My issue is that I often escape reality and don’t spend enough time living in it, which leads to it being unbearable thus forcing me to escape.
Yeah but I don’t really care about him. I love the ocean and water too much to let something like that stop me.
My issue was just chasing that to the exclusion of my life.
I made this for Majel Roddenberry for her birthday before she died and shared it on the Roddenberry forum. She said the line, which I truly adore and believe to be true, in the TNG Episode where she and Alexander kept running off to the holodeck:
Is there a difference between self love and narcissism?
I think that distinction is what’s stopping me since I believe that loving yourself is narcissism.
Yes. That’s a Good question.
Not necessarily, but Lausten is right, that is a good question.
Well self hate is something I struggled with and self esteem, but I’ve never done anything with it because I think that any attempt to feel good about yourself or confident is just narcissistic especially if you haven’t done anything to earn that.
I agree.
But I believe that the way it is phrased presents a category error.
Love is to “care (generously) for self and others”
Narcissism is “to care (obsessively) only for self”
I ran across a third category; Echoism
Echoism is the opposite of narcissism. This personality trait involves a fear of seeming narcissistic causing a person to be withdrawn. Echoism is also characterized by being very generous and receiving less in return from others.
People who align more with echoism than narcissism may generally put other people before themselves. For example, an echoist may sacrifice their needs to prioritize another’s desires.
What are we dealing with here?
Wow…that’s most of my life. Didn’t know there was a word for it.
Found this on an old thread
I remember that speech, it’s almost everywhere I go on the internet, but it’s too bad he was wrong about everything in it.
There is no real sense in caring about others like he suggests.
No wonder you are unhappy.
Why do you say this? How did you survive COVID if there is not real sense in caring about others? How do you make it through life even?
I get that it’s difficult to consider. It’s not a moral choice it’s actually a bit selfish. He gives some examples of alternate possibilities of the thoughts of people around you, then,
Of course, none of this is likely, but it’s also not impossible - it just depends on what you want to consider. If you’re automatically sure that you know what reality is and who and what is really important - if you want to operate on your default setting - then you, like me, will not consider possibilities that aren’t pointless and annoying. But if you’ve really learned how to think, how to pay attention, then you will know you have other options. It will be within your power to experience a crowded, loud, slow, consumer-hell-type situation as not only meaningful but sacred, on fire with the same force that lit the stars - compassion, love, the sub-surface unity of all things. Not that that mystical stuff’s necessarily true: the only thing that’s capital-T True is that you get to decide how you’re going to try to see it.
But it’s A) not easy to think positively, B) a little scarey. It’s a power that includes a high chance you’ll be wrong. Thing is, that doesn’t matter. We can’t talk to everyone about why they are doing the weird crap they are doing and fact check their stories. Thinking this way is not a matter of being right, it’s about your attitude to life.
What do you mean why? My question to people is why care about it? The one question I never really got the answer to in life is why living was preferable to dying. To me the only reason arguing for life would make sense is if you HAD to live. If you couldn’t die until a set date then making a good life makes sense. But if you don’t have to be here then I don’t see a reason to. Joy doesn’t make life worth living because in death you don’t have to concern yourself with purpose, meaning, joy, or anything like that.
As for how I make it through life, it’s surprisingly easy when you consider most people generally don’t give a damn. You show up, you work, and no one really asks questions or cares, and life goes on. Having to care about others is more a burden than a requirement.
But you don’t believe in free will (at least you told me I think) so this is a moot point. We don’t have a choice in how we see the world or think. Though generally positive thinking is considered delusional, and there is psychology to support that.
This is just more evidence of him not only being wrong but deluded and privileged. Most don’t have the luxury to think like this (bear in mind this was at a graduation speech so nuff said). He’s wrong that it’s within our power, we don’t choose what we believe or how we perceive the world. Something either convinces us or it doesn’t.
That’s why I said his speech is wrong about a lot of things, especially how people work. He’s very naive. It’s not a matter of wanting, it simply is.
Why to care for others ?
Because we are humans beings, because it is our instinct and our interest.
Parents care for children, when these are young, children care for parents when they are old.
It a mutual benefit operation ans a badge of humanity and civilisation. Men were weak compared to many animals. Caring and cooperating allowed them to triumph.
This is why we help the children of lesser gods who have been maltreated by humans.
And this is what happens when certain humans do not care.
Free will and choice are two different things.
You just don’t like the answers. There are many answers.
In death there is no you. It’s not a happier existence. It’s not existing.
That’s your choice to consider that. It’s not a statement of truth. There’s plenty of evidence that it’s wrong, but I’m not going to argue about it with you.
The speech isn’t about positive thinking.
Again you take a word and make it worthless. What happened? You seemed to have changed your mind and now you’re back to arguing with everyone about everything.
Life is better than death. If one is dead, there is nothing. One cannot learn when they are dead. One cannot fight for a better life if they are dead. One can’t do anything if they are dead. Death is final. There is nothing one can do better themselves or others if they are dead. That’s it. Why would anyone want to die when it is so final?
You just proved my argument about why death is preferable. No need to concern yourself with any of that stuff.
So is internal violence and tribalism, not really making your case here.
They literally aren’t. No free will means no choice.
There aren’t many answer when you see that living is optional and not requires. All the arguments for life over death only make sense if you have to live but you don’t.
Duh, that’s the point. You don’t have to be cornered with anything because you won’t exist.
Again, not a choice, and again plenty of evidence to back it. Heck the bystander effect is one example, not to mention the way our own brains are wired more for tribalism than anything else. The list goes on.
I’m not, I’m highlighting the error in your reasoning. I’d take you more seriously if you didn’t tell me you don’t believe in free will.
We don’t choose what we believe, something changes us or it doesn’t. It either convicted us or it doesn’t. We don’t choose what to believe, something shapes us to do that.
