Life as an Addiction

[Moreno]

It's still traumatic for me. I'm still under the influence of the addiction.

WEll, you could focus on your addiction to breathing air first and a side effect of ending that addiction - if we really want to call such things addicitons - is you will solve your 'addiction' to life. To end an addiction to life is so vague and all encompassing. Breathing (or eating for a slower detox) are concrete processes, easy to monitor and define, and you can easily evaluate how you are doing in relation to these addictions.

Now what I wrote could sound sarcastic, and yes, I did mean this to be on the ironic side. But I also mean this seriously. If you want to eat and breath you want to live, at least some rather large part of you does. Unless all 'addictions' at this level are gone, you probably like life and want it. One can add a layer of ideas in the mind to cover up this desire for life, but I am pretty sure this is adding a layer, not really addressing the 'addiction'. Underneath there is the same love of life, but judged as bad and/or sick - since addiction is considered an illness.

It might be you who loves life. Not a person who loves life because of an bad positive feedback loop with something. You may be wishing not to be yourself, but in a kind of spiritual/medical model.

I'm trying to slowly step away from life. What I'm doing at the moment seems like the most peaceful transition. Ideally, I'd want to be able to find bliss in life, for that is the state where the bridge between life and death is the shortest.

I am not sure what you mean by bliss. Have you experienced bliss? What made you think that experience was like death? From what I can see in other posts it seems like you are equivocating on words to convince yourself it is deathlike.

[Pandora]

What relevance is awareness, if one is indifferent to all stimuli?

I'm afraid this question may be best answered by a Buddhist.

(I, for one, would not want to remain in a state indifferent to stimuli).

[Joe Schmoe]

Well, you could focus on your addiction to breathing air first and a side effect of ending that addiction - if we really want to call such things addicitons - is you will solve your 'addiction' to life.

Two points.

1)I'm not saying breathing, sleeping and eating are addictions. I'm saying they're results of our addiction.

2)You're telling me how to end the addiction quickly. I know how to do this. I want to end my addiction peacefully without trauma or doubt.

To end an addiction to life is so vague and all encompassing. Breathing (or eating for a slower detox) are concrete processes, easy to monitor and define, and you can easily evaluate how you are doing in relation to these addictions.

Again, you've misunderstood me. We are addicted to drive/desire/pleasure. Not the behaviour that enables it's realization.

Wiki - "Drive is an “excitatory state produced by a homeostatic disturbance”"

Wiki - "The pleasure principle is the psychoanalytic concept describing people seeking pleasure and avoiding suffering (pain) in order to satisfy their biological and psychological needs. Specifically, pleasure principle is a driven force of id. Furthermore, the counterpart concept, the reality principle, describes people choosing to defer gratification of a desire when circumstantial reality disallows its immediate gratification. In infancy and early childhood, the id rules behavior by obeying only the pleasure principle. People in that age would only seek for immediate gratification in order to reduce their urges such as hunger, thirst or even sex. Maturity is learning to endure the pain of deferred gratification, when reality requires it; thus, the Psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud proposes that “an ego thus educated has become ‘reasonable’; it no longer lets itself be governed by the pleasure principle, but obeys the reality principle, which also, at bottom, seeks to obtain pleasure, but pleasure which is assured through taking account of reality, even though it is pleasure postponed and diminished”.

Wiki - "Desire is a sense of longing for a person or object or hoping for an outcome. Desire is the fire that sets action aflame. The same sense is expressed by emotions such as "craving" or "hankering". When a person desires something or someone, their sense of longing is excited by the enjoyment or the thought of the item or person, and they want to take actions to obtain their goal. The motivational aspect of desire has long been noted by philosophers; Hobbes (1588–1679) asserted that human desire is the fundamental motivation of all human action."

They all lead to the same place.

If you want to eat and breath you want to live, at least some rather large part of you does. Unless all 'addictions' at this level are gone, you probably like life and want it. One can add a layer of ideas in the mind to cover up this desire for life, but I am pretty sure this is adding a layer, not really addressing the 'addiction'. Underneath there is the same love of life, but judged as bad and/or sick - since addiction is considered an illness.

Want is part of the addiction. To say part of me wants life, is to say part of me is addicted to life. I freely admit this.

What do I desire (want) in Life? Bliss.

It might be you who loves life. Not a person who loves life because of an bad positive feedback loop with something. You may be wishing not to be yourself, but in a kind of spiritual/medical model.

What am I, other than my addiction?

I am not sure what you mean by bliss. Have you experienced bliss? What made you think that experience was like death? From what I can see in other posts it seems like you are equivocating on words to convince yourself it is deathlike.

Bliss is the death (absence) of struggle. Death is the absence of life (and all it entails). I compare them because both entail the loss of struggle, which I want.

Have I experienced bliss? Perhaps in tiny amounts, when I temporarily lost awareness of my struggle.

Bliss is similar to death.

[Joe Schmoe]

(I, for one, would not want to remain in a state indifferent to stimuli).

If you were indifferent, you would not want anything. Including to escape it. You would not want.

What do you want?

[Arcturus Descending]

Joe Schmoe

Wiki - "Bliss can be a state of profound satisfaction, happiness and joy, a constant state of mind, undisturbed by gain or loss."

If one is in bliss, why would one do anything?

I love peanut butter cups but if that was all I consumed, I would soon hate them, become sick by them.
Also, because there is much more to life than simply wanting to be in a state of bliss. I think that person might have a mental disorder.

You say bliss can include struggle. I say if one struggles, they couldn't possibly be in a state of bliss, for struggle is a product of being unsatisfied.

Wiki - "Drive theory is based on the principle that organisms are born with certain psychological needs and that a negative state of tension is created when these needs are not satisfied. When a need is satisfied, drive is reduced and the organism returns to a state of homeostasis and relaxation."

Yes, and I do intuit that we can come to bliss - let me say DESPITE THE STRUGGLE - ALSO, for you. If one is doing what resonates within them, that they love, whether it is writing a philosophical thread or a treatise, trying to work out 'quantum theory' in one's mind , if it's something which gives meaning to their life, it can move into bliss.
See, you see struggle as being unsatisfied. What does 'unsatisfied' mean. One definition might be that it includes not having completion about something which we're working with. Drive theory, which I go along with, does not necessarily negate the movement into bliss because of struggle. But I suppose it would depend on the individual.

I'm not arguing that bliss/satisfaction can't be found in life. I believe you are satisfied when write, but consider if you couldn't overcome the struggle to articulate your thoughts, would you still be in bliss

?
Would it make sense at all to write if I couldn't? I'm not good at math so I couldn't see myself falling into bliss trying to figure out calculus.

When you write, I'm sure you continually satisfy your drive to articulate yours thoughts. The reason you're in bliss, is because you are satisfied.

That is true in part. But because I love to create with words, to mold them, manipulate them, bring something into existence, I would still feel a certain degree of bliss within the strugge perhaps because I realize that what I set out to do eventually will take hold. Perhaps a sense of who we are and trusting in possibilities leads to bliss before the achievement.

This satisfaction is only temporary. If one was constantly satisfied in life, they would die. I have explained this earlier in the thread.

Well, I tend to agree with this, Joe Schmoe. I do not think that I would want to have total satisfaction always. Everything being relative, if we were always satisfied, eventually it would lose its meaning, no?

I argue that our lives are struggle, and to overcome it, is to lose one's life. I say it is moral to lose one's life, because our only drive is the lack of suffering and struggle.

You sound like an ascetic almost - like John of God. Sure, our lives are ALSO about struggle BUT wouldn't you at times like to overcome and to transcend that struggle? That is also part of our lives. We do not lose our lives, our identity or self (whichever word you choose) by allowing ourselves to flow into happiness and contentment sometimes. You use the word 'moral' so I will too. I say that it is immoral and harmful to the organism to allow ourselves to become masochistic in our struggle. Struggle for the sheer sake of it is masochistic. . I do agree with you that to lose one’s ‘false’ ego is moral (your word).
If ‘our’ only drive was the lack of suffering and struggle, we would be very remiss in our spiritual growth and becoming. But that doesn't mean that we have to abuse our Selves. Some of us are this way and some of us are not. Again, much depends on the individual.

Arcturus Descending"A state void of struggle may be simple detachment.

Detachment from struggle. Which is acting in accordance with our drives. To seek struggle, is to ignore our drives and is an act of addiction.

It isn't a question of 'seeking' struggle so much as it is 'allowing' it in order to grow. To deliberately seek it may be masochism unless it's in order to evolve. Wasn't struggle part of our evolution which created our drives?

"Arcturus Descending"]Why do you associate bliss with death? If anything, it's an affirmation of Life. Do you find happiness to be a negative thing?

Bliss is a type of death. Bliss is the absence of struggle. Death is the absence of life. Life is struggle, therefore, death is the absence of struggle. Bliss/Death = No struggle.

Being that all things are relative, let's say that a man or woman with cancer is in remission. Before, there was great struggle as a result of the chemo and radiation. But now, simply being able to wake up each morning and being able to appreciate a cup of coffee and to take a walk outside in nature - that may not seem like bliss or heaven or being there, to another, but to that person it is pure bliss, where to us it may just be a quiet moment of contentment. You tell that man or woman that he is experiencing death and see what he/she tells you, Joe Schmoe.

If you'd read anything I've said, you'd see that bliss is a step away from life.

But that is just or perception of it. We all see with different eyes. And you are free to see things as you want. But the more we see what the other guy and the other guy sees, the clearer the picture we get. You said you want to know who you are. How can you do that when you only want to see what you want to see?

Happiness is just a product of being satisfied. I'm not anti-satisfaction, I'm anti-struggle.

Well, for some reason, I am getting the complete opposite view of you.

"Arcturus Descending"A state void of struggle may, simply put, also encompass a life which has no more will to survive, has given up.

Wiki - "In Schopenhauer's philosophy, denial of the will is attained by either:

• personal experience of an extremely great suffering that leads to loss of the will to live; or
• knowledge of the essential nature of life in the world through observation of the suffering of other people."

"Necessity is the mother of all invention". 'Giving up' is synonymous with failure or weakness. I'm gonna say on both accounts, that is a misrepresentation. I'd much rather say, letting go, as opposed to giving up.

Letting go - giving up. I prefer the word 'surrendering" to reality and of course realizing that we cannot ever see all of it such as it is.
I'm sort of an amor fati kind of woman myself.

[Typist]

Ideally, I'd want to be able to find bliss in life, for that is the state where the bridge between life and death is the shortest.

Hmm... If it's bliss you want, forget about life and death and the big picture stuff etc, and focus on the bliss in a straightforward common sense manner.

Not like a grand philosopher, like a car mechanic. Be simple, serious, practical. Pop the hood, identify struggle, remove it. You won't get paid unless you actually fix the car, so stop fooling around, and fix it.

Once you know what the struggle is made of, just remove that substance from the engine, and you're done.

[James S Saint]

The most direct path to bliss - never reach for what you cannot grasp.
..the more deep question is how you hold onto it.

[Moreno]

The most direct path to bliss - never reach for what you cannot grasp.
..the more deep question is how you hold onto it.

I think the rule raises a lot of epistemological issues. And psychological ones. I mean reaching for what (it turns out) one cannot grasp is a good method for triangulating what one can grasp. I mean, I have been truly shocked sometimes at what I grasped that I had long never bothered to reach for given what turns out was pessimism.

[Arcturus Descending]

The most direct path to bliss - never reach for what you cannot grasp.
..the more deep question is how you hold onto it.

That was beautiful, James...gave me the shivers.

[Joe Schmoe]

There is much more to life than simply wanting to be in a state of bliss.

What else do you see? I'm curious.

Yes, and I do intuit that we can come to bliss - let me say DESPITE THE STRUGGLE - ALSO, for you. If one is doing what resonates within them, that they love, whether it is writing a philosophical thread or a treatise, trying to work out 'quantum theory' in one's mind , if it's something which gives meaning to their life, it can move into bliss.

Love is but one more pleasure, one more drive. If you want to share, but you don't, tension exists. So, if you struggle for something, it's because you anticipate satisfaction afterwards. Your goal is satisfaction.

Wiki [Reality Principle] - "Maturity is learning to endure the pain of deferred gratification, when reality requires it; thus, the psychoanalytic psychologist Sigmund Freud proposes that “an ego thus educated has become ‘reasonable’; it no longer lets itself be governed by the pleasure principle, but obeys the reality principle, which also, at bottom, seeks to obtain pleasure, but pleasure which is assured through taking account of reality, even though it is pleasure postponed and diminished”. "

Drive theory, which I go along with, does not necessarily negate the movement into bliss because of struggle.

Drive theory suggests to me that we want to remove struggle and find relaxation. To struggle, to me, is far removed from relaxation.

Commonly said "Don't struggle, just relax. It'll be over soon".

Perhaps a sense of who we are and trusting in possibilities leads to bliss before the achievement.

Yeah, I can see this. It'd depend on the individual, though.

I do not think that I would want to have total satisfaction always. Everything being relative, if we were always satisfied, eventually it would lose its meaning, no?

Are you saying constantly being satisfied would stop being satisfying? That doesn't make sense.

I can't see how you could want anything other than satisfaction. I believe this to be the objective of want.

If ‘our’ only drive was the lack of suffering and struggle, we would be very remiss in our spiritual growth and becoming. But that doesn't mean that we have to abuse our Selves. Some of us are this way and some of us are not. Again, much depends on the individual.

Spiritual growth? Elaborate, please.

It isn't a question of 'seeking' struggle so much as it is 'allowing' it in order to grow. To deliberately seek it may be masochism unless it's in order to evolve.

Grow into what? Something that's better at surviving?

Wasn't struggle part of our evolution which created our drives?

Yes, pressure came first. Organisms that overcame the pressure, survived. Therefore, all living organisms, fight the pressure.

Here in lies the issue. We, homo-sapiens, have became aware of many aspects of existence. The pressure we feel, those of use born in the 'Western' world, is mainly a product of our awareness, rather than biological needs.

Our drives, that were so crucial to dragging ourselves out the mud, are applied to our mind. To our thoughts and awareness. And what are our drives? To find equilibrium, satisfaction, bliss, calm. So, we try to find peace with all we are aware of.

We became aware of our death. To find calmness with our awareness of death, one must embrace it and pull it closer. However, as one does, life loses it's value. Since one is alive, this causes pressure in itself. We are stuck in a rut.

What is the most comfortable position? Sitting on the fence. Finding the closest point between the two pressures, and relaxing. What happens when one does this? I don't know. I haven't experienced that luxury. I'm still finding my balance.

Being that all things are relative, let's say that a man or woman with cancer is in remission. Before, there was great struggle as a result of the chemo and radiation. But now, simply being able to wake up each morning and being able to appreciate a cup of coffee and to take a walk outside in nature - that may not seem like bliss or heaven or being there, to another, but to that person it is pure bliss, where to us it may just be a quiet moment of contentment. You tell that man or woman that he is experiencing death and see what he/she tells you, Joe Schmoe.

There's a saying that goes, "The sweet is never as sweet without the sour". When someone suffers, as a cancer patient would, all the little pleasures would become far more potent. That little pleasure * 10 = Bliss. Ah, but it is only temporary...

Again, I'm not saying they're experiencing total death. Just the death of struggle and pain.

But that is just or perception of it. We all see with different eyes. And you are free to see things as you want. But the more we see what the other guy and the other guy sees, the clearer the picture we get. You said you want to know who you are. How can you do that when you only want to see what you want to see?

I don't think what you've expressed goes against my position. You say there's something more to life than bliss, I would agree. There's lack there of. Everything you've spoke about, in regards to why one does what one does, I can easily attribute to same intent.

I think we're looking at the same picture, and you're describing it differently.

[Joe Schmoe]

Hmm... If it's bliss you want, forget about life and death and the big picture stuff etc,

If our identity is but our awareness, to forget is to lose part of one's self. Which part of one's self should one lose? You say the awareness of the big picture. I wonder whether one should just forget all.

How does one forget? Is forgetting another type of death? The death of memories. The death of past awareness.

and focus on the bliss in a straightforward common sense manner.

Ok.

Not like a grand philosopher, like a car mechanic. Be simple, serious, practical. Pop the hood, identify struggle, remove it. You won't get paid unless you actually fix the car, so stop fooling around, and fix it.

Life and death are like a seesaw. Choose an end, and watch the other loom above. Why should one bother? Pick death, lose awareness of the choice and all reason for said choice. Choose life, and what do you have? More questions, more battles, more bullshit that you don't believe in.

What's there to be fixed? The seesaw is in working order. I'm not well suited for riding on one. I should alter myself, so I like it seesaws, right?

I'm the problem, not the seesaw.

Once you know what the struggle is made of, just remove that substance from the engine, and you're done.

We don't have the tools to remove the struggle from me.

Now what? Build the technology.

Do I have the motivation to become well adapted to what I'm not well adapted to? If I do, then I am well adapted, and therefore, need not change? If I don't, then I wont, and with that, my death and with that, my place amongst all others that weren't suited. All is well?

What if someone else is well adapted, and they alter me? Am I then well adapted?

Hmm...

[Joe Schmoe]

The most direct path to bliss - never reach for what you cannot grasp.
..the more deep question is how you hold onto it.

So, one grasps, to attain bliss.

One should then grasp for bliss itself.

In a state of bliss, one loses the will to hold on to anything.

It's then inevitable that bliss is temporary. Bliss doesn't fight the absence of bliss.

If bliss is temporary, then there will always be struggle.

Death does not fight life. Life will re-emerge.

[Typist]

Hi Joe, been enjoying your posts.

We don't have the tools to remove the struggle from me.

We can remove what the struggle and me are both made of, thought. Well, we can remove it for awhile, until it's needed again. I don't know of a permanent fix, and would include death in that, as we don't know what death is.

Do I have the motivation to become well adapted to what I'm not well adapted to? If I do, then I am well adapted, and therefore, need not change? If I don't, then I wont, and with that, my death and with that, my place amongst all others that weren't suited. All is well? What if someone else is well adapted, and they alter me? Am I then well adapted? Hmm...

So we face a choice of thinking about bliss, or experiencing bliss. I'm using "bliss" here the way I understand you to be using it "absence of struggle". Correct?

Struggle is thought. "Me" is thought.

Turn off thought, "me" is gone, struggle is gone.

Or more realistically most of the time, reduce thought rate, and struggle and me are quieter.

If this is of interest, the challenge people like you and me face is that we want it to be complicated. If it's not complicated, WTF will I write about???

[Typist]

One should then grasp for bliss itself.

If that's what one wants. What one should probably do is be clear about one wants.

In a state of bliss, one loses the will to hold on to anything.

The desire to hold on....

It's then inevitable that bliss is temporary. Bliss doesn't fight the absence of bliss.

Indeed! You are wise! Seriously.

[WW_III_ANGRY]

There is no peace in death, there likely is nothing. Peace is positive, a state of death, or rather, non existence, is likely not positive or negative, but nothing.

In any case, addiction's aren't really addiction's when they're beneficial. The only point in life being an addiction in which living further, would only cause pain and suffering to oneself. The tricky part however, is knowing life will only be pain and suffering and thus not worth living (elimination of all hope). But this is still not very fair... We could easily say, there is always hope, for the future is always unknown, and so is the true state of all of existence. With that, some alien might just pop in from a different dimension and give you all the bliss you could never imagine at your darkest hour. Who knows. In any case, I wouldn't classify self preservation as an addiction, because it isn't adverse. What is adverse, is death.

[Moreno]

In any case, addiction's aren't really addiction's when they're beneficial.

This is my problem with the metaphor. An addiction should disrupt healthy biological functioning. I am sure worrry about death can do this, in extreme cases. But it is the excess worry, not the life itself, that is the addiction, in those cases, if anything.

[Moreno]

Wouldn't death be the ultimate addiction. I mean, you just keep on being dead. It is like, man, a total habit. And its not good for the body. And only Jesus managed to break this habit. Worse than tobacco and heroin and even television which is the addiction closest to death.

[Joe Schmoe]

There is no peace in death, there likely is nothing. Peace is positive, a state of death, or rather, non existence, is likely not positive or negative, but nothing.

All is neutral, objectively. It is the subject that has bias. Peace is neutral. Death is neutral. Happiness is neutral. Pain is neutral.

If one is dead, one isn't experiencing 'violent conflict', therefore, there is peace in death. Death is not neutral to us. It is as much worthy of value as any other phenomenon.

In any case, addiction's aren't really addiction's when they're beneficial. The only point in life being an addiction in which living further, would only cause pain and suffering to oneself. The tricky part however, is knowing life will only be pain and suffering and thus not worth living (elimination of all hope).

I think that.

If you have the time, read back through the posts for an explanation.

But this is still not very fair... We could easily say, there is always hope, for the future is always unknown, and so is the true state of all of existence. With that, some alien might just pop in from a different dimension and give you all the bliss you could never imagine at your darkest hour. Who knows.

I argue that bliss leads to death. If we achieve what we truly hope for, we'll die. So our hope leads to death.

In any case, I wouldn't classify self preservation as an addiction, because it isn't adverse. What is adverse, is death.

Living isn't adverse?

Man, I don't know which world you're living in.

[Typist]

If one is dead, one isn't experiencing 'violent conflict', therefore, there is peace in death.

This is a common view, but what's it based on?

[Joe Schmoe]

If one is dead, one isn't experiencing 'violent conflict', therefore, there is peace in death.

This is a common view, but what's it based on?

We've been dead before.

It's an 'educated' guess.

[WW_III_ANGRY]

There is no peace in death, there likely is nothing. Peace is positive, a state of death, or rather, non existence, is likely not positive or negative, but nothing.

All is neutral, objectively. It is the subject that has bias. Peace is neutral. Death is neutral. Happiness is neutral. Pain is neutral.

If one is dead, one isn't experiencing 'violent conflict', therefore, there is peace in death. Death is not neutral to us. It is as much worthy of value as any other phenomenon.

In any case, addiction's aren't really addiction's when they're beneficial. The only point in life being an addiction in which living further, would only cause pain and suffering to oneself. The tricky part however, is knowing life will only be pain and suffering and thus not worth living (elimination of all hope).

I think that.

If you have the time, read back through the posts for an explanation.

But this is still not very fair... We could easily say, there is always hope, for the future is always unknown, and so is the true state of all of existence. With that, some alien might just pop in from a different dimension and give you all the bliss you could never imagine at your darkest hour. Who knows.

I argue that bliss leads to death. If we achieve what we truly hope for, we'll die. So our hope leads to death.

In any case, I wouldn't classify self preservation as an addiction, because it isn't adverse. What is adverse, is death.

Living isn't adverse?

Man, I don't know which world you're living in.

I'm not discussing peace, or death, or happiness, without the subjective experience. There would be no peace, death or happiness without a subjective experience of it. As such, when I stated peace is positive, that means peace is a positive subjective experience.

Peace is not just a lack of violent conflict, or even conflict. Webster says it well, in that it is:

: a state of tranquillity or quiet: as
a : freedom from civil disturbance
b : a state of security or order within a community provided for by law or custom <a breach of the peace>
2
: freedom from disquieting or oppressive thoughts or emotions
3
: harmony in personal relations
4
a : a state or period of mutual concord between governments
b : a pact or agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity.

To experience peace, one must be alive. To experience anything, for arguments sake, one must be alive. Death only has value to us when we are alive, if we choose to value it. Then upon death, there is no value of it.


Living isn't adverse, I already outlined why, no matter what conditions are suffered, there is always hope, whether that hope is recognized or not. If living were adverse, there's no need to not kill yourself. Yes, its not adverse for me. What is considered to be an addiction is those things harmful to you. Death being the ultimate harm. You can redefine the words to mean something else, but I wouldn't want to use the word's your using to appeal to addiction to define your lack of willingness to kill yourself despite all adversity being experienced. How about, cowardice? (to be blunt, I mean no ill will).. or perhaps, there is a glimmer of hope somewhere. Which, as stated earlier, there is always hope, whether you consciously recognize it or not. Adversity leads to success, if you can overcome. Or.., perhaps we should all kill ourself to get rid of this terrible addiction. I mean, I experienced physical pain the other day when I stepped on that blade of grass that went through my skin, that was quite adverse. Why should I continue living only to feel more pain? Let alone the emotional stuff, loss of loved ones or worse yet, the lack of love all together of anyone or anything.

[Joe Schmoe]

I'm not discussing peace, or death, or happiness, without the subjective experience. There would be no peace, death or happiness without a subjective experience of it. As such, when I stated peace is positive, that means peace is a positive subjective experience.

I follow you. If you have to experience something, in order for it exist, then once one dies, it does not exist.

I seek the end of particular experiences.

Peace is not just a lack of violent conflict, or even conflict. Webster says it well, in that it is:

: a state of tranquillity or quiet: as
a : freedom from civil disturbance
b : a state of security or order within a community provided for by law or custom <a breach of the peace>
2
: freedom from disquieting or oppressive thoughts or emotions
3
: harmony in personal relations
4
a : a state or period of mutual concord between governments
b : a pact or agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity.

To experience peace, one must be alive. To experience anything, for arguments sake, one must be alive. Death only has value to us when we are alive, if we choose to value it. Then upon death, there is no value of it.

Which context/definition are you using of peace? There's a few there.

Because death only has value to us when we're alive, we'd only ever seek it while we are alive. As soon as we are dead, we would no seek death, but we would also not seek life. We would not seek. We would not be.

To say that we shouldn't seek death, because we'd lose experience, doesn't cut it. If one seeks to lose experience, then it's a justification, not a deterrent.

Living isn't adverse, I already outlined why, no matter what conditions are suffered, there is always hope, whether that hope is recognized or not.

What do you hope for? Is it beyond the addiction?

If living were adverse, there's no need to not kill yourself. Yes, its not adverse for me. What is considered to be an addiction is those things harmful to you. Death being the ultimate harm.

This is where we really diverge. You think there's something life has to offer that's so grand. I think you're lying to yourself.

Let's consider a child, born into starvation and lives to 4 years old before dying of disease. What hurt the child? Was it life, or death?

You can redefine the words to mean something else, but I wouldn't want to use the word's your using to appeal to addiction to define your lack of willingness to kill yourself despite all adversity being experienced. How about, cowardice? (to be blunt, I mean no ill will)..

So you argument is, I'm a coward and that's why I wont kill myself. This is a strange standard. Would you also call me coward if I did? Am I not 'running away' from the suffering of life? Perhaps I'm also selfish? I'm clearly not thinking of my family, if I do it.

Let's look at the alternate to cowardice, which is courage. Courage is a product of purpose. Is one courageous if they jump into fire without cause? Or is that just stupidity or carelessness?

I have contradicting desires. I'm facing them right now and I'm not in a competition to see who can assert their conviction fastest.

or perhaps, there is a glimmer of hope somewhere. Which, as stated earlier, there is always hope, whether you consciously recognize it or not. Adversity leads to success, if you can overcome.

What is success to you? Feeding the addiction?

Or.., perhaps we should all kill ourself to get rid of this terrible addiction. I mean, I experienced physical pain the other day when I stepped on that blade of grass that went through my skin, that was quite adverse. Why should I continue living only to feel more pain? Let alone the emotional stuff, loss of loved ones or worse yet, the lack of love all together of anyone or anything.

Not a bad idea.

[Arcturus Descending]

Joe Schmoe wrote:

Arcturus Descending wrote:There is much more to life than simply wanting to be in a state of bliss.

What else do you see? I'm curious.

I see much. The below will direct you to some of it. But can you refine your parameters?

Love is but one more pleasure, one more drive. If you want to share, but you don't, tension exists. So, if you struggle for something, it's because you anticipate satisfaction afterwards. Your goal is satisfaction.

Love is not always a drive - it may also simply be - if it is LOVE.

That isn't necessarily true. Human beings may struggle for things and that struggling may not always or even often reap results. So what is it then that allows humans to continue struggling? Yes, it is the hope that satisfaction will come to us in achieving our goals. It is also the struggle itself which may be satisfying on another level. Even if one were not to reach their destination, couldn't the journey still be satisfying? Humans need struggles and problems - sometimes even those problems for which there are no answers) in order to feel more alive. Being able to 'feel more alive' is at least as important to satisfaction and bliss, in my book. I do not intuit that 'feeling more alive' has to translate into 'bliss' or 'satisfaction'. But I may be wrong here.

Wiki [Reality Principle] - "Maturity is learning to endure the pain of deferred gratification, when reality requires it;

True, that is [one] sign of maturity. It doesn't necessarily have to be painful though unless one focuses on it too much. Lose the focus, and the pain or the 'itch' leaves.

thus, the psychoanalytic psychologist Sigmund Freud proposes that “an ego thus educated has become ‘reasonable’; it no longer lets itself be governed by the pleasure principle, but obeys the reality principle, which also, at bottom, seeks to obtain pleasure, but pleasure which is assured through taking account of reality, even though it is pleasure postponed and diminished

You mean 'more' reasonable' in the moment. There are other ways in which the ego takes over and a person becomes less reasonable.
True, when there is more clarity about one's life and what is real, in actuality, intelligence and emotions can live together in harmony. Pleasure does not necessarily have to be derived from something which makes someone feel extreme joy and happiness. It can be a simple singular moment where one feels alive, has a sensation of 'being there'. The sound of a bird chirping can do this (lol) but one does need to live in a more detached way for this to 'happen'. You're basically speaking of living in self-awareness.

Drive theory suggests to me that we want to remove struggle and find relaxation. To struggle, to me, is far removed from relaxation.
Commonly said "Don't struggle, just relax. It'll be over soon

Perhaps it would depend more on the type of struggle one is experiencing. The body, but especially the mind, I think, is experiecing a negative state when it is really, really hungry. That's a struggle.

At the same time, why would someone want to run a 20-mile marathon, considering what they might have to endure, knowing that it's possible they might not even finish the race. Much if not most of the race is a struggle yet to them it isn't about finding relaxation - it's more about 'transcending' that negative state of tension when needs are not satisfied. It's more about facing into the wind and enduring, not running away from. I don't feel that drive theory presupposes that we run away from these negative states. They are necessary for mental/emotional and spiritual health and growth. Sorry for compartmentalizing. lol

Did you happen to watch Nik Wallenda's high-wire walk across Niagara Falls into Canada, through wind and mist and falcons this past weekend? It was absolutely amazing...breathtaking...incredible...insane...(albeit he planned it for almost 3 years and there must have been such a level of confidence (he certainly had faith too) - but at the same time so awe inspiring to me. I wonder what his level of bliss vs. non-bliss was for him. I would not have missed that for anything though at first I had decided not to watch it - but then was so glad I did. I wonder, was he trying to remove struggle and find relaxation in that, Mr. Schmoe?

Arcturus Descending wrote:Perhaps a sense of who we are and trusting in possibilities leads to bliss before the achievement.

Yeah, I can see this. It'd depend on the individual, though.

Truth be told, things in most situations/circumstances, depend on the individual. We sometimes tend to forget this. Perhaps it is those who are more able to swim 'against' the tide, those who have had to do 'just' that so often within their lives, when there was no other choice, who are able to sense and trust in possibilities, no matter what.

Arcturus Descending wrote:I do not think that I would want to have total satisfaction always. Everything being relative, if we were always satisfied, eventually it would lose its meaning, no?

Are you saying constantly being satisfied would stop being satisfying? That doesn't make sense

I don't know, Mr. Schmoe. For me, this is based on empirical knowledge and also intuition. When everything is going your way and life becomes one without struggle, don't you sometimes get an 'itch'? It isn't that you wish for struggle and chaos in your life, lol, but not having experienced it for a while, and everything being so copacetic, life can begin to get a bit boring. Maybe it's just me. Maybe I'm just a more positive type of masochist who needs struggle for growth.

I won't deny that there are those, who for the most part, have been born into a pretty non-chaotic and harmonious life, one which others might call 'blessed'. Struggle is not the only way in which to grow/evolve. The above, who are intelligent/compassionate/self-aware - who are able to learn/become wise through clarity of vision/introspection/seeing the world in its reality albeit through looking at a world in pain, there surely must be some struggle for them - (unless they are compassionately detached) - these do grow without the struggle which I am speaking about.

I can't see how you could want anything other than satisfaction. I believe this to be the objective of want

Is that necessarily true? I mean, I could be thoroughly off the wall here but perhaps satisfaction IS NOT necessarily the 'only' objective of want. Want is part of the prerequisite of 'being' but does that mean that we always have to attain satisfaction? I would think that the spirit and soul (whatever) would stagnate and stop growing if we are always satisfied. Maintaining want within ourselves is important for our survival I think. If i got everything i wanted and desired in my life where would life's meaning go? What would be left to STRIVE for?

Spiritual growth? Elaborate, please

Everything and anything, both the positive and the negative, which contributes to our becoming. And of course, within that, the negative becomes the positive through self-awareness and insight and also hindsight. lol. Our spiritual growth is an on-going journey, a process, into wholeness, into a fullness of Being. What is spiritual encompasses all of our humanity - the psychic, emotional, physical, and the spirit and soul (if we have a soul). Even what you and I are doing in here contributes to our spiritual growth, because we are thinking and learning and sharing (hopefully).

Arcturus Descending wrote:
It isn't a question of 'seeking' struggle so much as it is 'allowing' it in order to grow. To deliberately seek it may be masochism unless it's in order to evolve.

Grow into what? Something that's better at surviving

lol. Well, something that's better at surviving could even be a rock. No, Mr. Schmoe, I meant growing more and more into the human being, the total human being who will always be incomplete, but more complete. But then again, there are those who feel that our destiny will someday be one of a transhuman. So then we will cross-over into that - whatever that is. I'm digressing here. lol. AND YES, growing into something that also IS better at surviving, without the use of those escapes that harm us more than help us.

Also, growing into something where we are all able to teach others how to survive. We are an inter-dependent species.

The pressure we feel, those of use born in the 'Western' world, is mainly a product of our awareness, rather than biological needs

.
Hmmm...I think it's a combination of both. Our physiology does to some extent, depending on the individual, influence our awareness. They're related. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your meaning here though.

Our drives, that were so crucial to dragging ourselves out the mud, are applied to our mind. To our thoughts and awareness. And what are our drives? To find equilibrium, satisfaction, bliss, calm. So, we try to find peace with all we are aware of.

There's no drive to become more? To evolve? Unless you are including the satisfaction which comes from the journey toward completion, though again, there can never be that...except in moments.

We became aware of our death. To find calmness with our awareness of death, one must embrace it and pull it closer. However, as one does, life loses it's value. Since one is alive, this causes pressure in itself. We are stuck in a rut.*

i disagree with you here. Again, i suppose that it would depend on the individual and one's perception and sense of self-awareness and identity. When one is able to accept and to embrace the ultimate reality of death, one's life does not lose value. If anything, life can gain more value and clarity. ..have more meaning. It finds meaning in the present moment...which is ad continuum....because at some point it begins to realize that there will be an end...at least to life as we know it before death. An awareness of ultimate Death also allows us to to question, to seek and to understand what is quality of life as opposed to quantity of life and to experience that.

I think that there might just be a sense of being [stuck in a rut] if we were immortal. On the other hand, that would also depend on the individual and his/her zest for life, the ability to carpe diem!!!!

What is the most comfortable position? Sitting on the fence. Finding the closest point between the two pressures, and relaxing. What happens when one does this? I don't know. I haven't experienced that luxury. I'm still finding my balance.

Sitting on the fence means taking no action, which may be comfortable, and not in the sense of wu wei wu which is non-action and which is definitely not always comfortable but beneficial.
I am also still trying to find my balance, which doesn't necessarily mean always sitting between those two pressures and relaxing. Sometimes we have to veer more to the right and more to the left depending on what's going on. I suppose that there's even balance in that. Sometimes it's simply a matter of losing one's present focus, detaching and focusing on something else and living lightly. I am trying to learn to live more lightly...I do not so much like 'lightly' it would seem. But there are times when I do....

There's a saying that goes, "The sweet is never as sweet without the sour". When someone suffers, as a cancer patient would, all the little pleasures would become far more potent. That little pleasure * 10 = Bliss. Ah, but it is only temporary...

This is what I was speaking about when I said "Everything being relative, if we were always satisfied, eventually it would lose its meaning, no"? Yes, I understand that that little pleasure, that little moment, becomes a 10. And wouldn't it be wonderful if we could learn from those who have constant painful and psychological struggle - if we could only be intelligent and perceptive enough to allow them to teach us, even unknowingly - those of us who cry and whimper at the least thing, (myself included) who have to desperately chase after their own hedonistic pleasures because we think that this is all there is? Even if this is all there is and nothing after death, I wonder if in the long run we would be more content and happy not trying to chase our own tails and not trying to capture those 'butterflies'? Perhaps simply showing others that there are those butterflies.....and dragonflies.

It would seem that there are different experiences which could be named 'death'. The death of 'struggle and pain' and the death experienced through struggle and pain. Perhaps also the death which is experienced when the heightened sense of happiness dissolves. It is all a form of feath preparing us for that final one.

I don't think what you've expressed goes against my position. You say there's something more to life than bliss, I would agree. There's lack there of. Everything you've spoke about, in regards to why one does what one does, I can easily attribute to same intent.

I think we're looking at the same picture, and you're describing it differently.

Let's not forget, Mr. Schmoe, that there are degrees of bliss vs. non-bliss and quality pertaining to that which is experienced, depending on our brain chemistry, our zest for life, our own wills, endurance and where our individual journeys have taken us and what has been shown us.

You mean "we are" describing it differently.

I have jury duty for about two weeks but I will return.