People believe that whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger, which they got from Nietzche. That's false. Whatever doesn't kill you makes you weaker, according to Psychology Today. For example, dogs who have been abused, stray dogs, feral dogs, are useless. To work as a K-9 for the police, it's better to have been raised in a healthy, loving, safe environment, like the burbs. Suffering is totally pointless. That's why hedonism is about having more pleasure than pain during the day. It's giving life a purpose, which is to enjoy it.
I'm in complete agreement. People do what works. If it weren't working they wouldn't do it. So if people are walking around frustrated about whatever, it's because it works on some level. I also think people choose to be offended. I think the ego wants to turn you into a victim for any number of reasons, such as a balm for failure, the cult of the lovable underdog, etc.
For the opposite viewpoint, take a look at Nicholas Nassim Taleb's "Antifragile". I don't think Psych Today has the corner on that.
I checked it out. The material was difficult but I think I'll check it out again. I got the part where he said muscles become stronger after having been subjected to pain of weights.
Could be the posts sucked so your not missing out on much... A lot of older threads are coming up missing their posts. Part of the conversion to the new software
I've been wondering how this thread applies to my negative daydreams. I know that on the one hand, I can distract myself from them through pleasure. That makes me happy. Sure beats boring ass Buddhism. But what I was really wondering is, if suffering is impossible (a plausible idea), then why do I have these types of thoughts? Who would choose to have a negative daydream? Maybe bad attention is better than no attention, maybe it's craving stimulation and excitement over the quiet life, maybe it's to feel like a victim and a lovable underdog? What do you think?
I guess the difference between this type of thinking and Buddhism is that Buddhists don't label anything good or bad, while hedonism relish in all emotions.
Suffering isn't hedonistic. The goal of hedonism is maximum pleasure/minimum pain, not reinterpreting any and all forms of pain as pleasure.
It might hurt on one level but be pleasure on a different level. Sex comes to mind, or professional fighting/sports. Think emotional pain too, the deliciousness of real agony, it presents with a truth and deepness which is itself attractive and life-affirming. It feels so good to feel so bad - Ram Dass
You do have a point. I think some people enjoy being angry and miserable. They crave the intensity and excitement that comes with a harsh worldview. Tell someone some perceived reality isn't as bad as it seems, and watch them angrily insist that it is.
I've been pondering for quite some time now... the way I live, it's as if I choose to suffer sometimes. I'm not sure why. Perhaps because of the past I've had with my family. Being involved in situations I should haven't been involved in, having no choice but to suffer at certain times... I'm not sure if it's considered Hedonistic or some form of Taoism. I'm also not sure if it's necessarily a choice I make or if my mind is just broken (in a sense).
Epicurus was primarily concerned with the avoidance of pain, not the pursuit of pleasure. So no, suffering is not hedonistic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7R6BYr0nMP8