegon]

Could she though? That's a confident statement.
Do you have experience of losing a child or watching a child slowly die in front of you through lack of food?

I've  personally got over some pretty rough times and can smile and laugh and put on a front.. 
But some shit is in my favour, like geography and skin colour.

And this is EXACTLY what I find repugnant (and no, I got your "point" just fine. I just find it morally repugnant). YOU do NOT get to tell OTHERS what to make of their suffering or how to handle it. This is the height of arrogance and, frankly, incredibly callous.

Next time you meet the mother of a dying two-year-old, do go on and tell her to find the meaning in it and choose her own attitude.

What's the alternative? Hm? What's the alternative to what I wrote? Fine, next time I meet the mother of a dying two-year old (happens every day during my morning commute) I'll tell her to just off herself and join the baby because there's no point in anything. Happy?

Obviously I wouldn't say this straight to someone's face as they are in the midst of a horrific situation or immediately afterwards. This response is disingenuous and does nothing to counter anything I said.

And you can save the woo and the mumbo-jumbo for yourself as well. It must feel so good and self-righteous, grandstanding on the internet - or in a Buddhist monastery, removed from most hardships of life. Do go on and tell a woman who's just been gang raped, who's just watched her child be raped next, about the arrows and her reaction to it and to find meaning in it. I highly doubt even you would do such a thing unless you're a real monster. And if you wouldn't peddle your deep, Buddhist "wisdom" to those who have the greatest need for it, spare us what is, at the end of the day, empty mumbo jumbo.

Okay, wow. First off, you're literally making up the most specifically horrific situations imaginable as if it negates anything I said. Obviously in the moment such a horror your mind is not going to be on a parable. But after the fact, unless you just want to kill yourself on the spot, you need to figure out how to come to terms with what happened and prepare yourself for future suffering.

Are we playing a game of "Who suffers more" like that means anything? I quoted a Holocaust survivor in my post. You want to tell me how privileged Viktor Frankl is? How about myself? You want me to go into detail about my own sexual assault, drug addiction, organ failure, etc? Do we want to go down that road? Or can you take a deep breath and realize that there's no point in playing the "Who suffers more" game?

And btw, we have people on this forum who've lost children. Maybe you should share your profound wisdom with them too.

I doubt they would disagree with the notion that a person needs to understand how to deal with suffering in life in a positive and healthy manner? Which is my point. Again, what's the alternative?

This is actually infuriating, the utter, oblivious, selfish gall of people who presume to preach about suffering in general, to spout empty platitudes at the face of so much indescribable suffering. But hey, for a couple of seconds you *almost* sounded wise to a handful of strangers on the internet.

I don't find them to be empty platitudes at all. These are critical and profound teachings in my eyes. I'm sorry you've been so upset by what I am saying. I realize that you carry with you probably many memories of God-loving people talking down to you about this and now you're projecting on to me. But honestly I think what you've said here is much more offensive to me than what I've said to you.

[Thingymebob]

Could she though? That's a confident statement.
Do you have experience of losing a child or watching a child slowly die in front of you through lack of food?

I've  personally got over some pretty rough times and can smile and laugh and put on a front.. 
But some shit is in my favour, like geography and skin colour.

And this is EXACTLY what I find repugnant (and no, I got your "point" just fine. I just find it morally repugnant). YOU do NOT get to tell OTHERS what to make of their suffering or how to handle it. This is the height of arrogance and, frankly, incredibly callous.

Next time you meet the mother of a dying two-year-old, do go on and tell her to find the meaning in it and choose her own attitude.

What's the alternative? Hm? What's the alternative to what I wrote? Fine, next time I meet the mother of a dying two-year old (happens every day during my morning commute) I'll tell her to just off herself and join the baby because there's no point in anything. Happy?

Obviously I wouldn't say this straight to someone's face as they are in the midst of a horrific situation or immediately afterwards. This response is disingenuous and does nothing to counter anything I said.

And you can save the woo and the mumbo-jumbo for yourself as well. It must feel so good and self-righteous, grandstanding on the internet - or in a Buddhist monastery, removed from most hardships of life. Do go on and tell a woman who's just been gang raped, who's just watched her child be raped next, about the arrows and her reaction to it and to find meaning in it. I highly doubt even you would do such a thing unless you're a real monster. And if you wouldn't peddle your deep, Buddhist "wisdom" to those who have the greatest need for it, spare us what is, at the end of the day, empty mumbo jumbo.

Okay, wow. First off, you're literally making up the most specifically horrific situations imaginable as if it negates anything I said. Obviously in the moment such a horror your mind is not going to be on a parable. But after the fact, unless you just want to kill yourself on the spot, you need to figure out how to come to terms with what happened and prepare yourself for future suffering.

Are we playing a game of "Who suffers more" like that means anything? I quoted a Holocaust survivor in my post. You want to tell me how privileged Viktor Frankl is? How about myself? You want me to go into detail about my own sexual assault, drug addiction, organ failure, etc? Do we want to go down that road? Or can you take a deep breath and realize that there's no point in playing the "Who suffers more" game?

And btw, we have people on this forum who've lost children. Maybe you should share your profound wisdom with them too.

I doubt they would disagree with the notion that a person needs to understand how to deal with suffering in life in a positive and healthy manner? Which is my point. Again, what's the alternative?

This is actually infuriating, the utter, oblivious, selfish gall of people who presume to preach about suffering in general, to spout empty platitudes at the face of so much indescribable suffering. But hey, for a couple of seconds you *almost* sounded wise to a handful of strangers on the internet.

I don't find them to be empty platitudes at all. These are critical and profound teachings in my eyes. I'm sorry you've been so upset by what I am saying. I realize that you carry with you probably many memories of God-loving people talking down to you about this and now you're projecting on to me. But honestly I think what you've said here is much more offensive to me than what I've said to you.

Dude. I'm not into typing massive posts so I'll keep it short. I was just replying to your statement that everyone can feel joy no matter what.
The six month old baby is just one of many scenarios that show that statement to be incorrect.
It wasn't a gotcha moment like you suggested. It was an obvious common sense objection to your assertion.

[Aegon]

Dude. I'm not into typing massive posts so I'll keep it short. I was just replying to your statement that everyone can feel joy no matter what.
The six month old baby is just one of many scenarios that show that statement to be incorrect.
It wasn't a gotcha moment like you suggested. It was an obvious common sense objection to your assertion.

And I wasn't replying to that comment in this post.

[Thingymebob]

Dude. I'm not into typing massive posts so I'll keep it short. I was just replying to your statement that everyone can feel joy no matter what.
The six month old baby is just one of many scenarios that show that statement to be incorrect.
It wasn't a gotcha moment like you suggested. It was an obvious common sense objection to your assertion.

And I wasn't replying to that comment in this post.

Yeah, but you're lumping my posts in with Vera's, so I'm getting a bit lost.

[Aegon]

IF someone who's gone through the same tragedy you've gone, asks you how you handled it, THEN you might share your experience. WITHOUT telling them to choose their attitude or create their own reality or whatever. You do NOT pass your own personal journey (if you even went on it) as the be-all and end-all of dealing with suffering. My neighbour lost her child when he was a teen to suicide (I think she actually found him hanged on a tree), then her daughter died in her forties of cancer. Should I have gone and explained to her about arrows and reactions and freedoms? That woman was a 7th Day Adventist. Even had we actually gotten to talking about stuff (she was my grandmother's age so we didn't), do you for a second imagine I would have even questioned her faith? Like hell I would have. If she'd told me how she was going to meet her children again in heaven, I would have nodded. Not try to sold her some Buddhist platitude.

...I agree? I also would do the same thing in that situation? When did I say: "These are the ideas that I would approach someone with immediately after their hardship, and I would tell them that what they believe is bullshit and that what I think works is better than their way"? Lol. My whole philosophy is focused on compassion. We all go through suffering, it is universal to the human experience. Obviously I wouldn't say any of that directly to a person's face. If they asked for help I'd tell them what I think. Overall the emphasis would be on helping.

Frankly, I think most people wouldn't do the shit they're doing here in real life either (though some, sadly, might do). So, again, why do it here? To sound wise in front of internet strangers? I really don't get it.

??? Saying things on the internet you wouldn't say in real life is a crime everyone on an internet forum is guilty of. My post wasn't an example of this, by the way, people who know me IRL know what I believe. You don't think you're guilty of that too? I see your posts, you make plenty of pretty shitty comments towards people that are full of vitriol.

[Aegon]

And I wasn't replying to that comment in this post.

Yeah, but you're lumping my posts in with Vera's, so I'm getting a bit lost.

Basically you have a fair point about the baby whose brain has not really developed and is likely fixated purely on the fact that the baby does not have food. Yes, a starving baby likely is not experiencing joy. In regards to how suffering and joy play off each other, you really need to have a more developed brain to think about something like that. The post you're replying to here is regarding the mother of a child who passes.

"How does one deal with suffering?" is a legitimately compelling question. It depends on numerous factors, but personally I believe that suffering, simply, is when things are different than you want them to be. This can describe the low end of the spectrum ("I wanted turkey on rye but they're out of turkey so now I need to get ham on rye") and the very high end of the spectrum ("I had to watch my six-month year old baby get gangraped and murdered," or whatever horrific hypothetical Vera comes up with next).

So how can a homo sapien deal with such an idea? Mindfulness and meditation practices aren't woo anymore, they're a part of mainstream Western psychology. The "two arrows" parable is just a metaphor, there's really no woo in that all. The idea of creating space between a stimuli and reaction isn't crazy, it's a practice recommended by most if not all mental health professionals. These ideas can theoretically be applied to everyone because it's tackling the issue from the POV of "we can use our understanding of our own psychology to our advantage." Because 95% of humans (leaving off a small percentage who are literal psychopaths, sociopaths, etc) have the same physical brain and therefore remarkably similar conscious experiences, you can have a field like psychology. It also means that you can create ideas, tips, and actions/practices that allow you to deal with suffering specifically from that psychology POV and it can apply to multiple people who go through multiple types of suffering. This means that the precise nature of the suffering in question is not as relevant; whether it's your baby dying, being raped as a child, living through the Holocaust, etc, the exact ways these sufferings affect a person are shocking similar. That's why these tips can help.

It's also worth noting that all I did was drop some quotes and not dive deep into it because clearly nobody wants to read any more. They're not just platitudes, they're fleshed out ideas. Obviously I'm not going to waste my time fleshing out those ideas for people in this thread. It would be a waste of time.

[Vera]

whatever horrific hypothetical Vera comes up with next).

You did read my original comment about Dennis Mukwege's youngest RAPE victim being 6-month-old, did you? You did read my comment about there being people on this forum who have lost children, did you? You know there are actually kids being raped in Ukraine right now... I actually know people in Ukraine that...

Oh forget this. I've read your UFO posts and these here are even more laughable. You are utterly incapable of getting it and I am not going to waste any more time on your self-congratulatory woo. Do go on, slapping yourself on the back about how enlightened you are. If it helps you accept what a horrific world we live in, more power to you. It doesn't help me one iota and it doesn't help a whole lot of other people who, unlike any of us here, have had and still have to endure what we can't even begin to imagine. But yes, it's all just "horrific hypotheticals" I'm coming up with.

And whether my posts are full of "vitriol" has nothing to do with this conversation. But good on you, showing how little you're actually capable of having a discussion instead of going "I know what I am [which, btw, you patently don't], but what are you?"

[Aegon]

whatever horrific hypothetical Vera comes up with next).

You did read my original comment about Dennis Mukwege's youngest RAPE victim being 6-month-old, did you? You did read my comment about there being people on this forum who have lost children, did you? You know there are actually kids being raped in Ukraine right now... I actually know people in Ukraine that...

Oh forget this. I've read your UFO posts and these here are even more laughable. You are utterly incapable of getting it and I am not going to waste any more time on your self-congratulatory woo. Do go on, slapping yourself on the back about how enlightened you are. If it helps you accept what a horrific world we live, more power to you. It doesn't help me one iota and it doesn't a whole lot of other people who, unlike any of us here, have had and still have to endure what we can't even begin to imagine. But yes, it's all just "horrific hypotheticals" I'm coming up with.

And whether my posts are full of "vitriol" has nothing to do with this conversation. But good on you, showing how little you're actually capable of having a discussion instead of going "I know what I am [which, btw, you patently don't], but what are you?"

I feel sorry for you and I hope your personal situation improves! Have a great life. Ignored.

[mordant]

 You did read my comment about there being people on this forum who have lost children, did you?

I lost four close family members to illness or misadventure, including a wife and child in separate incidents, and I have to say that I did not find anything Aeon said offensive or impertinent. He's sharing what worked for him, and I don't feel my own suffering is minimized or that I'm obligated to agree with him.

You're right that it can be a fine line of course. Lacking the input of Aeon's body language and tone of voice I'm just not willing to assume some sort of sanctimony or desire to self promote at my expense. He's never posted like that before AFAIK.

At any rate, I've only known one grieving person in my life who was truly "stuck" in their grief, so I conclude that most people eventually get this sorted, one way or the other -- at least well enough to carry on. My experience has been that each loss diminishes me a little, and remains as something known and experienced that I can't un-know or un-experience -- a sort of obscene rip in the fabric of my personal spacetime. But at the same time, after some highly individual period of adjustment averaging perhaps a couple of years, it can't and mustn't dominate my every waking thought and dream, either. That way lies madness -- for me, anyway. And I think that's all Aeon is really trying to say.

I will say that in this regard Frankl has never resonated much with me FWIW but I haven't lost any sleep over his writings, either. He, too, was trying to transcend his personal losses and help others to do so as best he knew how. I take what I can from his thinking, which isn't much in my case ... and I don't worry about the rest.

[Vera]

I lost four close family members to illness or misadventure, including a wife and child in separate incidents, and I have to say that I did not find anything Aeon said offensive or impertinent. He's sharing what worked for him, and I don't feel my own suffering is minimized or that I'm obligated to agree with him.

You're right that it can be a fine line of course. Lacking the input of Aeon's body language and tone of voice I'm just not willing to assume some sort of sanctimony or desire to self promote at my expense.

Obviously not at *your* expense, or anyone else in particular. I didn't even think it was malicious or consciously sanctimonious. I just find this type of generalised pontificating on suffering ultimately self-involved and often dismissive of what others have gone through (the platitudes certainly do not help. Like I said, the Buddhist profundity is on par with "she's with God now" which most people here find distasteful. To me both are equally distasteful, to others both are helpful).

That conversation with the woman in Brazil I mentioned - I am not sure if she actually told her friends they are being taught a lesson by watching their child die (I think she might have), but she did tell *me* that my mother has a serious autoimmune disease because of a choice she made in a previous life.

So yeah, everyone's mileage does vary, but I have a visceral distaste for people pontificating about suffering in general, especially when it involves suffering either teaching us a lesson or it all boiling down to how *we* look at it. To me that's a refusal or an inability to realise that people see and process things differently. Just because that lady in Brazil learnt something from her miscarriage does not give her the right to tell others they should be learning lessons or putting the blame for not coping as well as she has on the other person's attitude or reaction or, worst of all, blaming the person for their own suffering, either through "a choice in a previous life" or through not having the right attitude.

Just because someone has survived something and learnt something from it, doesn't mean the same thing won't break someone else and such talk comes dangerously close to claiming that it is that second person's fault for not having the right attitude.

[Thumpalumpacus]

We're so inured to suffering that we can't imagine our existence without it. That's a failure of imagination though.

Being inured to suffering doesn't lessen the imagination of living without it. Acceptance is not necessarily surrender, the way I live it.