Lust + energy + entertainment + ideal of abundance = ?

Lust + energy, combined with entertainment + ideal of abundance = a fake sense of prosperity. It’s an illusion, and it’s heading straight for a global disaster.

YES or NO? Tell me why.

Ronald Rogers27

Ronald Rogers27 said:Lust + energy, combined with entertainment + ideal of abundance = a fake sense of prosperity. It’s an illusion, and it’s heading straight for a global disaster.

YES or NO? Tell me why.

Ronald Rogers27

All three can be boiled down to one common denominator: WASTE.

Waste means burning through our natural resources just to satisfy whims. Beyond feeding our own flaws, it actively destroys nature.

As Gandhi once said:
The country has enough for everyone's needs, but not for everyone's greed.
Simply put: there isn't enough for everyone, nor is it possible to satisfy every human whim, so we shouldn't feed them. All three are ultimately hollow impulses. They come at the expense of the common good.

One could argue they are the perfect definition of evil.

No. While individual tragedies will certainly rise as more people fall into the trap you're describing, we won't see any global catastrophes. Human nature and the world are driven by entirely different forces.

To get straight to the point, listen to Zvonko Bogdan:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4DAJ...eature=related

🙂🙂🙂

Harold James9 said:No. While individual tragedies will certainly rise as more people fall into the trap you're describing, we won't see any global catastrophes. Human nature and the world are driven by entirely different forces.

To get straight to the point, listen to Zvonko Bogdan:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4DAJ...eature=related

🙂🙂🙂

And what exactly is that force? Is it just greed—that "I have to own everything" mentality?
There's a difference between sustainable and unsustainable growth. If we keep this up, we’ll consume the entire planet like a worm eating through an apple. Then it’s over. This constant wastefulness just accelerates the decay; it doesn't spark any creative energy needed to find a solution or grow a new apple.
Space is vast. It could theoretically handle all our excess, provided that excess doesn't reach cosmic proportions.
But we actually have to get to space first. And it's hard to launch a rocket when everyone is too busy getting drunk and chasing lust + energy.

dustyorca3, my comment refers back to the original post. I honestly don't see where greed fits into this song. If you say it's there, then maybe it is. As far as I'm concerned, it's all fine.

🙂🙂🙂

There’s an old saying floating around that hits home: it’s a strange way to live—people tossing away their happiness just to chase after a bigger pile of cash.

I think the real weight of that thought lies in the word "happiness," because when you spend your whole life just hoarding material wealth, you usually end up feeling hollow and profoundly unhappy. Since my own take is that true satisfaction and happiness are actually what we’re all searching for deep down, I’d argue that pursuing lust, entertainment, and an ideal of abundance—if you're doing it just for the sake of having them—only offers a cheap imitation of joy. It’s usually fleeting, a temporary high that never quite manages to make a person feel truly, lasting satisfied...
To me, this whole obsession seems to stem from a deep-seated fear that there isn't enough to go around, coupled with this growing sense of isolation and a total lack of genuine connection between people.
And if you look at the state of things, it's painfully obvious that this path is heading straight toward a global disaster. 🤷

Ronald Rogers27 said:Lust + energy, combined with entertainment + ideal of abundance = a fake sense of prosperity. It’s an illusion, and it’s heading straight for a global disaster.

YES or NO? Tell me why.

Ronald Rogers27

Maybe for those who don't buy into that kind of prosperity. As for everyone else, I don't know; there's been plenty of doom-and-gloom prophecy about global disasters that never actually happened.

There’s an old saying: "Money in the pocket, happiness in the heart."

If someone lives by that philosophy, why are we constantly trying to prove them wrong? We tell them their way is hollow and illusory, and that some other path is the "real" way (whatever that means). Can we even be certain our own definition of happiness is the right one? Are we just being aggressive by trying to force our views on people whose worldview is built on simple hedonism? Should we let people decide what happiness means for themselves, or is it better to push them toward our version of the "correct" path?

They say philosophy requires asking at least three questions for every answer, so... 🙂

Ronald Rogers27 said:Lust + energy, combined with entertainment + ideal of abundance = a fake sense of prosperity. It’s an illusion, and it’s heading straight for a global disaster.

YES or NO? Tell me why.

Ronald Rogers27

No. Those are symptoms, not causes. Besides, very few people actually live out that lust, chase that entertainment, or enjoy any kind of abundance.🙂

rustymaker5 said:There’s an old saying floating around that hits home: it’s a strange way to live—people tossing away their happiness just to chase after a bigger pile of cash.

I think the real weight of that thought lies in the word "happiness," because when you spend your whole life just hoarding material wealth, you usually end up feeling hollow and profoundly unhappy. Since my own take is that true satisfaction and happiness are actually what we’re all searching for deep down, I’d argue that pursuing lust, entertainment, and an ideal of abundance—if you're doing it just for the sake of having them—only offers a cheap imitation of joy. It’s usually fleeting, a temporary high that never quite manages to make a person feel truly, lasting satisfied...
To me, this whole obsession seems to stem from a deep-seated fear that there isn't enough to go around, coupled with this growing sense of isolation and a total lack of genuine connection between people.
And if you look at the state of things, it's painfully obvious that this path is heading straight toward a global disaster. 🤷

It feels like we all struggle to actually define what "wealth" means. 😉

But my gut tells me that happiness is even harder to pin down. Everyone defines it differently.

So, what exactly is happiness? 🤷

Ronald Rogers27

lust + energy + entertainment + ideal of abundance = ?

I honestly don't get what people have against sex, having fun, and living large—it makes zero sense to me, let alone turning it into some deep philosophical crisis

I mean, nobody’s talking about any kind of trade-offs here. Just because someone is out enjoying themselves doesn't mean they aren't also hitting the books—maybe reading dense philosophy is actually their version of a good time...

If a person can just go ahead and crush a steak, then an octopus salad, and top it all off with chocolate cake—well, there might be something a little bit off with them, right?😵!

Just following up on that last post above me—which I am totally on board with, by the way—I just gotta finish the equation with = "a normal, living, healthy human being"...

the chosen people say:
Sex + energy + entertainment + Abundance Ideal = ?

I honestly don't get why anyone thinks there's an issue with sex, fun, or abundance. It makes zero sense to me that people turn this into some deep philosophical crisis.

Look, nobody mentioned any restrictions here. Just because someone is out enjoying themselves and having sex doesn't mean they aren't reading heavy literature. Hell, maybe that's exactly what they find entertaining...

If someone can go from eating a shrimp cocktail to octopus salad and then finishing off with chocolate cake, there’s definitely something wrong with them, right?😵!

It feels like you're basically treating sex and Lust as the exact same thing (sex = Lust)... 😵 😵 😵

Is there anyone else besides the chosen people and Donna Campbell6 who thinks those two things are identical? 🙂

Ronald Rogers27

Ronald Rogers27 said:Lust + energy, combined with entertainment + ideal of abundance = a fake sense of prosperity. It’s an illusion, and it’s heading straight for a global disaster.

YES or NO? Tell me why.

Ronald Rogers27

I am struggling to grasp the core logic here; I feel as though I am missing the central thread of the argument.

To be perfectly honest, what confuses me most is this concept of 'sex + energy'—forgive me, but if it isn't too much trouble, could you clarify exactly what you mean by that term?

hiddenhound3 said:I am struggling to grasp the core logic here; I feel as though I am missing the central thread of the argument.

To be perfectly honest, what confuses me most is this concept of 'sex + energy'—forgive me, but if it isn't too much trouble, could you clarify exactly what you mean by that term?

First, we need to nail down what Lust actually means. Let's say, just for the sake of this debate, that we define Lust as promiscuity (switching through multiple partners in a short span of time). It could be a single paid encounter, a series of them (hinting at prostitution), or even a group of swingers at one of their clubs. 🤷

Now that we've settled on a definition... let's say sex + energy is basically the classic physical, mental, and emotional energy found in those old-school Roman orgies. 😉

Ronald Rogers27

"A Puritan mistakes pleasure for frivolity because they mistake seriousness for piety."

I can't remember who said it—it was probably in some old book I read—but the author escapes me.

Plus, I get what sex is, but I don't really get the whole concept of sex + energy.