Posts by driftingraven122

Elizabeth Ruiz65 said:From my perspective, and based on the general philosophy I live by, the goal isn't really about...
It isn't about stripping away every single desire you have; it’s more about narrowing their scope.
And the sheer absurdity that stems from them.

People these days just want everything at once—the latest iPhone, a brand new Ford, maybe a massive 110-inch plasma screen to stare at. Is that really what everyone is after?
Designer labels, mountains of cash spent on winter getaways, summer vacations... does anyone actually believe the hype?
Spring fever, autumn blues... It’s always the same cycle. Everyone is just chasing that fleeting sense of stardom, desperate to be famous, successful, or to finally have it all. Is anyone actually satisfied?
They’re being fed this idea that an endless pile of cash is the direct ticket to happiness. But what if all that wealth actually leads you to die a... well, you know.
Don't worry about it; the market will always find a way to plant new desires in your head and invent an entirely new set of needs.
Another newer phone, an even faster and sleeker Ford, an even larger plasma screen... what else is there?
The newer departments... Just more celebrations, more glamour, and even more "success."
Money and recognition. The market just traps people in this endless, self-perpetuating loop.
It’s never-ending.I need it now, and I need it right this second, because apparently my happiness depends entirely on getting exactly what I want the moment I want it.
My happiness is my life.It really comes down to the fact that in most cases...
Those aren't actually their own desires; they've been implanted by someone else.
How exactly do mass media and modern capitalist paradigms interact? Or rather, how would they shape our perception if we actually stopped to look at them?
It was all just a way to keep the capitalist machine running smoothly.Give me more, more, more—because that’s exactly what’s required.
Just my luck.It’s pretty much impossible to stay consistent all the time.
With growth like that, she’s bound to hit a wall eventually. And once she does, seeing as they haven't...
Is there any point in chasing happiness if we only look for it through one narrow lens? We really ought to start developing more diverse ways to find fulfillment rather than relying on just one thing.
Walmart runs and mindless shopping sprees? They usually just lead straight to frustration and misery.

A life built on those kinds of desires is practically being engineered into reality as we speak.
In accordance with the idiom. Work, Amazon, Walmart, die a.

And I don't even need to point out how many people are just driven by pure...
It starts with that sudden, frustrating inability to satisfy your own desires—or rather, the desires you think are yours.
It’s all being implanted by the mass media, acting as nothing more than a service to the market. What exactly is it they want?
Is there anything more exhausting than the desperate urge to be "cool"? You know the type—people who feel the need to wear the exact same outfits, haunt the same overpriced bars, and spend their entire paychecks at places like Walmart just to stay relevant. Why does everyone feel this constant pressure to follow the same tired script?
They’re playing by the exact same playbook as those people they worship like idols. Not happening.
The only real distinction between the first group and the latter is that the former can barely keep their heads above water financially.
It allows for the maintenance of existential conditions. And so, an individual...
Is it really worth suffering just because you’re chasing something that might not even be worth the effort?
Will she ever actually have it? Or is she just playing a part because that's what her social circle keeps telling her she needs to be?
Exactly that—she’s actually being denied the very thing that would have been good for her.
I need this.

So, I’ll say it again: if you actually want to find some lasting sense of happiness, at least from where I'm sitting...
Is the real answer just scaling back our own needs, desires, and cravings? What else is there?
Fewer desires mean less burnout. Why waste all that energy trying to chase every single whim?
Satisfy yourself. After all, when you aren't constantly running on empty, you actually have the energy and the will to get things done, don't you?
Maybe it’s time to finally turn toward other people, just for a change.
Maybe try actually getting to know yourself—and figuring out what you truly need, rather than just what you think you want.
While everyone else keeps insisting he needs it, he’s already decided what he wants for himself.
After a while, it starts repeating itself.Yeah, that’s exactly what I’ve been telling you.
Necessary.The continuous dominance of market hegemony is just so incredibly efficient at...
They keep telling people they’re free, as if that were somehow a reality when we're all just pretending to be equal in such massive numbers.
Is there anything more hollow than being held captive by your own desires, reaching a point where you can't even admit them to yourself?
Self-inflicted captivity.

Still, I think it’s worth pointing out just so there isn't any confusion:
Desires can actually lead to happiness, provided you direct them toward the right things.
Focus on something more lasting, something non-material. Some people write poetry or short stories,
they read books, paint, sing, stay active, learn,
study and research all sorts of things, or explore the spiritual side
of existence... Most of these pursuits don't require massive financial
outlays, so you aren't constantly facing the threat of going broke just to
satisfy your own impulses. Take someone whose passions involve
writing, for instance; if they lack a computer, finding a pen and paper is easy enough. For me,
whenever I feel that itch to fulfill a desire, I don't head
over to Walmart, instead I might just hit a nearby beach for a couple
hours of Yoga. It’s a practice I can return to whenever I want; no one can
strip it away from me, I don't owe anyone a dime for it, and it remains entirely independent of
whatever market supply and demand dictates. If people dedicated themselves
to more desires of this nature, wouldn't there be significantly less depression
and neuroticism out there?

To wrap this up: if you don't manage your desires in a
reasonable way, you're essentially inviting suffering. It's quite simple: in an era of
hyper-inflated desires manufactured by the market, it is impossible for the vast
majority of people to satisfy every single whim. Even if we assumed
it were possible right now, only a tiny fraction of the population could actually sustain
that lifestyle in the long run. And it is precisely that inability to reach a set
goal that breeds frustration—which is really just the first step toward suffering.

Because while it might seem to some that stripping away most desires leaves
nothing but a void, I personally believe true emptiness is much fuller than a false sense of
abundance.

Spot on. 🙂

In a void, there’s nothing to bother you—yet, somehow, nothing is missing either. That’s true emptiness—at least, in my view.

Thanks for the piece, Elizabeth...

Sophia Lee80 said:Man didn't invent "good" versus "evil"; he just slapped the wrong labels on them. There is a right way and a wrong way to act, but that doesn't make one path inherently moral and the other immoral. It’s simply about whether a course of action is correct or incorrect. There is no inherent goodness or evil in the mechanics themselves.

So, if those aren't the right names, what are? 🤔

Well, they are relative to any individual, I suppose—though we should probably consider that most people tend to see them quite similarly.

The real questions, if you ask me, are these:

Is there such a thing as an absolute good that exists regardless of human thought?
Is there such a thing as an absolute evil that exists regardless of human thought?

Scott Brown6 said:Alright, driftingraven122, now you're putting 'good intentions' in quotes... look, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, I'll give you that. But surely you'll admit that actual, genuine good intentions exist.🙂 Like, if you intend to plant a flower, so you go ahead and plant it, and then it actually grows...

Yes, well, I did say they exist. Intending to plant a seed just to watch something live and grow next to you—that's a good intention, I guess. My point is simply that most people aren't really aware that 'good intentions' aren't always as great as they seem at first glance.

I suppose I agree that some form of absolute exists within morality and ethics—though I suspect it isn't exactly glaringly obvious at first glance. It seems most people—and by that, I mean the crowd I usually run into, those who don't pursue what we might call spirituality, including much of the so-called religious population—fail to recognize it, opting instead to mistake it for something else entirely.

Scott Brown6 said:Are we talking about socially acceptable norms here? In Iran, if I recall correctly, chess is banned because it's viewed as "evil"—and since women can't see male doctors, they're stuck just describing symptoms to a man. Basically, social norms are built on whatever specific society decides is right or wrong at the time. What's considered wicked in one culture is totally fine in another. Though, yeah, those are pretty extreme examples. It sounds like you're leaning toward some kind of anarchy—just acting on pure instinct and calling it all "good." Or maybe I'm just misreading you again...
Good intentions aren't a guarantee of a good outcome, sure, but that doesn't mean they're useless. They're still necessary if you want to get anything right. 🙂

A slightly longer thought.

I am not advocating for anarchy. A serial killer needs to serve their sentence. We live in a society where people will label them as "evil" and punish them accordingly.

And I have nothing against society being exactly what it is. In fact, I think it *ought* to be that way.

But then, looking at it from another angle—take a serial killer, for instance. They are essentially just a "tool," or rather, they're operating in a state of unconsciousness—if that's even the right word—unaware of where their thoughts originate. People who obsess over the concepts of good versus evil won't actually help a serial killer if they need assistance while in prison. Or, they'll demand the death penalty out of a desire for vengeance. That whole concept of revenge is really just a byproduct of the good vs. evil dichotomy.

Personally, I suspect they aren't fundamentally evil—actually, I’d argue they are fundamentally good, they just don't know what they're doing—and they need help too.

Or consider a pop star trying to boost album sales by "doing good" through charitable donations. Or a religious person performing humanitarian work while thinking, "I'll go to heaven because of this," or "this will ensure a better reincarnation."

I don't think those things ever end well. Those people are slaves to various constructs, including those unfortunate notions of good and evil.

I believe human instinct is always inherently good—in alignment with nature. I mean, someone who isn't shackled by all these different concepts will always act rightly. You can never truly know what lies behind "good intentions"—most people have ulterior motives, I suppose. My view is that good deeds shouldn't involve the typical mental gymnastics people perform; you should just do good simply because of who you are, not because it fits the definition of "good."

That’s why I maintain that good and evil don't exist—there is only what *is*, and what *is* is fundamentally good.

I suppose I agree—good and evil are just social constructs imposed upon us. In fact, whenever you actually intend to do something "good," it'll probably end up having some unintended negative consequence.

Of course, that logic falls apart if, say, a child is drowning. I imagine anyone would instinctively dive in to save them without giving a single thought to moral philosophy.

So, my take is that an action can only be truly good when the concepts of good and evil don't even exist yet. 😳

Personally, I’d argue the yin-yang symbol isn't actually an answer—it's more of a description... 🧐
If good exists, then evil must exist too—and vice versa...
There's probably a bit of good in every evil, and a little evil in every good, I guess...

Scott Brown6 said:If you’re arguing that a serial killer is just some "tool" of fate or circumstance, then fine—by that logic, the guy who dives into a river to pull a drowning kid to safety is also just a tool. So, what’s the actual difference? How does one act count as a mere instrument while the other is something more?
If someone pulls some absolute garbage move and knows exactly what they're doing—then that’s not just a mistake, it's a choice. You can't call that a "tool" or an accident when there's full intent behind the mess.
Look, I’m not looking for a debate on this one. Period.
I get where you're coming from. Personally, I’d argue that our whole idea of good and evil is basically just a moving target—it all shifts depending on how much someone has actually leveled up their own consciousness. It's like that old saying: if you're standing halfway up a mountain, you're never going to see the full picture compared to the person at the summit. Perspective is everything.😉 )
And let’s be real—it just ramps up the level of accountability across the board. Everything becomes way more high-stakes—including... Regarding what we’re actually putting out there—Look, if you're just sitting around feeling hot and bored, go hit up the off-topic lounge instead of messing around in the evil threads. Seriously—don't do it unless you want everyone here to stop taking you seriously.

I’m being serious. It seems to me that my point stands. But if it’s bothering anyone that much, then I guess I won't bother writing anymore. 😁

I won't be addressing those points 1 through 4—they don't really have anything to do with what I was saying in the first place.

You misunderstood me 😢 ... though I suppose I'm partly to blame—my phrasing was a bit muddled, I guess.

So, what exactly does "relativizing terms" even mean? 🤔

Scott Brown6 said:You’re playing some pretty dangerous games with definitions there, kid.

dangerous?!
I'm just sharing my own perspective... I guess. 🤔

Brian Baker32 said:The symbol of Jina and Janga is the answer

I don't think it's an answer—it's more of a description of how humans process things. I guess the brain just perceives that every positive action triggers its own opposite, and vice versa.

Brian Baker32 said:I guess good exists just like evil does. If there's good, there's gotta be evil too.

Exactly. If there's good, then there's evil—and vice versa. But the thing is... they probably don't actually exist at all.

Here is my take. ☕

There is no such thing as good or evil—period. A serial killer is merely a tool, and I suppose they aren't even aware of that. Naturally, society will label them an evil entity and pursue some form of punishment, which is fine, I guess, since society itself is just another tool—and most people aren't even conscious of that fact.

So, neither society nor the killer is doing evil, nor are they doing good.

I believe the only way a person can actually do "good"—though not the kind of "good" defined by these binary concepts—is to rid themselves of the notion of good and evil entirely, effectively "clearing" their mind.

Good is the same as evil, and frankly, neither one truly exists.

Susan Diaz91 said:Does anyone actually enjoy this specific blend of rock and alternative music coming out of Cleveland?

No. ☕

Sophia Parker8 said:Understanding isn't a prerequisite. Desire is enough.
The mere will to grasp a mystery puts you miles ahead of those who have no intention of trying.

True, I suppose. Though—and this is just my take—calling sitting in a cave a waste of time seems a bit much; it’s really just one way of doing things.

jademarlin26 said:I wouldn't call it suffering; it's simply a complete waste of time. You have to step out of the cave if you ever want to grasp the mystery of your own existence.

So, I guess you’ve actually solved the mystery then—since you clearly know exactly what it takes to understand it, right? 🤔

jademarlin26 said:Life is understood through actual experience, not by sitting in a cave.

Well, I suppose sitting in a cave is also an experience—just a different one, maybe.
And I wouldn't exactly call it suffering; from where I'm standing—it's more of a luxury, a privilege some people actually get to enjoy. 🙂

Sophia Parker8 said:You've got it backward. A being doesn't orient itself toward physics; it transcends it. Once you've done that, physics ceases to be an obstacle.
As for those ascetics living in caves... well, they exist. But bears live in caves too. Neither group is actually accomplishing anything.

And how exactly would you know that? 🤔