I'm not suicidal, but what if I told you, that I don't want to live in a world...
That's all nice and well, but none of this negates the truth of suffering, and if someone finds that truth to be too much to bear, then it is immoral to try to convince them otherwise. But, again, as I said, I'm not actually suicidal. I was using this to make a point.
-
-
"If someone finds that truth to be too much to bear" is not the finding-so in itself an act of free choice? "Nothing is good or bad, only thinking makes it so..." Therefore, it cannot be immoral to discuss the possibility of re-orienting one's attitude and accepting the /1
-
suffering as the worthwhile cost of being, for being and experiencing is a good in itself. I suppose I take a leap of faith in believing so. /2
-
Aristotle is an influence here in this leap. Existence is a good in itself, perhaps because every being is a potential for further good and flourishing according to the creator's design. /3
-
I think suffering is important, but existence is more important. Existence is suffering + non-suffering.
-
Existence is fundamental, the necessary "stage" upon which "good" and "bad" are able to emerge, without which they will not. There is no good or bad without existence, and so to eliminate existence is not to correct the imbalance of badness/suffering to goodness, but to /1
-
Someone who is looking to end their suffering is not looking to get anything "good" as a replacement. They are looking to end the suffering. It really doesn't matter what the philosophical implications of that are.
-
(Most?) Suffering can be borne. We all want to end our suffering, but choose to bear it, when we have the strength and find a philosophical or spiritual reason to.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.