CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online
log in · register
Home › Society › Spirituality › Is moderation actually a sign of wisdom?

Is moderation actually a sign of wisdom?

Started by Noah Myers8 · · 👁 5 views · 315 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Noah Myers8Alexander Parker69Jack Harris3hollowviper72Ryan Wilson2Alexander WatsonPaul Campbell3frozenangler9velvetpilot212John Walker74Jose ReyesRebecca Cox2nimblecobra79Alexander HallPaul Phillips4Ryan Ruizfadedpanther29Aboldsailor32
Noah Myers8 Noah Myers8 Active MemberOP
50 messages
joined Aug 2004
#1 ·
... because all passion needs to be kept in check, according to Gaudrath.

But why? Isn't passion actually one of the most creative parts of being human? And I'm talking about positive passion—not just some physical release.

Why is wisdom always tied to moderation and finding the middle ground?

And if spirituality is built on who we are—if it’s deeply personal and individual—isn't that exactly where we should be allowed to go totally wild and passionate?

So, yeah, that's my first topic here.👋 new kid on the block😁
Alexander Parker69 Alexander Parker69 Active Member
117 messages
joined Mar 2003
#2 ·
Noah Myers8 said:which brings me back to my very first thread on this forum.👋 just the new kid on the block, I suppose.😁

in which case, I’ll probably have to bite my tongue to keep from commenting before we all decide to tear you apart too quickly.😁
Jack Harris3 Jack Harris3 Regular
451 messages
joined Dec 2002
#3 ·
Noah Myers8 said:why is wisdom always tied to moderation... you know, finding that middle ground?

Honestly, I think it’s just because people are terrified of actually being themselves. 😁

I was wondering the exact same thing when I talked to hollowviper72 earlier... though you went into much more detail than I did. Now I'm just sitting here waiting to see what they have to say about it... 😁
Noah Myers8 Noah Myers8 Active MemberOP
50 messages
joined Aug 2004
#4 ·
Alexander Parker69 said:Fine, I guess I'll hold back on the comments just so we don't roast you alive too quickly. 😁

I don't believe in holding back.😁
Noah Myers8 Noah Myers8 Active MemberOP
50 messages
joined Aug 2004
#5 ·
Jack Harris3 said:People are just terrified of being their true selves. 😁

I actually asked hollowviper72 the exact same thing, but you gave a much deeper answer, so now I'm just sitting here waiting to see what else comes out of this. 😁

So, are people afraid to be themselves and therefore they ARE restrained, or are they afraid to be themselves so they AREN'T restrained?😁
Jack Harris3 Jack Harris3 Regular
451 messages
joined Dec 2002
#6 ·
Noah Myers8 said:They’re just too scared to be themselves, so they end up holding back...

Exactly. 😁
I wouldn't even go as far as saying they're being restrained... it's more like they're performing restraint. Mostly for their own benefit. 😁
There's a massive difference between actually being someone and just forcing yourself to act like it...
Alexander Parker69 Alexander Parker69 Active Member
117 messages
joined Mar 2003
#7 ·
Noah Myers8 said:I don't buy this whole idea of self-restraint.😁

But honestly, what am I supposed to do when I inevitably lose my head and go all in?😍 😁
hollowviper72 hollowviper72 Regular
268 messages
joined May 2004
#8 ·
Let's not derail such a great discussion—especially since it’s the very first point raised by Noah Myers8 here. 🙂

Noah Myers8 suggests, "is passion not precisely the most creative of all human aspects?" My answer? Not quite. Passion itself isn't a creator; rather, passion is just the outward expression of being obsessed with a specific subject, not a creative force in its own right. If I had to pin down the single most creative aspect of the human experience, I’d say it’s imagination. Imagination is the true engine of the human spirit... passion is merely the spark... it always needs fuel to burn, and like a fire, it cannot exist in a vacuum.

Now, regarding why wisdom is so often linked to moderation—that's something worth chewing on. What actually constitutes wisdom? To my mind, wisdom rests on two pillars: knowledge and understanding.
Knowledge without understanding is pure madness. American history is littered with examples of what happens when people wield knowledge without any real understanding—the development of the atomic bomb is perhaps the most spectacular example of that kind of folly.
On the flip side, "understanding" without knowledge is mere pretension, which is just another flavor of madness. People who strive to understand without first knowing are essentially trying to build their own "Tower of Babel"—from the top down.

However, those who possess both knowledge and understanding have managed to temper their own madness. The old folks say youth is foolishness, and they're right—because youth is fueled by passion. Every passion stems from a lack of understanding... a failure to grasp the things we do, a failure to see the consequences of our actions, but most importantly, a failure to truly know ourselves. Consequently, a passionate person remains blinded by their own fervor, and the wisdom that comes from understanding one's full self remains just out of reach.

Anyway, that’s my take on it. It's not that I'm not a passionate person myself—I'm still young, after all, and I have plenty left to understand. What I'm writing here is my knowledge—but even then, I often fail to truly understand what I know. So, I certainly wouldn't call myself wise. Just as a bit of a disclaimer. 🙂
Ryan Wilson2 Ryan Wilson2 Regular
387 messages
joined Dec 2002
#9 ·
Uh... I have an absolutely devastating weakness for blondes... it’s honestly a problem...

No, but once I sober up and actually address the spirit of this discussion: in my experience, moderation yields absolutely zero results when it comes to magical practices.
Jack Harris3 Jack Harris3 Regular
451 messages
joined Dec 2002
#10 ·
hollowviper72 said:Imagination is the driving force behind the human spirit... passion is just its expression... it always needs something to feed on, much like a fire, and just like a fire, it can't exist on its own.

So imagination doesn't feed on anything? 😁
The old folks say youth is madness because it’s so full of passion. Every passion stems from a misunderstanding... a failure to grasp what we do, the consequences of our actions, but mostly, a failure to understand ourselves. That’s why a passionate person stays blinded by their own fervor, and the wisdom that comes from truly understanding all those layers remains out of reach.

Or maybe passion just comes from being young? 😁
And then when someone young like you—for whom passion is basically just your default setting—starts preaching about having to "rein it in," it sounds pretty "unnatural" to me... if not something worse... 😁
Partly because of the age thing, and partly because of that word "rein in"... it implies force. Even a horse won't let itself be reined in voluntarily.
You have to break it... or, to put it more politely, "tame" it. 😁

And jumping over to a different thread for a second:
Siddhartha pursued his purpose through passion. Once he let go of that passion, he found his true aim.

Did he leave it behind, or did it leave him? 😁
hollowviper72 hollowviper72 Regular
268 messages
joined May 2004
#11 ·
Jack Harris3:

But doesn't imagination feed on nothing at all? 😁

Imagination grows just like a plant—and much like a plant, it exists in a delicate balance with whatever provides its sustenance. Now, passion and imagination both draw from certain aspects of life, but there's a fundamental difference: passion eventually depletes you without any way to replenish that energy, whereas imagination simply transforms what it takes. 🙂

Or maybe passion just comes from being young? And when someone as young as you—for whom passion is basically a baseline state—starts lecturing me about how it needs to be mastered, well, it sounds a bit "unnatural" to me, if not something worse...

Why is that? Personally, I think there’s a bit of a skewed perspective here regarding passion—treating it as this inherently vibrant, living thing. It gives the impression that someone who isn't obsessed is somehow... dry... inert... you know? That's really the sickness of our modern American culture—we always gravitate toward extremes. Even when people talk about moderation, they tend to approach it with a sort of fanaticism.
Moderation ought to be a natural state of being, not something forced upon us. It should be our healthy, default approach to life... and the person I’m talking about isn't "non-vibrant" or some hollow vessel... quite the opposite! This is someone who wants to experience life in its absolute fullness. But passion—ironically—is exactly what prevents a person from experiencing everything *except* the one thing they're obsessed with. They focus so intensely on that single aspect that everything else gets pushed to the periphery... and as is always the case with passion, that specific aspect begins to burn out within them, growing paler and more faded by the day. Like an emotional addict, the obsessed individual gets trapped in this feedback loop where the passion itself triggers even more passion just to sustain the illusion of that initial feeling... eventually, people just burn out, exhaust themselves, and... then what?

Passion shouldn't be excused as a "normal state"—that's really just a misunderstanding of its nature. The world is full of elderly people who are burning just as brightly with passion as they did in their youth, simply because they never grasped the true nature of obsession. It’s an inevitable stage in our development. Some people realize the reality of passion by age 25... others never see it for what it is in their entire lives. One of the most common fallacies is the idea of a "passion for life," when in reality, what people mean is a passion for specific *aspects* of life that they find desirable. Someone who truly loves life doesn't discard the whole in favor of a few isolated parts.

So, let me pivot the discussion a bit: can anyone actually point to a passion that is purely positive? I’ll try my hand at demonstrating how every passion ultimately carries a negative consequence. Just a little game. 😉

Did he leave her, or did she leave him? 😁

Only he knows the truth. 😉
Alexander Watson Alexander Watson Member
45 messages
joined Jul 2004
#12 ·
Noah Myers8 said:... because every passion needs to be kept in check, according to hollowviper72.

Noah Myers8?
Thank goodness your avatar is green... 😉
But, welcome aboard...

And hollowviper72?
hollowviper72 just sells smoke wrapped in the fancy, arrogant nonsense of people who wouldn't know the truth if it hit them.
Alexander Watson Alexander Watson Member
45 messages
joined Jul 2004
#13 ·
hollowviper72 said:Imagination is the driving force of the human spirit... passion is merely an expression... it always feeds on something, much like a fire, and like a fire, it cannot exist on its own.

If we’re going to play along with those analogies, let’s be clear.
hollowviper72, if passion is *only* an expression, then imagination is just as much an expression.
You can't just shrink or expand definitions whenever it suits you.
Besides, neither imagination nor passion can survive in a vacuum. They aren't standalone entities; they don't have lives of their own. Like I said before, assigning a quality to something isn't something you can just hand out like candy.

Now, let's look at your argument.
Just picture a writer trying to be "moderate." Imagine them hitting a moment where they need to describe pain or suffering, and instead of tapping into passion, they just settle for moderation?
What kind of writer is that?
They need to write about love, about death... are they just going to scribble mediocre sentences?
Don't be ridiculous, hollowviper72.
Try imagining life without passion (and I'm not talking about lust here). Seriously, imagine a life of perpetual moderation, devoid of passion because it supposedly needs to be "restrained"?

To wrap this up, I'll leave you with a quote from Nietzsche:
"It is easier to renounce certain passions altogether than to be moderate in them."
Alexander Watson Alexander Watson Member
45 messages
joined Jul 2004
#14 ·
To be fair, my first post was based entirely on my own perception of reality..
This one is pretty straightforward; all you have to do is open an American dictionary and look up "passion"..
It becomes immediately obvious just how much you're trivializing and cheapening the whole concept..
Actually, I’d go as far as to say you're desecrating it..

Passion—a lasting inclination toward the beautiful and the sublime (one of three standard definitions)

Is it clear now, hollowviper72, just how wrong you are?
hollowviper72 hollowviper72 Regular
268 messages
joined May 2004
#15 ·
No. 🙂

Let me clarify things a bit:

hollowviper72, if passion is nothing more than an expression, then imagination is just as much an expression—plain and simple. You can't just shrink or expand a concept whenever it suits your mood.

It’s tempting to think that imagination and passion function like two sides of the same coin—analogous, if you will. But they really aren't. They operate on entirely different frequencies. While neither can truly exist in a vacuum—imagination needs a spark, and passion needs a target—there is a fundamental difference in how they impact us. Passion tends to burn through you; it exhausts your reserves until there's nothing left. Imagination, on the other hand, is transformative—it builds you up even as it moves you forward. As I've mentioned before, one drains the tank while the other refills it.

Prenesimo to na ovo:

Just imagine a writer who is fundamentally driven by the pursuit of moderation—someone whose entire creative compass points toward the middle ground. Now, picture that same person reaching that inevitable, heavy moment in a story where they have to tackle raw pain or deep suffering. Instead of leaning into the intensity, instead of letting the passion take over, what if they simply... surrendered to the moderation? What if, when faced with agony, they chose restraint over catharsis?

What exactly is passion fueled by? Is it agony? Suffering? Love? Death? Or maybe just the act of creation itself? In the world of art, we talk about passion constantly—but I’m not talking about the artist here. I’m talking about the wise man. You see, artists and sages rarely walk the same path; in fact, many of the greatest artists are little more than walking caricatures of themselves, driven by impulse rather than insight. I honestly don't know what to make of this—it feels like we’re circling the drain of a very specific kind of madness. It's that classic "idiota-savanta" paradox, isn't it? Where someone possesses this staggering, almost frightening level of specialized knowledge, yet lacks the most basic common sense required to function in a civilized society. It reminds me of those brilliant researchers you see in Silicon Valley—people who can map out the entire architecture of a neural network in their sleep, but would probably walk into a glass door if you didn't warn them first. There is a profound, almost tragic gap between raw intellectual horsepower and actual wisdom. You see it everywhere lately; people are becoming walking encyclopedias of niche data, yet they seem increasingly incapable of navigating a simple conversation without tripping over their own ego or their own lack of social intuition. It’s a strange phenomenon to witness—this hyper-specialization that leaves the individual fundamentally disconnected from the world around them. We’re building a society of geniuses who can’t read a room to save their lives.It’s funny how passion works—it can be a double-edged sword. Some people get so blinded by their own intensity that they become completely oblivious to everything else around them. They lose their grip on reality because they're staring too hard at the flame. Then, you have those rare artists who manage to take that raw, burning passion and channel it through their imagination—using it as a sort of fuel to drive the human spirit forward rather than letting it consume them. There is a massive distinction between those creators and the ones who simply burn out in the heat of their own obsession. And honestly? It isn't even about the quality of the work or how unique their vision is. It really just comes down to plain old human luck.
Passion... it doesn't actually bring you happiness. It won't bring you satisfaction, either—not even a true sense of fulfillment. Honestly? Passion just brings desire. It creates this bottomless pit, an endless craving that you can never quite manage to fill.

Just imagine—really try to picture it—a life completely devoid of passion. And let me be crystal clear here: I’m not talking about mere lust or physical craving. No, I mean the deep, driving, soul-stirring fervor that makes us who we are. Think about a life lived in a state of perpetual moderation, where every impulse is checked and every intense emotion is kept under tight control because someone decided that passion is something that simply needs to be suppressed. Can you actually envision existing like that? It sounds utterly hollow, doesn't it?

Heh. Honestly, if I hadn't envisioned a life fueled by passion—a life lived to its absolute fullest, free from shackles and blinders alike—I wouldn't be speaking this way right now. To me, passion is that enduring inclination toward everything beautiful and sublime; though, that’s likely just the third way to define it. So, Alexander Watson, what would you say is the first definition?

To leave you with a little something to chew on—I’ll quote Nietzsche: "It is easier to renounce certain passions altogether than to practice moderation in them."

Who on earth decided that taking the path of least resistance is the only way to go? Honestly, if life has taught us anything at all, it’s that this whole "easy way out" principle is nothing more than a fallacy. Through hardships to the stars....

Just a small side note regarding the tone of your post—I think we can all agree that everyone strives to live their life according to their own internal compass. That said, there’s a certain level of arrogance involved when we tell others they’re doing it "wrong" simply because they aren't following our specific set of rules. In my view, Alexander Watson, passion is ultimately something that blinds us—it acts as a sort of limitation rather than a liberation. You, on the other hand, clearly see passion as an absolute asset. But honestly, does it even make sense to sit here and debate who is "right," especially since neither of us is going to abandon our fundamental nature just to win an argument? A more hot-headed individual might actually enjoy this kind of back-and-forth, but for me... well, it feels a bit like watching kids compete over toys in a playground. 🙂 That’s why he delivers his truth with such calm, steady clarity... just like that line from *Desiderata* suggests. 😉
Noah Myers8 Noah Myers8 Active MemberOP
50 messages
joined Aug 2004
#16 ·
Look, hollowviper72, those definitions you're throwing out are interesting, but I’ve got no clue where you're getting them from.
It feels a little weird debating spirituality since it's such a personal thing—everyone has their own set of rules and definitions. But hey, let's try to nail down some terminology because I feel like we're totally talking past each other semantically.

So, based on what you're saying, passion is something "low," something that just serves as fuel, whereas love is this self-sustaining power. And if I'm following you right, love is a creative force, but passion can't actually be creative? Where are these definitions coming from? Is this just your personal take on reality, or are you citing specific sources? If it's the latter, which ones are we even using here?

I could agree with you that passion needs to be "tamed"—but honestly, I think passion is exactly what drives thought. It gives wings to the mind, which eventually leads to creation. Living passionately doesn't mean living mindless; it means actively loving the act of being alive.

And that question you asked—"does it make sense to argue when neither of us will give up who we are"—that's actually a great point. But we could ask that about pretty much anything on this forum. We're assuming spirituality is an intimate domain, so we should be speaking from the perspective of WHO we are, not just WHAT we think, even though those two things really ought to overlap. We're having a conversation. I'm asking because I genuinely want to see what you have to say and get a sense of who you actually are. 🙂
Jack Harris3 Jack Harris3 Regular
451 messages
joined Dec 2002
#17 ·
hollowviper72 said:Why? I feel like there’s this skewed way of looking at passion here—like it's something purely vibrant and alive. It gives the impression that someone who isn't obsessed is somehow... dull... stagnant... just inert.

If they aren't obsessed, fine, but if they are and they try to suppress it because they read somewhere that moderation is a virtue, then that's just bullshit.
And that's the vibe I was getting. Like you're supposed to stifle your passion. 😁
That's the flaw in our civilization. We always swing to extremes. Even when people talk about being moderate, they tend to be passionate about being moderate.
Moderation should be a natural state, not something forced upon us. It ought to be our healthy approach to life... the person I’m talking about isn't "non-vibrant," they aren't some empty vessel... quite the opposite, they're someone who wants to experience life to its absolute fullest. But passion can actually prevent a person from experiencing anything *except* what they're obsessed with. They focus so intensely on that one single aspect that everything else just falls by the wayside...

Like I said before: a moderate person knows a little bit about everything, but nothing deeply. 😁
But then again, people really value someone who knows way more about one specific thing than anything else when they need help. For example, imagine someone wants to learn Spanish and goes to a tutor. That teacher speaks perfect Spanish, but doesn't know a word of French. Damn that lack of balance... instead of being able to speak a little of every language since there are so many out there... he's become so obsessed with Spanish that he's forgotten how to truly embrace all the other languages in their full glory... 👎
Life works the same way. You can't know everything about everything; you can only know a little bit about a lot of things. Do you really think that's better than actually "knowing" something for real, with a bit of depth?
Besides, there are so many different paths in this life, and maybe some "passionate" person will figure things out before a "moderate" one ever does.
And wisdom is such a subjective thing. People have even told me I'm wise, so just imagine how much weight that carries. 😂
What even is wisdom? I've seen your "fundamentals," but you know what? Real wisdom comes from living your life and actually observing the world around you. Every "wise saying" I've ever read just points back to that same idea. And honestly, even old farmers who haven't left their patch of land in decades end up saying some incredibly profound things. Where does it come from? They might not even know how to quote or write properly, let alone possess formal "knowledge"...
and just like it always does with passion, that aspect within them burns hotter and hotter, growing paler and paler, until like an emotional addict, the obsessed person is trapped in a feedback loop where the passion itself triggers even more passion just to sustain the sensation... eventually, people just burn out, they exhaust themselves, and... what's left?

Then they become wise, obviously. 😛
Passion shouldn't be excused just because it's "normal"...

Then what?
It's "normal," sure, but its suffocating nature isn't. And besides, in most cases, passion just burns itself out. Like you pointed out... once it flares up and dies down. And even if someone clings to it until they're old, then what?...
Why mess with the natural order of things? 😁
...nothing more than a lack of understanding.

Well, if you really want to look at it that way, then a lack of understanding is also "normal." There isn't a person alive who understands everything, so they're forced into a state of not knowing. You either get it or you don't...
So, true understanding requires certain predispositions, and once all those pieces fall into place, understanding just happens automatically...
But while those pieces aren't there, it’s perfectly normal for understanding to be absent, simply because something is missing. 😛
Let me shift the discussion slightly: can anyone name a passion that is actually positive? I’m going to try to show how every single passion eventually leads to something negative. Just a little game. 😉

You don't even have to try. Of course you'll find something "negative," because if all that energy is poured into one passion, there's nothing left for anything else...
And so what? For the person involved, none of those other things even matter...
Take a passionate painter, for example. His paintings might be all he cares about; everything else is just noise to him. And the people looking at them feel the same way...
And occasionally, that painter might say more to them than those moderate folks could ever manage with their own hard-to-find wisdom... 😛
Paul Campbell3 Paul Campbell3 Regular
259 messages
joined Feb 2004
#18 ·
Jack Harris3 said:Wisdom isn't some textbook crap; it’s what you actually pick up from living your life and watching how the world works. Every single "wise saying" I’ve ever read points back to that one truth. Even old-timers out in rural Nebraska who haven't left their farm in forty years—they drop these heavy nuggets of wisdom all the time. Where does it come from? They can barely write a coherent sentence, let alone claim to have any formal "knowledge."

🙂
Paul Campbell3 Paul Campbell3 Regular
259 messages
joined Feb 2004
#19 ·
Siddhartha chased his goals with everything he had. But once he let go of that passion, he finally found his purpose.

I’d argue that the second he found that "purpose," the passion was already dead and gone.
hollowviper72 hollowviper72 Regular
268 messages
joined May 2004
#20 ·
I think we’ve hit a bit of a misunderstanding here. You seem to be operating under the assumption that someone has to be either purely passionate or strictly moderate—treating those two concepts like they're mutually exclusive, like fire and water.
To me, "moderation in all things" simply means finding that sweet spot where you aren't doing too little or overdoing it in any given area.

Just chew on that for a second. It doesn't make much sense for me to try and answer questions about moderation if my interlocutors are starting from such a flawed premise to begin with.

And Jack Harris3—just so we're clear, having "knowledge" isn't limited to high-level nuclear physics; it includes life experience, too.

Damn the excessive guy—instead of dabbling in a few different languages since there are so many out there... he was so obsessed with English that he completely forgot to actually master the others.

No... I think you're still misinterpreting what passion and moderation actually look like. A truly passionate person would be so consumed by their obsession with English that they might forget they even have a wife and kids (for example). Nothing else would matter. A moderate person, on the other hand, would be great at their job without letting it become an all-consuming obsession. Does that make sense?

She’s "normal," but her suffocating nature isn't. Plus, in most cases, she just burns herself out. As you so aptly pointed out, once she burns out, she's done. And even if she manages to hold on until old age, then what?

Nothing, except for a life wasted. When a house burns down, the fire eventually stops. But what does that actually mean for the person who just lost everything they owned?

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads