My new (old) faith: the Collective Enlightenment.

[an anarchist]

For a start you are an 'anarchist' and so you are unlikely to want to accept the rules and laws that communities need to make and follow.

That’s not anarchism. But let’s not explore this tangent.

 

[Balthazzar]

Suffering can inspire us to figure out how to get rid of it.

It can do many things. It helps guide us subjectively and in accordance with objective reality. To lessen it is preferential, knowing that it will still be part of our experiential knowing. The severity to which we cater to the suffering, in contrast to its opposite may or may not determine the effectiveness of our endurance ability to overcome adversity. We are often enough bound by our environments, having less choice to decide for ourselves an effective way able to strengthen us, according to our perceived capability as individuals.

 

[Kathryn]

??? How does this change what you said? Do you suppose I’ll change my mind or be less optimistic when I am older for some unstated reason? You give no reason why this would be the case and I see no point in your edit. You ignored my response as well.

LOL I didn't ignore you or your response. And if you don't see the point, alrighty then.

 

[Kathryn]

My mother didn't ask to be mentally ill, or cause her mental illness, and I didn't ask for her as a mother, for starters. As far back as we can trace, there are mental health issues in her family and in fact, the average risk of serious mental health issues is 2 percent of the population and my risk factor, based on DNA only, is 11 percent (though I dodged that bullet, my brother apparently didn't).

 

[ppp]

It can do many things. It helps guide us subjectively and in accordance with objective reality. To lessen it is preferential, knowing that it will still be part of our experiential knowing. The severity to which we cater to the suffering, in contrast to its opposite may or may not determine the effectiveness of our endurance ability to overcome adversity. We are often enough bound by our environments, having less choice to decide for ourselves an effective way able to strengthen us, according to our perceived capability as individuals.

The tools for overcoming adversity are learned by the individual as a reaction to the situation. But those tools are available without the adversity. My parents did not make me learn how to heat the oven with wood or draw water from the well just because that was an adversity they had to over come. The goal is not to fetishize the adversity, but to pass on the tools that we have inherited and learned our selves to reduce suffering.

 

[ppp]

Post #32 and I won't repeat the question.

You get your answers and suddenly silence.

 

[Kathryn]

You get your answers and suddenly silence.

Sorry, real life and all that good stuff.

 

[Balthazzar]

The tools for overcoming adversity are learned by the individual as a reaction to the situation. But those tools are available without the adversity. My parents did not make me learn how to heat the oven with wood or draw water from the well just because that was an adversity they had to over come. The goal is not to fetishize the adversity, but to pass on the tools that we have inherited and learned our selves to reduce suffering.

I won't argue the point, aside from those who choose endurance training for themselves as a way to increase capability. Mountain climbers, long distance runners, bicyclists, weightlifters, etc. the list goes on and on. Survival of the fittest applied in our everyday activities as people who develop chosen skills in accordance with the principle of possible need. We do this in our academia, also. The difference is the principle is applied to intellect rather than physical conditioning.

Which would be of greater use?

Mental, physical, or both being balanced in effort?

Between our numbers, interests, and effort, I'll suggest it's mostly covered as a collective.

 

[ppp]

Sorry, real life and all that good stuff.

Just surprised. As I said before...

It's okay @Kathryn . You can move on.

 

[an anarchist]

LOL I didn't ignore you or your response. And if you don't see the point, alrighty then.

Well, can you elaborate on what your point was? I just reread our conversation and still don’t see a point. And yes, you don’t address my response.

Well I ain’t gonna be able to get rid of suffering in my lifetime, so I’ll tell you right now I am sure I will live in a world full of suffering for the rest of my life.

You’re a Christian, right? We believe the same thing, sort of. Heaven on Earth is possible. Though, Christianity teaches that it is inevitable, I believe that it is merely a possibility.

 

[Kathryn]

Well, can you elaborate on what your point was? I just reread our conversation and still don’t see a point. And yes, you don’t address my response.

OK your response had something to do with many of our beliefs being similar, which may or may not be true. Your response also alluded to the belief that heaven can be on this earth, and it might be but I don't worry one way or the other about all that.

Also, my point was that as we get older, we tend to suffer more.

 

[ppp]

I won't argue the point, aside from those who choose endurance training for themselves as a way to increase capability. Mountain climbers, long distance runners, bicyclists, weightlifters, etc. the list goes on and on. Survival of the fittest applied in our everyday activities as people who develop chosen skills in accordance with the principle of possible need. We do this in our academia, also. The difference is the principle is applied to intellect rather than physical conditioning.

Which would be of greater use?

Mental, physical, or both being balanced in effort?

Between our numbers, interests, and effort, I'll suggest it's mostly covered as a collective.

Maybe I misunderstand you, but I think you are conflating adversity in the sense of suffering with adversity in the sense of difficulty.

 

[Balthazzar]

Maybe I misunderstand you, but I think you are conflating adversity in the sense of suffering with adversity in the sense of difficulty.

Yes, these coincide as an experiential reality, but the severity to which we suffer is broad and imposed upon us in many different ways, which is why many people choose to train themselves to become better able to endure that which might be imposed upon us in the future. Beyond this, is perseverance and overcoming personal limitations we've been subjected to.

 

[Kathryn]

Just surprised. As I said before...

Sorry, never saw where you answered my question but I may have missed something.

 

[ppp]

Yes, [adversity in the sense of suffering with adversity in the sense of difficulty] coincide as an experiential reality,

They really don't. There are many things that I find difficult to do, that I thoroughly enjoy. That is not suffering.

but the severity to which we suffer is broad and imposed upon us in many different ways, which is why many people choose to train themselves to become better able to endure that which might be imposed upon us.

That is true. Both difficulty and suffering can happen at the same time. But not necessarily. I can experience difficulty without suffering. But can one experience suffering type of adversity without experiencing the difficulty type of adversity? Hmmm. I should think so. Have to think about that one.

 

[Kathryn]

How do you explain suffering caused clearly through no fault of the person who is suffering?

 

[ppp]

Sorry, never saw where you answered my question but I may have missed something.

The only question you asked if I agreed with your representation that "Suffering CAN BE for the best, not IS for the best. It CAN make a person stronger and better, not it DOES make a person stronger or better. See the difference?" I addressed that specific claim prior to your statement in Post #32, and I again specifically addressed why your statement was wrong subsequently in post #48.

Never "saw" it, huh?

 

[Kathryn]

The only question you asked if I agreed with your representation that "Suffering CAN BE for the best, not IS for the best. It CAN make a person stronger and better, not it DOES make a person stronger or better. See the difference?" I addressed that specific claim prior to your statement in Post #32, and I again specifically addressed why your statement was wrong subsequently in post #48.

Never "saw" it, huh?

Nope.

 

[ppp]

Nope.

You might try removing all those planks from your eyes. Good luck.

 

[Kathryn]

You might try removing all those planks from your eyes. Good luck.

Thanks. Never saw your answer, though I did see that you kept trying to make me say something that I was not saying.