Living an Authentic Life

https://www.lionsroar.com/how-to-live-a-genuine-life/

I’m not entirely sure this is what a genuine life is. I don’t believe we humans have a true nature like it says and what they mean by a genuine life sounds like more of their own opinion rather than what actually constitutes it.

That said, I have heard authenticity tossed around a bit in existentialism. Though I wasn’t sure to what extent such a life is possible. Is something authentic because we say so? If that’s the case then does true authenticity exist or is it just our definition of it?

  • Fruit (apples, oranges, peaches or nectarines)
  • bread
  • toothpaste
  • cheese (if on sale)
  • potatoes (ones good for baking)
  • thousand island salad dressing
  • eggs
  • lettuce (iceberg if possible)

did you even read it

No. You ignore everything I write, so I thought I could use your threads as places to store my grocery lists.

good idea.

  • bread
  • peanut butter
  • sodas
  • chips
  • bananas
  • pastries
  • chicken pot pies
  • eggs
  • anti-depressants

Again, did anyone read it?

I heard that in the US there are different kinds of breakfast cereals. I’m wondering what some of the more common kinds are down in the States. (Only healthy ones though, nothing processed or with too much added sugar.)

I usually add plain rolled oats to whatever I’m having if it’s sweetened. Quaker Harvest Crunch and other granola-type cereals are my staples.

I eat cereal for breakfast every day, so after years and years of the same kinds, it would be interesting to see what else is out there.

I was at the co-op the other day, trying to find a low sugar cereal and picked this one up for comparison.

It looks like a sugary kids cereal, but note, “made with beans”, and it is in fact lower in sugar than the more “adult” cereals I usually choose. Whodda thunk it.

Speaking of surprising foods, has anyone tried the Burger King Impossible Burger yet? I wonder if it tastes the same as their burgers that have actual meat.

None of this has anything to do with what the article is saying about how the lives that we live are just substitutes for what is genuine.

I have looked in a couple cities for the Impossible Burger. I think they are keeping it a secret so people will come in looking for it, then buy something else.

I heard that it is coming soon across the nation - i.e., all Burger Kings.

BTW, I must be living a genuine life, as I am aware of my addiction to fast food burgers. (see Xain, everything is related)

I’d totally try that bean-based cereal. There’s no way I’d have given it a second look on the shelf because the box is terrible, it looks like a sugar coated, marshmallow filled kid cereal. Unfortunately the price is crazy- I would eat a box each morning, and it’s over $8 American per box, so, with milk, I’d be paying $10 a day for breakfast.

I think there are the equivalent of ‘Impossible Burgers’ in Canada (I heard that A&W had one a few years ago) but I’m not sure since I don’t see ads on TV or eat at fast food restaurants. But I would try one to see what they’re like. As a farm kid I know my beef and what a burger should taste like, so it would have to be pretty authentic to pass my test.

Xain wrote: "I’m not entirely sure this is what a genuine life is. I don’t believe we humans have a true nature like it says and what they mean by a genuine life sounds like more of their own opinion rather than what actually constitutes it."
Xain, you keep going back to these Buddhist sites as if deep down inside you truly feel that they have something of value to teach you. But then you seem to rush to judgement about what they're trying to tell you. Take it slowly. Really read what the author is saying. Sit still for a moment and really think about the words. What he's saying is that, especially in the modern world we are easily distracted by things, by our devices and gadgets, by the news of what's happening in the world, by our friends, by our jobs, by our own fantasies of what kind of life we SHOULD be having, and in consequence our minds are so busy that we don't take time to just BE. How often do people just sit still and experience what's going on? That is what he means by a genuine life.

Okay Xain, Advocatus read it, seems to me he shared some spot on advice.

As for the shopping list, I thought you’ve read a lot of Zen and Tao stuff - I’d think you’d recognize the tactic

<blockquote>In the words of a pretty smart fellow:  "Sit still for a moment and really think about the words.  What he’s saying is that, especially in the modern world we are easily distracted ..."</blockquote>
&nbsp;
<blockquote>From your read:  Being precise means focusing on what gets in the way of clarity in practice. We need to focus particularly on the addictions that keep us encased in a substitute life. I’m not talking about the most obvious addictions, like the chemical addictions to drugs or alcohol. I’m talking about more subtle addictions to which we all fall prey.

Let’s start with our addiction to comfort. I’m talking about the ways we manipulate our experience in an effort to find comfort and avoid pain. We’ve all got it to some degree. What does yours look like? Does it manifest as avoiding sitting meditation when you don’t feel like it, or as moving around during sitting even when the instruction is to sit still? Can you see it in your attachment to food or sleep or fantasizing? ...

&nbsp;</blockquote>
Xain, you keep going back to these Buddhist sites as if deep down inside you truly feel that they have something of value to teach you. But then you seem to rush to judgement about what they’re trying to tell you. Take it slowly. Really read what the author is saying. Sit still for a moment and really think about the words. What he’s saying is that, especially in the modern world we are easily distracted by things, by our devices and gadgets, by the news of what’s happening in the world, by our friends, by our jobs, by our own fantasies of what kind of life we SHOULD be having, and in consequence our minds are so busy that we don’t take time to just BE. How often do people just sit still and experience what’s going on? That is what he means by a genuine life.
That's actually not it. What he is saying is that much of what we think is life is just us trying to satisfy some kind of negative emotion. That life is really this non conceptual silence. It's not what you think. That we have to let go our desires, and wants, and thoughts, and to me that just sounds like being a rock. He's saying that our pursuits are motivated by sating negative emotions. Your interpretation is mistaken.

 

I don’t follow this because I believe it has value (which by the way they argue is imaginary) I follow it because it is supposedly the correct view and what to do.

It’s pretty much saying that the life I live now sucks and that the only real life is what they offer. This was from the same magazine in which one article said that value was just an imaginary metric that doesn’t exist and that nothing was “worth it”.

one article said that value was just an imaginary metric that doesn’t exist and that nothing was “worth it”.
I don’t think it says that, but I can see how you might think it does. But arguing with you is pretty pointless, so instead, here’s a different point of view that might shake you out of your current position. Dr. Richard Carrier has been arguing with a theologian on the existence of God. His arguments apply to any kind of philosophy that attempts to claim there is some way of life that can replace what we actually experience. I’m not sure if you can get this without reading through the whole thing, but Carrier’s point boils down to; reality shaped us, so understanding what’s real and true is the best path to happiness. Unless reality is designed to makes us unhappy, that has to be true. And unhappiness would less likely lead to survival, so if that were the case, we wouldn’t be here talking about it. The difficulties we experience are due to the impression of the process of evolution. There’s no way around that and attempts to shortcut it won’t end well. Here’s a good summary:
What humans more and more discover is that there could never have been anything worth seeking but a desirable life. And moral values and duties are what we must embody to maximize our opportunity for that. But evolution, being unintelligent and indifferent, did a better-than-nothing but still poor job of developing for us reliable organs of reason and moral perception. Which actually proves there is no God; for He’d be morally obligated to install in us reliable engines of reason and moral perception, while atheism successfully predicts evolution wouldn’t, requiring us to fix it.

Finally, you can’t just rewrite a social and cognitive system, much less on any arbitrary desire you may have. So it’s not the case that you can just “choose” to operate as if a different system exists. Try, and the system that does exist will crush or frustrate you. This is not only true of the social system (“thieves and gang members, serial killers, pedophiles and sadists” and “Nazis” statistically end up nowhere near optimal life-satisfaction, but typically end up crushed or miserable) but also of the cognitive system (such persons are psychologically always dissatisfied, with themselves and the world; often even wallowing in loathing and misery).

That’s from the section on the moral argument, starting here. https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/15591 There is an index, so you can pick sections. He also links to other essays of his, so you can dig deeper on his ideas. Here’s one on a moral god hypothesis, which applies to any philosophy that claims our evolved notions of value are imaginary. Showing how it doesn’t match what we experience


https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/15246#overlook

Well apparently we are already living a lie:

https://www.lionsroar.com/reality-isnt-what-you-think/

 

https://www.lionsroar.com/do-dishes-rake-leaves-and-dont-forget-the-endless-loads-of-laundry-march-2010/

 

The second is is the one about meaning I was talking about. The first was part about living a genuine life and not the projection we put on the world.

The first one says almost nothing. I could replace “Buddhist tradition” with just about any deity or philosophy that also claims to offer everything while actually offering nothing, and this article would fit in any of their websites. It’s empty of any practice, anything tangible. It says, “do my thing and get the ultimate”. It doesn’t even bother to describe one attribute of ultimate.

The second one is exactly what I said, via Richard Carrier.

“When we cultivate nondistracted awareness as a formal practice, we call it meditation. When we cultivate it in our home life, we call it the laundry, the kitchen, or the yard—all the places and the ways to live mindfully by attending without distraction to whatever appears before us.”
Funny that both claim to be based on what the Buddha said. Like I said, people get their meaning from some book, then claim that book is the only answer. That’s how you know they haven’t found the answer yet.