If there were a genre called "Human Suffering" what books would you say make the cut?
Job.
My Twisted World
Job's Twisted World
>>7924828
>this would be at the top of the list.
>>7924828
>Trump: the art of the deal
The guy only started with a small loan of 950 trillion dollars.
>>7925056
He hasn't killed himself, invalidating his own argument.
>>7925191
He's actually arguing that killing yourself is just as pointless as not killing yourself. If you'd read it, you'd realize that.
>>7925204
I have read it, dear. To live is to accept a continued suffering, so why live?
>>7925213
>To live is to accept a continued suffering, so why live?
>To live
>so why live?
>live
Let's add time to this equation. Fast forward to the destiny of the human race and the fate of the universe.
>no one will live
>no one lives
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe
This is the horror he's writing about.
Probably a quarter of Infinite Jest.
>>7925233
The author of this book is implying that suicide is just as meaningless as living, just as meaningless as reproducing to have ancestors to survive witness human extinction ultimately when the universe dies.
>it gets better
Before or after the human race ceases to exist?
>>7925222
A couple of things:
1. The addition of time - while interesting, and which I will come back to - is oblique to the argument I was making about the individual choice which Ligotti (in my interpretation) was advocating. If human existence is so full of suffering, why hasn't he taken his own advice? When confronted with the choices he's laid out, while any 'choice' may be equally pointless in the context of a finite universe, why take the route that involves continued suffering?
2. I disagree with his premise here. Some species die out, others evolve. Same goes for civilisations. We may well obliterate ourselves; equally we might not. I'm erring on the not (for now).
>>7925243
See, you still don't get it. All humans will die. The human race will become extinct. These are facts, not opinions.
What Ligotti is arguing is simply that it's a horror. He's not advocating that everyone commit suicide, because everyone is going to die anyway. He does mention rhetorically that not reproducing is someone favorable since it prevents new people from being born who will have to suffer and die eventually.
>>7925248
>See, you still don't get it.
We could have had a nice debate about interpretations, but never mind.
>>7925254
No one survives, even if they survive not committing suicide. Can't avoid the truth of death when your time is up. And the time runs out for every individual human, well in their lifetime. Time will eventually run out for humans as a species. Time is fundamental.
>>7924828
that dog is so fucking cute i can't handle it i'm gonna die
>>7925233
So it's completely permanent? 100% effective? You're selling me on this.
>>7925233
What if my problem is that I have consciousness, causing me to suffer and have knowledge that I will die someday? Is this a permanent or temporary problem? Is suicide a permanent or temporary solution to this problem? How can it get better if I exist? How can it get better if I don't exist?
Probably the entire Buddhist canon would be required reading as its one of the core aspects of the 4 noble truths.
>>7925395
>Wtf did I just write
A load of old nonsense.
my diary desu senpai
Nowhere, by Ann Sterzinger
Gets a little hammy at some points but fuck, I wish I hadn't read it while I was depressed, it just made things so much worse
“If middle-class Americans do not feel threatened by the slow encroachment of the police state or the Patriot Act, it is because they live comfortably enough and exercise their liberties very lightly, never testing the boundaries. You never know you are in a prison unless you try the door.”
Dear Hunting With Jesus fucked me up for a while.
There's a bit early on covering this woman's mistreatment by the social security administration that's particularly painful.
>>7924828
what is pathos
>>7925649
A clever lie told by savage beasts wearing human faces.
>>7924828
The Idiot. Book made me feel like killing myself after I finished it.
>>7924828
The Illiad, and its the first one i think
>>7924828
these brehs
>>7925667
;_;
Unfortunately it would be enormously plebby, so some pretty bad books.
Self-help, included.
>>7925667
your a pussy fart
>>7924828
Literary fiction.
all fiction desu
>>7925401
wut
>>7925788
>being new
>>7925056
God, antinatalists are so dramatic. For all their scepticism, they sure don't seem to get enough of finding inherent meaning in pain.
>>7925788
> he doesn't know that the abbreviation of "to be honest" auto-corrects into "desu"
You're early, anon. Summer break isn't for another few months.
>>7926118
Weeb. Also moot said it himself that summer traffic doesn't increase that much compared to the whole year. Faggot.
>>7926124
Angry cool guy haha nice, ready for those finals ???
>>7925056
>CRAAAAAAWLING IN MY
SKIIIIIN
what an edgy cuck.
>>7926159
1) you will die
2) your progeny will die
3) most likely your own genetic line will die out even before human extinction
4) the human race will go extinct
Your opinion is nothing compared to these objective truths.
>>7926167
5) your "objective truths" do not bother me
6) it's obvious you've never felt love in your life, so i'm sorry you're trapped in a bottomless pit of misanthropy and edginess
>>7926178
What becomes of love when everybody is dead?
>>7926167
>>7925056
>>7925204
>>7925238
Ligotti is pure reddit cancer. I was the underage atheists to leave
>>7926187
Argumentum ad hominem is ineffective to objective truth so you attack the character of the arguer. What you fail to realize is that no amount of slander can change these facts. We are human puppets. We do not matter that much. This is why you don't understand these truths. We will live and move around like the puppets we are until we take our final shit. Our opinions don't matter. No one will even witness the end of the human race, when that final human takes his or her final stinky breath. You're putting value on human puppets.
>>7926214
>when that final human takes his or her final breath.
I'd like to remove the "stinky" comment. It makes me sound misanthropic.
>>7924828
Your books LOL
>>7926225
Really, you think a little twerp looking fag like that ever thinks about realities like death and the meaninglessness of life? You can't be that naive right? Does he look intelligent enough to come to those conclusions about life at such a stage in his life when his hormones are making him think with his dick rather than his brain?
>>7926240Yes.
>>7926257
>only because you're a kid like him
>>7926119
So fucking what? Why is that bad? If you hate life so much, why aren't you happy it's going to end? Why would you wanna live forever anyway, what do you need all that time for? Why is it so horrible for you that small beings enjoy small pleasures and suffer small pains?
Whoa, it hurts so much when you break a nail and there is no meaning to the pain beside warning me something will fuck me up... BIG FUCKING DEAL!
>>7925243
>If human existence is so full of suffering, why hasn't he taken his own advice? When confronted with the choices he's laid out, while any 'choice' may be equally pointless in the context of a finite universe, why take the route that involves continued suffering?
I don't have an answer on the authors part, I have not read the book but this is a very old question. I don't mean to sound like some trashy 80's movie either but have you factored for hope? Even if all you see is misery there is always that tiny spark that tomorrow will get better. Maybe?
>>7927124
>Why would you wanna live forever anyway, what do you need all that time for?
Not anon you were talking to but, think of all the things you would see both present and future, all the places in the universe you could go. All the people/ entities you would meet and the stories you would hear. The languages you could learn and all the countless lives you could influence to do good not just for the world but for the entire universe.
You could literally experience everything.
Why would you not want to experience everything?
>>7925483
Deer hunting with Jesus? I remember that being about gun rights. I'm going to have to read that again.
>>7924828
Book of Disquiet, at least to people who aren't schizoid.
Man's Search for Meaning
Inferno
Journey to the End of the Night
>>7926167
>4) the human race will go extinct
>Your opinion is nothing compared to these objective truths.
>objective truths
Not anon you were discussing with but:
I don't agree with this being an objective truth, you only account for what we know now, not what the future holds. I don't necessarily disagree with your statement, just your authoritative affirmation of it.
I like this conversation, very interesting to read these opinions.
>>7926187
>Ligotti is pure reddit cancer. I was the underage atheists to leave
>I was the underage atheists to leave
Not sure if you're having a dig at yourself or just mistyped what you meant to say?
>>7926214
Maximum edge, minimum coherence.
>>7927248
You can't experience literally everything while remaining "you". And to begin with you define that "everything" purely through the limited knowledge you already have, in contrast to what you know--you are inferring and predicting; but what makes you so sure what you're experiencing isn't already everything there is? And what makes you think it would be better than what you already have?
In the end those who want to gain pleasure and who want to avoid pain are the same: they inherently, without questioning, adscribe value to particular parts of experience, put them above the rest, separating them from the holistic reality they are dependent of to be, and then can't see how they obviously aren't self-generating.
As for me, gambling's not my thing, so ı'm not fond of getting particularly euphoric or depressed about stakes ı myself have set arbitrarely on things ı can't know by definition (like the future).
>>7927471
>You can't experience literally everything while remaining "you".
Why not?
>And to begin with you define that "everything" purely through the limitced knowledge you already have, in contrast to what you know--you are inferring and predicting;
Of course I am. How else is this thought experiment suppose to work? Aren't you doing the same in the negative?
>but what makes you so sure what you're experiencing isn't already everything there is?
I'm not sure, but I would have forever to find out if this is everything. I will make an educated guess that this is not everything.
>And what makes you think it would be better than what you already have?
Again I don't 't but I'm one of those people that just loves waking up in the morning and enjoys life, so if this is the best there is, I'd be happy to live this for eternity.
>In the end those who want to gain pleasure and who want to avoid pain are the same: they inherently, without questioning, adscribe value to particular parts of experience, put them above the rest, separating them from the holistic reality they are dependent of to be, and then can't see how they obviously aren't self-generating.
Interesting. I don't try to avoid pain, I embrace it. I'm the guy that hooks himself up to Meggars just for the lolz. I enjoy doing the hard slog. I've been to very dark places emotionally which makes me appreciate the happier places my brain has discovered. You sound very pessimistic.
>As for me, gambling's not my thing, so ı'm not fond of getting particularly euphoric or depressed about stakes ı myself have set arbitrarely on things ı can't know by definition (like the future).
I've found as I get older this to be the case. My emotional state has plateaued out a lot. Doesn't mean I still wouldn't appreciate living forever.
>>7927322
Maximum ad hom, minimum argument.
>>7927321
Freudian slip maybe.
>>7926028
watch it.
>>7928433
What about that show though?
>>7924828
There's "Misery Literature" already.
It mostly contains fictionalized accounts of alleged abuse victims.
Christ we had to read a lot of that pap in College.
>>7927790
>Why not?
Because to experience "everything" you would need to be everything, even not "you", or the opposite of "you", even someone/thing that doesn't know it's experience everything.
>Aren't you doing the same in the negative?
Not exactly. I have yet to present assumptions of my own and don't intend to. But that isn't my point, guessing is perfectly fine, my issue is that you are guessing on things you don't know and defining them poorly.
>I would have forever to find out if this is everything.
Well, it simply follows that you would take forever to know everything, and vice-versa; they're co-dependent.
>You sound very pessimistic.
Why? You say it yourself that it's the bad moments which made you appreciate the good. That's just the way things are, there's nothing negative about it--on the contrary, ı find embracing those things people avoid only serves to make the "good" things more true. My death is a relief, because it means ı can't take anything ı do to it's very end, which makes me do as much as ı can, and on my own terms, not out of dependence or desperation. My separation from others is a relief, because due to how unbreakable it is, it makes me and them more real--that ı am an instance that will never repeat itself, that will never know another like itself only makes me more happy to be me, and more happy to find ı have anything to do with others.
What's theirs is theirs, what's mine is mine. Wanting things that ı don't and can't have only creates futile expectations--to covet things that are others' only serves to create resentment, and to come to have them means ı have reduced somebody else, and in the first place means ı'm not happy with what ı am and have (which ı find to be quite a lot already).
>Doesn't mean I still wouldn't appreciate living forever.
What does "forever" mean to you? That's the issue. Not whether it's good or bad that you would enjoy it, or your capability to. Because if it means that things are really the same as now, why want it at all?
>>7928983
>Because to experience "everything" you would need to be everything, even not "you", or the opposite of "you", even someone/thing that doesn't know it's experience everything.
Define "you" and "living"
As I see it, with certain advancements in technology, couldn't it open up these possibilities of living as other entities while still encapsulating the essence/characteristics that defines me? Even being the opposite of "me," almost like a dream experience?
>Not exactly. I have yet to present assumptions of my own and don't intend to.
But you did when you put limitations on what can be experienced. But yes not exactly.
>But that isn't my point, guessing is perfectly fine, my issue is that you are guessing on things you don't know and defining them poorly.
Of course I don't know, I am displaying positives of living forever. This is unfounded territory we are exploring and only exists as a thought. I am banking on the unknown future being favourable.
>Well, it simply follows that you would take forever to know everything, and vice-versa; they're co-dependent.
Exactly, always learning something new. Wouldn't it be wonderful?
>Why? You say it yourself that it's the bad moments which made you appreciate the good.
But even in dark times I had a positive position of what the future held. Even when death seemed all that was avaliable, tomorrow seemed like it was going to be better. That may sound queer (not in the homosexual way), but even at the darkest moments I felt tomorrow (distant future) was somehow going to be exactly what I wanted.
>My death is a relief, because it means ı can't take anything ı do to it's very end, which makes me do as much as ı can, and on my own terms, not out of dependence or desperation.
Are you doing everything you can though? And isn't that because of desperation to accomplish those things in your lifetime?
>My separation from others is a relief, because due to how unbreakable it is, it makes me and them more real--that ı am an instance that will never repeat itself, that will never know another like itself only makes me more happy to be me, and more happy to find ı have anything to do with others.
I like this, the sentence; "I am an instance that will never repeat itself." Profound. I often used to think something similar but this being said with such authority makes me feel uncomfortable simply because; I don't know what the future holds and I can only assume you don't either. Whose to say the universe isn't an infinite loop of the same experience? Only living forever would I discover these truths.
>What does "forever" mean to you?
Without end
>Because if it means that things are really the same as now, why want it at all?
Because life is amazing! Even on just our small planet we have a plethora of experiences.
Granted the majority of the universe is empty lol but, I'm sure there's even beauty in experiencing that.
Great conversation senpai, appreciate your thoughts.
>>7929053
>you
That's complicated. Mostly it's a point of view.
>living
For an animal, breathing, eating, excreting, and so on. For a mind, to thought, perception. Otherwise you could call it existence. The most important thing to define about life is not to exactly define it's boundaries, but whether it's something that is done, or something that is felt: if by living you are graving a rock, or if that rock part is part of your life.
>couldn't it open up these possibilities of living as other entities while still encapsulating the essence/characteristics that defines me?
It would give you a very faithful simile, but it can't be the same because you would be there where you weren't before (you can't remove yourself from the situation).
>But you did when you put limitations on what can be experienced.
Of course, discourse isn't possible without limitations (no understanding is).
>Wouldn't it be wonderful?
Coud be, could be not.
>Are you doing everything you can though?
Yes. What else could ı be, but all that ı can be?
>And isn't that because of desperation to accomplish those things in your lifetime?
Nah, the way ı am, if ı get desperate ı'm incapable of doing anything.
>Whose to say the universe isn't an infinite loop of the same experience?
It's possible, but doesn't make much sense to me that things could repeat in the exact same way.
>Without end
And what is an end?
>Because life is amazing! Even on just our small planet we have a plethora of experiences.
"The wise man looks into space and does not regard the small as too little, nor the great as too big, for he knows that, there is no limit to dimensions."
What ı mean to tell you, is that it's you that is making those things big. And that is through what you think are your limitations.
>Great conversation senpai, appreciate your thoughts.
Likewise, would get late for classes to talk with you again.
>>7925056
Anti-natalists always make me kek.
>>7929454
You didn't get the joke though. The joke is the meaning of life, which is death.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zXDo4dL7SU
>>7929084
>For an animal, breathing, eating, excreting, and so on. For a mind, to thought, perception. Otherwise you could call it existence. The most important thing to define about life is not to exactly define it's boundaries, but whether it's something that is done, or something that is felt: if by living you are graving a rock, or if that rock part is part of your life...
>...but it can't be the same because you would be there where you weren't before (you can't remove yourself from the situation).
when I first imagined this idea, I set my parameters of experience arbitrarily so I wasn't imagining it as anything more than what I personally and what whoever read it, would personally be experiencing now.
Your body would be entirely indestructible. While having an undamageable consciousness.
Since this discussion however I've thought of experience as nothing more than being self-aware, in that you would be just your collection of thoughts/experience, thanks to Technology, using a number of bodies as vehicles to experience existence.
Then I realised I was getting existence, experience and consciousness mixed up and confused myself a little lol, also that I am heavily relying on technology for this to happen.
>Of course, discourse isn't possible without limitations (no understanding is).
I think I'm the latter on this, no understanding:
If boundaries aren't put on what experience actually is, why would boundaries be set on experiencing them?
>Yes. What else could ı be, but all that ı can be?
But are you being all that you can be? And how would you know if you are?
>Nah, the way ı am, if ı get desperate ı'm incapable of doing anything.
But isn't existence itself a kind of desperation? You said yourself; you do as much as you can because of the limits of death. Or did I misinterpret that statement?
>It's possible, but doesn't make much sense to me that things could repeat in the exact same way.
I was thinking of the universe being like a sine wave, or a track on an infinitely-repeating album. It wouldn't necessarily be just the same universe on repeat, but a multitude of different universes that eventually go full-circle back to where we are.
>And what is an end?
I had just imagined it to mean the end of knowledge of one's existence. I hadn't really considered alternatives. Like even if the universe ceased to exist, would forever go on? Or are they bound together? The question I guess, is too big for me to fathom properly right now. I'll have to think more about infinity/eternity/forever and what they all mean to me.
>"The wise man looks into space and does not regard the small as too little, nor the great as too big, for he knows that, there is no limit to dimensions."
That spirit of the ocean is a clever spirit.
I wish I read more as a child/ younger man. I can't wait to start on eastern philosophy, I just read "Neither Great nor Small" as I was typing this. Thank you for that.
I hope your class goes well mate.
Flowers for Algernon its got no physical suffering but there is some serious mental fuckery. Pic vaguely related.
>>7929454
Kek
Ann Franks diary *drops mic
>>7929454
>Anti-natalists always make me realize that life and reproduction is meaningless and that I will have to die and that the human race is ultimately doomed for extinction, so I disassociate by pretending the messenger is funny when the message is an unfunny joke called "life"
>>7926178
>>7931740
>implying refusing to procreate is any more meaningful an act than living
whoops, wrong again, but being wrong is the anti-natalist's calling card
>>7931774
Why eat a cookie?
I'm just going to die later.
>>7931780
Why have a child?
It's going to die later.
>because of you and her
>>7931782
Why be a part of humanity at all?
They're just going to die.What I'm trying to say is anti-natalism is pure hypocrisy practiced by spiritually blind fools
>>7931789
The human race is guilty for causing the aggregate suffering of billions of people, possibly trillions and more in the future if this walking, talking virus that is humanity is not eradicated.
>>7931791
Meaningless value judgments not worth peddling in public; it reads a lot like satire. The sky is blue; I hate blue. Should I seek to eradicate it?
>>7931804
>The sky is blue; I hate blue. Should I seek to eradicate it?
No need, the sky is not conscious nor self-aware that it will eventually not exist. The sky, even if conscious would not feel the pain of death because it lacks a nervous system. The sky will continue to know nothing of its own existence and inevitable destruction and when the sun of this solar system destroys this planet it will feel nothing.
Unlike humans.
>>7928450
It's the worst. Main nihilistic character wastes his whole life weeping like a little bitch until finding peace in the vision of afterlife. What a joke.
>>7931810
"What do I care for your suffering? Pain, even agony, is no more than information before the senses. The lesson is simple: you have received the information, now act on it. Take control of the input and you shall become master of the output."
>>7931825
I care for my suffering because I know it exists and more importantly I feel and will feel it.
>>7931826
You know where the rope is.
Remember, any other act is one of hypocrisy.
>>7931832
No one is arguing to kill the people who are already living, that's why it's "anti-natalism," preventing trillions times trillions+ from being born to experience more aggregate suffering of death.
So you're incorrect for equating anti-natalism as utilitarian. It's not utilitarian. Although, I'm sure someone will think up a philosophy that is more like what you're describing, but this is not anti-natalism, which is simply trying to prevent more people from experiencing death.
>>7931836
>Life is so horribly terribly awful and full of suffering and oh man it's just the worst
>End it prematurely? WHOA, NO WAY MAN, DON'T GET THE WRONG IDEA OR ANYTHING
You can't make this stuff up!
>>7931841
>what is antinatalism
>>7931843
No true antinatalist... !
>>7931836
Cling to these mental gymnastics if you really need but if you're lording over the human condition to the point where you are deciding whether or not humanity should have a right to their own sovereign experience of creation then you are being a utilitarian to the extreme.
>>7931846
True utilitarianism would seek humanicde through mass genocide or nuclear holocaust. Antinatalism is about stopping all reproduction. No one is going to "die" from not reproducing.
>>7925056
>consciousness has forced us into the paradoxical position of striving to be unself-conscious of what we are-hunks of spoiling flesh on disintegrating bones
KEK
>>7931855
>you're lording over the human condition to the point where you are deciding whether or not humanity should have a right to their own sovereign experience of creation then you are being a utilitarian to the extreme.
What you're describing is what groups of people have done to humanity as a whole already since the beginning of time. You're describing one of the many reasons why living is "not all right."
>>7931866
>proof there are bot on 4chan
>>7931867
>What you're describing is what groups of people have done to humanity as a whole already since the beginning of time.
What I am describing is exactly what you are proposing. Don't act like anon didn't see that dodge there. So I guess you're just another group tacitly continuing their collective legacy, eh? Just because you've set it to an intellectual practice doesn't exclude you from still being figurative torchbearers.
>>7931883
>what is "civilization"
>what is government
The people responsible for these things don't want to prevent suffering and death, they are the ones causing it! In fact, they want to depopulate a significant amount of the 7 billion people alive today. This many people won't be needed when the technological singularity is reach, everything will be automated and elitists never liked sharing.
>>7931893
Pointing out other prior examples of this shit happening doesn't somehow give you a pass to trot a slightly different iteration of the exact same bullshit again under your own banner.
Please stop being such a fucking meme.
>>7931912
You're a shill.
>>7931921
I said STOP being a meme.
Not ramp it up to sperglord territory.
>>7931928
Memes are popular. Antinatalism is not popular.
(You) = meme.
>>7931740
Firstly, I'm not so egily nihilistic to fail to appreciate subjective meaning and the beauty therof.
Secondly, unlike you shitters, I genuinely love every minute of living, so I don't automatically presume it to be a curse like you incessant projectors.
>>7931932
>(You) = meme.
Whatever you say. Every human who doesn't believe in anti-natalism is a shill and a meme.
You win. You needed this win and guess what, you won! Everything is good now.
>>7931857
Not reproducing is associated with higher rates of psychological disorders and even cancer, particularly in women.
>>7931944
Why do you even concern yourself with it then?
Do you hate life so much? Its horrid projection to formulate ideology strictly on that basis.
>>7931955
The only shame is that your parents were not anti-natalists.
Your meming is laughable, at least, but a blight nonetheless.
>>7925273
I'm still waiting on an answer to these questions.
>What if my problem is that I have consciousness, causing me to suffer and have knowledge that I will die someday? Is this a permanent or temporary problem? Is suicide a permanent or temporary solution to this problem? How can it get better if I exist? How can it get better if I don't exist?
>>7931955
No, it has nothing to do with that. Biological systems are hard-wired to reproduce, as successful proliferation is the foundation of their perpetuation. Failure to do so is at odds with the neurochemistry, and is often disruptive to it and many related regulatory pathways. Thus, heightened rates of and susceptibility to psychological and physiological dysfunction.
>>7931966
Your entire argument is a projection of your own feelings onto everyone based on elementary truths which you, rather sophomorically, make out to be profound, so what do you expect exactly?
>>7931992
>fast forward time long enough
>we're all dead
>including all our descendants
>>7931992
>No, it has nothing to do with that. Biological systems are hard-wired to reproduce, as successful proliferation is the foundation of their perpetuation. Failure to do so is at odds with the neurochemistry, and is often disruptive to it and many related regulatory pathways. Thus, heightened rates of and susceptibility to psychological and physiological dysfunction.
Where does homosexuality fit into this bullshit theory?
>it doesn't fit
>>7931997
I see taking this seriously was a mis-assessment.
Good luck in your endeavors, and may you find something worth living for.
>>7932003
No one ever finds anything to live for. They only think they do. Because they all die.
>>7932002
A large number of homosexuals desire to adopt, homosexuality is also aberrant to begin with.
>the more you know
>>7932006
Dying is aberrant to life.
>>7932010
Aberration is normality to absurdity.
>>7932014
We're all going to die.
>>7925233
Why does this knee jerk retort still exist when for every other imaginable problem, a permanent solution is exactly what everybody wants?
>>7932025
Except for me.
>>7932140
>proof there are bots on 4chan
>>7930642
>Then I realised I was getting existence, experience and consciousness mixed up and confused myself a little lol, also that I am heavily relying on technology for this to happen.
I suppose that has to do with our circumstances, since in our culture mind=being (which leads to a host of implications).
>why would boundaries be set on experiencing them?
Boundaries are put on experience; you could experience being a dog, but a rock is a different thing, at least the way ı think we're seeing it.
>And how would you know if you are?
What proof do ı have that ı'm not? Even if there was a Doppeldänger of me who lived all my dreams, he still would not be me--whoever it is ı imagine doing my shoulds or should'ves is not the me that is, like the map of a city isn't over the city because it has fixed the streets neatly (and that would be a bad map).
Moreover, with what authority am ı judging myself? If ı think ı it's wrong for me to die, do ı think the same of other people? Of animals? Of plants? Of my food? Do ı think it wrong that stones are grinded and trees felled to make houses? That we are converting oxygen into carbonmonoxyde with every breath, or our tasty meals into piss and poop? Do ı judge the plants too for nurturing themselves on those wastes? People find failure and death, surrender and shame to be so horrible, but in reality they're completely dependent on those things they hate--the never get tired of rejoicing when something goes along their expectations though, like they themselves weren't the one setting them.
>You said yourself; you do as much as you can because of the limits of death.
I do thinks because they would not be done otherwise--this is not to say ı'm obligated to do them, on the contrary, if ı wanted they would not exist. The actions are throughly mine, insited perhaps, but not actively motivated by imagined pasts or futures; there's nothing to be gained other than the actions themselves, the resuts are a bonus; whatever is mine is mine as ı make it mine, and it doesn't belong to me if not (actively) had, so whatever is lost to me isn't mine; ı owe nothing to anybody nor do they own anything to me--if it is different in words, that is only in words, which are only formal. With no expectations, ı don't care to see things completed, which is impossible in life, and only pursued in want of a world different than this, in hope that it would be a heaven, somehow, if ı *only* had that small thing.
>>7930642
>a multitude of different universes that eventually go full-circle back to where we are.
But is the first circle the same as the second circle? Can they be called first and second if they were, and if they can't have they really moved at all?
>I'll have to think more about infinity/eternity/forever and what they all mean to me.
Don't forget you'll need forever to get forever.
>I wish I read more as a child/ younger man.
So do ı sometimes.
>I can't wait to start on eastern philosophy
Read the Tao Te Ching if you feel, it's short enough. Also what little remains of this lesser known pre-Taoist thinker (Yang Zhu) which has been memed around /lit/ ı've found pretty illuminating, you can find it here:
http://sacred-texts.com/tao/ycgp/index.htm
>I hope your class goes well mate.
Thank you, it did. And ı found it funny how after years Ferdinand de Saussure's thoughts on language still seem parallels to "Eastern philosophy"; a girl in the class even quoted Zhuangzi, when we were discussing words and meaning.
>>7931979
It can't get better regardless. You do exist, therefore you do suffer. But the problem is only temporary because soon (in relative terms) you will not exist and therefore there will be no you to suffer.
>>7933403
Had I'd been given the choice of not being conceived and not being born I would not choose existing simply because of death. Not even the highest quality of life is worth having to die. Anyone who disagrees with this sentiment I believe is lying in the worst way.
>>7933426
wew lad
