[RD] Why is there so much suffering in the world?

[caketastydelish]

Yes, they caught him so the plan wasn't successful. But that was also something he didn't anticipate. He was anticipating that 1) he would be able to successfully get rid of the other crew members while walking out unscathed and 2) that smith and machines would do what they said they would once he gave them what they wanted.

His first assumption was already wrong, but even if it were right, I'm betting the second assumption also would have been wrong.

 

[Farm Boy]

You have to bet on the second assumption because it is besides the point. The first consequence is upriver and a result of his dysfunctional relationship with his situation. He's still going to be trapped, at best, in a situation that will probably have him making the same decisions unless he alters himself. It doesn't matter if the Architect doesn't like what he's saddled with, he's still been saved for the moment, unless he gets himself back into a situation where he also is going to burn.

Of all the characters that get an honest shake on what to expect from what they do, Cypher has it pretty straight up.

 

[caketastydelish]

I seriously don't understand what you mean. In the Matrix, where he would be a rich, famous actor he would be far happier, than his miserable place in the real world.

 

[Farm Boy]

Cypher's problem is functionally not that he trusts any particular thing or finds himself in any particular situation. Cypher's problem is that he's a piece of ****.

Do you think Cypher is going to be happy if only Trinity fudgs him? Or he's got groupies or whatever?

 

[AdamCrock]

In short my view is : limited resources, religion, overpopulation and ... wait for it ... government - it's when one guy (or corrupt set of guys) dictate how to distribute limited resources, what religion to choose from, and what to do with overpopulation. There are also many many factors that make our lives miserable namely greed, shortsightedness and simply the fact that we are human, we are imperfect, we cannot form perfect society. We can at least try a little , each on his/her own to make a life better for oneself and those around.

 

[Kyriakos]

I think that mood is of paramount importance. If one is depressed, everything becomes a million times harder :/

 

[caketastydelish]

Cypher's problem is functionally not that he trusts any particular thing or finds himself in any particular situation. Cypher's problem is that he's a piece of ****.

Do you think Cypher is going to be happy if only Trinity ****s him? Or he's got groupies or whatever?

Personally speaking, there's a difference between a pleasurable life and a miserable one, and I know what I would prefer.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Well, it is very clear that too many Matrix movies caused suffering, then and now.

 

[AdamCrock]

Personally speaking, there's a difference between a pleasurable life and a miserable one, and I know what I would prefer.

Rule #32 : Enjoy the little things

Spoiler :

 

[Farm Boy]

Personally speaking, there's a difference between a pleasurable life and a miserable one, and I know what I would prefer.

Yes, but Cypher has already refused to stay asleep once. From a position of privilege, or whatever filter you want to toss on it. He's unsatisfied being a hero of humanity after waking up, and wants to go back to sleep without remembering that he woke up once, angry that he isn't screwing the best woman of the moment. Maybe, just maybe, he'd find some reason to stay where he is if he got her with child and found meaning in fatherhood. But somehow, seeing as he's willing to sell out unto death the woman he expresses desire to father that future upon, I doubt it.

Cypher is going to be a piece of **** no matter what position you put him in. Good, bad, matrix, reality. He's going to burn. The Architect let himself be saved, as far as the trilogy goes.

You probably read a bunch of things into the series, as you seem to think there is a definitive voice that is dictatorial rather than informative. But then, if that's true, you and I have a very different take on the role of a creator when it comes to good art. And I'm assuming it's good art if you care this much about it. And I'm willing to piss on about it. At least to us.

 

[caketastydelish]

Well, it is very clear that too many Matrix movies caused suffering, then and now.

Those are fighting words.

 

[caketastydelish]

@Farm Boy that was a good post that deserves a good response, but I'm about to go to bed. Will give it to you tomorrow when I have time.

 

[Farm Boy]

Sleep well, Cake.

 

[Modder_Mode]

Personally speaking, there's a difference between a pleasurable life and a miserable one, and I know what I would prefer.

It's all about finding the right balance in life and most important of all knowing the difference between pleasure and happiness. Pleasure is short term and happiness is long term. There are a lot of people I know who are sometimes down and even depressed because they keep chasing that quick "high" in life we know as pleasure, this of course wears off leaving the person wondering why they have to many ups and downs.

 

[Hygro]

Regarding the Matrix, I quote the warrior poet and definitely swallower of the red pill The Weeknd

I guess you had no idea that you could have persuaded me
Girl, you could have had me doing anything you pleased
Girl, you should have took your time and thought of what to say to me
'Cuz I'm not as hard as I make it seem to be

[more lines more lyrics etc]

Happiness exists when you don't know a thing
So I hope you don't think this song is about you
And only I can know how close you came
But baby I'm a pro at letting go
I love it when they come and go



Link to video.​

 

[yung.carl.jung]

The idea that we're born pure and only suffer because of conceptual conditioning is silly (not saying this is your view but it's a popular one)

fully agree there

It's biological programming makes it suffer (more important it makes it's caretakers suffer if they don't serve it asap )

unsure if it is just that programming that is causing the suffering, I think you even deny that with your first statement: "The idea that we're born pure and only suffer because of conceptual conditioning is silly". it is not as if we were born pure and suffering is only a worldly consequence, similiarly it seems silly to imply that we are born determined to suffer completely irrespective of the world around us. rather, I propose, suffering only appears reciprocally between an entity, the world and the passage of time.

suffering is also comparative, to some degree. we suffer, for example, when we are distressed due to not having wifi, phone signal or anything of that sort, while expecting an important call. people 50 years ago probably didn't give a hoot about that, but as standards change so does the treshold for suffering.

Cats and dogs suffer, there's no reason to think their emotional landscape is as rich as ours but to deny it exists altogether is odd and self-absorbed.

I don't really agree with suffering being an emotion or being reliant on emotional complexity. I think suffering is neither a mood nor an emotion. common language even suggests that: "I suffer from depression". the depression itself is not suffering, but causes suffering.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I don't really agree with suffering being an emotion or being reliant on emotional complexity. I think suffering is neither a mood nor an emotion. common language even suggests that: "I suffer from depression". the depression itself is not suffering, but causes suffering.

For years I had a blind dog. My gf suffered. She was constantly confronted by "it isn't fair." He didn't suffer. He just went on about his business.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

how can you say that animals suffer when both the word and the concept are man-made, though? that is what I tried to say with "humanity is literally the author of all suffering". we may (even this is kind of weak, but let's not resort to qualia arguments here) be able to measure animals experiencing pain or somesuch, but that is not the exact same thing as suffering. for suffering there must be "being" first.

It's a good thing you're not a vet. I'd never trust someone to care for animals if they have no clue that animals do suffer, both physically and emotionally.

Just because humans were the first species we know of to articulate a definition for pain/suffering, it doesn't mean that other species didn't (and don't) experience them just because their language may not have specific words to describe what they feel (or if they do, it's words we don't yet understand).

The main cause of human suffering in 2019 is human hubrisgreed.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Narz]

unsure if it is just that programming that is causing the suffering, I think you even deny that with your first statement: "The idea that we're born pure and only suffer because of conceptual conditioning is silly". it is not as if we were born pure and suffering is only a worldly consequence, similiarly it seems silly to imply that we are born determined to suffer completely irrespective of the world around us. rather, I propose, suffering only appears reciprocally between an entity, the world and the passage of time.

Definitely suffering is affected by the society we are born into. Modern society is unlike what we're adapted to so it's feasable to believe we actually suffer more now than in primordial times (despite longer lifespans, air conditioning, etc).

suffering is also comparative, to some degree. we suffer, for example, when we are distressed due to not having wifi, phone signal or anything of that sort, while expecting an important call. people 50 years ago probably didn't give a hoot about that, but as standards change so does the treshold for suffering.

Yeah the hedonic treadmill. Also society changes based on technology. 50 years ago no one needed a phone, people were more accessible.

I don't really agree with suffering being an emotion or being reliant on emotional complexity. I think suffering is neither a mood nor an emotion. common language even suggests that: "I suffer from depression". the depression itself is not suffering, but causes suffering.

Depression is just a label we put on persistent suffering. There is no "it" that "causes". Saying "I suffer from depression" is like saying "I'm tired due to fatigue", except no one would say that because everyone knows fatigue isn't a first-cause. But doctors try to convince you that something as deep & profoundly disturbing as depression just appears due to "unbalanced brain chemicals". The DMS was written to sell drugs.

It's a good thing you're not a vet. I'd never trust someone to care for animals if they have no clue that animals do suffer, both physically and emotionally.

Just because humans were the first species we know of to articulate a definition for pain/suffering, it doesn't mean that other species didn't (and don't) experience them just because their language may not have specific words to describe what they feel (or if they do, it's words we don't yet understand).

I'm sure he knows animals suffer, I don't know if he has pets but I'm sure if he does he takes good care of them.

When people try to say philosophical things... well, words just aren't so adequate.

The more I read & the more I observe creatures (human and otherwise) the more I think human exceptionalism is daft & we're just smart monkeys who are really good making up stories

Fixed that for you.

I think greed & hubris are both decent answers but the suffering they're ultimately going to cause is like a hurricane vs the raindrop of pain they are causing us now. We're simply not evolved to thrive in a global society. It may be inevitable that the worst among us rule in such a world (I hope I'm wrong)

 

[bernie14]

fully agree there



unsure if it is just that programming that is causing the suffering, I think you even deny that with your first statement: "The idea that we're born pure and only suffer because of conceptual conditioning is silly". it is not as if we were born pure and suffering is only a worldly consequence, similiarly it seems silly to imply that we are born determined to suffer completely irrespective of the world around us. rather, I propose, suffering only appears reciprocally between an entity, the world and the passage of time.

suffering is also comparative, to some degree. we suffer, for example, when we are distressed due to not having wifi, phone signal or anything of that sort, while expecting an important call. people 50 years ago probably didn't give a hoot about that, but as standards change so does the treshold for suffering.



I don't really agree with suffering being an emotion or being reliant on emotional complexity. I think suffering is neither a mood nor an emotion. common language even suggests that: "I suffer from depression". the depression itself is not suffering, but causes suffering.

I agree with most of what you said, but in regards to "suffering", like consciousness and punishment in pervious threads, is it just undefined

I dont want to get biochemically boring, but alluding to @Narz previous point, i think the mesolimbic regions he was talking about are the nucleus accumbens (pleasure/pain), amygdala (fear) and hippocampus (learning and memory). This is rather simplistic, since all those areas are interconnected with other areas and to each other, but they do seem key in how we experience and respond to our environment