This story has a strong "life sucks then you die" vibe going for it. And the afterlife also sucks apparently (although I don't personally believe in an afterlife).
Hopelessness and injustice seem to be the current zeitgeist - at least for anyone who spends a lot of time online. And I get it, there's plenty to be unhappy about.
But my counter-argument is that it's possible to do things in life that you're proud of. And find happiness in the simplest of places. And most people would do better to focus the majority of their attention on those things.
This story says "do yourself a favour and forgive yourself for any failings on your part, you’re only human after all" - which I agree with. But I'd go one step further and add "celebrate your successes" and try to align your life in such a way that you can have successes worthy of celebrating.
It makes me wonder: with everyone seemingly so unhappy, why aren't there more people pursuing alternative lifestyles? Similar to the 60s counterculture. You don't need the whole world to go along with you - just a handful (or less) of likeminded people. Or some people even manage to go it alone.
It seems a lot of people (perhaps a vocal minority?) actually enjoy being upset. Or maybe everyone is going through ups and downs but we just tend to be more vocal when we're upset.
It’s not the lifestyle that makes some people unhappy, it’s the knowledge that there is suffering around the world they can do near nothing to stop.
Not everyone frames their happiness solely on conditions within their own sphere. Knowledge comes with responsibility.
There is this feeling where it's futile to do anything, the world is big and miserable and you're small and insignificant.
I'm slowly getting convinced that some political players are spreading this view on purpose. It is an easy way to block people who try to stop the erosion of society.
It also isn't true. You can easily improve the world on a small scale by doing anything positive. On world scale, trying to change things is like buying into a lottery. Most attempts will fail, but the more stakes you have, the bigger the chance of winning.
In my corner of the world, over my life, I saw flemish people, woman, LGBTQ, vegetarians all stand up and demand the rest of the world treat them as equals. They all started tiny and were laughed at for the futility of their dreams. But I speak dutch, woman go to universities, gays are holding hands publicly and getting married, and vegetarian options are normal in restaurants. These causes won, because lots of little nameless people fought for it, even if there are still haters pushing back each of them.
> God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
Sorry for the cliche quote, but I feel it's relevant. As an atheist, I wouldn't appeal to God, but rather would look within for these things.
Yeah, a bit of this. Speaking from Europe, there is the latent feeling of war, and the fear that an even larger one may come. It's also becoming increasingly clear what kind of visions the powerful people are trying to realize, and don't have much to do with the kind of optimistic visions for the future that I grew up with. Lastly there is a feeling of helplessness in the face of all this.
There is still a lot of counterculture in spite of all this - and honestly, it even feels more enticing than it used to. But it also feels more hedonistic and escapist than like a genuine alternative way of living.
Things feel less like the 1980s and more like the 1920s...
I agree to the extent that you can impact things around you, but is the general chaos and suffering in the world outside of that sphere really a responsibility? At some point you have to accept you can really only impact the sphere unless you end up being a major historical figure.
I think one of life's big questions is defining the size of your sphere of responsibility.
Some people decide that sphere is really big, and they go on to be those historical figures. Others define it really big, and wallow in angst, aware and powerless to the suffering. Others still define it too small, and by the end of their life, find regret that they didn't try to help those within reach.
> why aren't there more people pursuing alternative lifestyles? Similar to the 60s counterculture.
I think the brony and furry community count for some examples. Brony community has been a major counter-culture since its inception and I truly believe it's had a measurable impact on gender norms and some other areas. Many of us see it as something of a lifestyle where it dominates the spaces we primarily engage in etc.
Furry is even bigger and easier to argue as a popular counterculture lifestyle, and growing all the time (record convention attendance every year).
They're also places where some other things like polyamory are more common, and much more LGBT/etc inclusive than average (which is less of a statement now, but they were both far ahead of the curve on that years ago), refreshingly sex-positive (at least the parts of the communities I identify with).
Personally all of those things apply to me and I love being a part of those communities. Brony community has been a hugely important thing in my life since high school and working on game development there was a big jumpstart on experience working in a team/technical experience. Furry I only started exploring more a few years ago but I've made a lot of great friends and met my current partners there too.
Brony's a consistent core of lifetime holdouts like me and a steady trickle of new people at this point, and furry's growing faster all the time - even the little bonfire meetup at a nature preserve I like to go to had a record smashing attendance on opening day this year.
While brony and furry weren't exactly what I had in mind, I think you're 100% correct. And also a great example of finding happiness in simple places. Whatever gets your juices flowing (figuratively speaking).
I thought bronyism sort of died out and that the furry community sort of subsumed it.
I'd also add that I think the increased self-ID of young people in the LGBTQ community is in and of itself sort of a means to access a sort of alternative lifestyle. Many of these people live somewhat hedonistic, bohemian, artsy lifestyles that disregard traditional notions of success or traditional standards and mores in relationships and love.
> why aren't there more people pursuing alternative lifestyles?
generally land costs
> And the afterlife also sucks apparently (although I don't personally believe in an afterlife).
Why don't you believe in the experience after dying ?
I'm going to say it will be similar to the experience prior to birth / conception, ie. we were nothing, and to nothing we shall return.
It's a scary feeling if you can grasp it. Grasping non-existence from within existence is difficult, I've consciously tried to do it and succeeded a couple of times, but it's fleeting and both times it affected my breathing and heart rate in a similar way to fear or panic or pain.
As someone who was born, I can attest that the experience of not being born consisted of billions of years passing by in an imperceptibly short instant, followed by being five.
So you will experience something then, if you say that you experienced this nothingness before you were born :D ;)
What I was aluding to is that people have profound consciouss experience when they are dying. Even clinicaly dead people with zero brain activity. But even if EEGs can't detect extremely low brain activity, it's still weird to have such rich experiences.
I would have never found metaphysics in my life, if i didn't have a few unnatural experiences. I would not find the big explanatory gap between experience and matter, which is so obvious to me now. I would still be a materialist while not even knowing I was one, like many here in these comments.
Before I was a materialist like you and I was not afraid of dying, because like you, I thought it's just lights out and I am no more, so I can not suffer. But now I am more afraid od death, because of the unknown that follows.
> What I was aluding to is that people have profound consciouss experience when they are dying. Even clinicaly dead people with zero brain activity. But even if EEGs can't detect extremely low brain activity, it's still weird to have such rich experiences.
This is an extraordinary claim, any sources for it? Specially the point about "profound conscious experiences" in "clinically dead people with zero brain activity".
Do you know whether we live in a computer simulation?
If we do, well it would seem trivially possible for our simulators to provide us with an afterlife if they wished–and we honestly could have no idea what they might wish.
If you claim to know we don't live in a computer simulation, or that if we do, our simulators would be unlikely to grant us an afterlife–how do you know that?
P(we live in a computer simulation) ~= 0.5
P(there is an afterlife|we live in a computer simulation) ~= 0.5
Therefore, P(there is an afterlife) >= 0.25 even if we assume P(there is an afterlife|we don't live in a computer simulation) = 0.0 (which is itself highly debatable)
I go through that exercise of visualizing the void and it is fascinating and terrifying at the same time, especially if you do it before going to sleep.
That being said, you can't just assume that existence is bounded by your living memories. You might as well have been everything instead of nothing prior to being spawned and you just don't remember it.
> you can't just assume that existence is bounded by your living memories
I was going to raise that, but couldn't find a short enough way to describe it properly. Something like:
Existence beyond what you can actually remember doesn't matter because it's outside any bounds of practical discussion; it should be excluded from consideration. The same way it's impossible to predict anything 'before the big bang' because we only have 'after the big bang' as useful evidence. There is no way to verify any continuity if you can't remember it or if there is no evidence of it. There's no guarantee you can even comprehend what it could be, 'you' as a concept may not even exist and it's unlikely to be relate-able to anything in this living world. Maybe you return to being 0.00001% of the collective consciousness of the universe, or any other crackpot thing anyone wants to suggest. Flying Spaghetti Monster.".
If you're a materialist and you think there is no afterlife then I don't believe there would be a void. There's no mechanism for "you" to perceive a void or perceive time.
Its the difference between:
"I see nothing when I close my eyes" (actually you 'see' darkness over time)
and...
"I see nothing through my elbow" (You really don't see anything through your elbow because the capacity for it just doesn't exist.)
Even our basic perception of time is mediated by the structure of our brains... and without that there's no difference between one second and a trillion^trillion years.
I've always wondered why doing it before sleep amplifies the anxiety
It's very easy to grasp, do you remember what it was like before your first memory? No? That's what it's like.
Nope. That's a long way from grasping it. That's seeing it from a distance and understanding the general shape.
I may just be defining 'grasp' differently to you though.
I think that once the power supply to my brain shuts down, that's likely the end of my conscious experience.
Dead brains don't feel