Justification for the world

Thesis: If even only a single strong, free mind with a full range of true, pleasurable and varied experience/power exists anywhere on Earth then this justifies the existence of all the weak, suffering and low-state other minds.

Do you really understand what are you saying?

Reread again, slowly and carefully, very carefully.

And, you will realize that -

You are unknowingly proving just opposite to what your intention is.

with love,
sanjay

And the support for this thesis?
And if there are only four minds you’ve encountered that you really respect, what are you in fact doing presenting a thesis like this? Are you trying to convince minds you do not respect that their suffering is justified by the existence of some other minds abilities? Isn’t that a bit of an odd enterprise to engate in?

Suffering will always exist. So will not-suffering (presumably).

What is stronger, happier, more free, more self-fulfilled, more true, will always exist on the backs of those masses who represent the opposite conditions. Has it ever been any other way throughout all of human history? Is it any other way in nature? Can you think of even a single counter-example?

So long as something great stands atop a mass of non-greatness, that mass may be said to be justified thereby. Only those in that mass would likely protest, but where is their right to set the standard of value for justification? Greatness asserts its own right and value as such a standard, and that is what “great” means, or it means nothing.

Maybe you deny that “greatness” has any meaning?

Sounds like hero worship to me.

Then that says a lot more about you than it does about me.

I’ll just take your word on that one.

Striving to build and create is its own justification. The world is a process which necessarily implicates all of us. Whether we forge ahead in exploration of the all or resign to the dirt of the nearest celestial mass, whether we live like the life of the party or “lead lives of quiet desperation,” we are entirely involved in the procession of the world. Is the suffering too much that we spend our days wishing for dispersion into simpler forms of matter? Or is suffering appreciated as a potentially unique and valuable part of our equipage as human beings.

MM,

You have done the same mistake again; Proving just the opposite to your intention.

Realize that there are no or rather cannot be any completely opposite conditions.

What you are calling as opposite are merely differ in quantity, not quality.

So, even being differ in degree, they all are in the same direction. This is to say that there cannot be any completely happy or dejected people possible. Each one of us use to have these both shades. Yes, the ratio of the mix may differ. There may be relatively happy or sad people.

But, you cannot call them just opposite.

Yes, that is true that, any given time, a few would be on the top while rest on the bottom of the pyramid. But, the difference would be in the relative hight only. The direction would be the same.

There cannot be any all-powerful or complete powerless people possible. We all have some powers. The only difference is that some use to have more or less than others.

So, they are not opposite but only relatively different.

Now, may i ask you that which person do you think was/is completely happy or all-powerful and without any worries?
You have the the whole of the history of the mankind at your disposal to search; right from Obamas, Bill Gates to Hitler and Alexgender the great, or even beyond that.

Tell me when you find the perfect happy or completely satisfied human being, just opposite of masses (as you defined them)?

I am eagerly waiting to know the name of that legend.

with love,
sanjay

Interesting that this was posted 5 days after the anti-natalism thread. Most people argue the reverse, if there is one being who suffers rather irreconcilably, then it negates all of the happiness that springs from life and we ought not to have ever been in the first place.

Sounds like a pyramid scheme to me, not exactly the world I’d want to live in! Or more precisely, a vampire pyramid scheme, where the only person who enjoys their life is doing it by sucking the life out of everyone else but them, like a nasty dictatorship, and then declaring that life is worth living because they are happy. Psychopath heaven.

I’m not sure your idea is going to get very far.

MM is at a loss to explain what he means, because he’s trying to explain these issue without using the rhetoric he normally uses, or at least knows exists, the rhetoric of an ass clown. The ass clown’s existence is justified because he is the intellectual ballast that allows others to reach the top.

Of course I agree with your premise, MM, but if you have something to say, why not just say it? Explain the background behind that statement, or do you want me to do it for you, maybe I’ll just find a fitting link to an explanation.

Many people are capable of climbing to the top of the heap, but it almost seems like chance as to who makes it. I’ve been climbing, I may not even 9/10ths the way to the top, and who knows how much farther I will go. Up ahead I see you flaying amidst several bodies, obviously set in your place, I wear spiked hiking boots, if your polite, I’ll try not to step on your face as I pass you.

MM’s ass clown’s guide to getting to the top of the heap:

And if there weren’t one of these free minds, and everyone else is then considered unjustified, what happens then? Do they cease to exist? Do you go around decapitating them? Where does it lead?

They exist regardless of justification. They exist nonetheless.

That’s quite an “if”, but to answer for him; nothing, no, no and nowhere.

Sturt,

I seems that you want to argue on the behalf of MM.
I do not have any objection and you are very much welcome.

But, remember that what you have to defend-

You do not have to defend that there are always some on the top and some on the bottom. That is not the matter of debate.

what you have to defend-

And,

This underline word opposite in the above para.

with love,
sanjay

Stuart, haven’t we been over this before? I really see you as better than that.

So you’re saying that I am the justification for the entire world??

…kewl. 8-[

Hi commentary, I’m glad someone was able to point out the obvious that “most people argue the reverse”. That is one of the purposes of this topic, to shed some light upon THAT position, too. Obviously the position in the OP is the exact opposite of the “common” one, or at least the one we are made to think is common.

That sounds a lot like the world as it is today. Every person carves out their own little “psychopath heaven” at the expense of others, even if those others are only coworkers, spouse, kids, friends, parents, or strangers on an internet forum.

We can’t all be tyrants, but people have that “impulse”, which only means a misrepresented and frustrated will to power.

And of course if anyone has other ideas regarding how the world is or perhaps should be justified, please feel free to state them openly.

Why should ‘how the world is’ be justified? Why does it need to be justified?

Surely, only a person’s actions need to be justified.