#''Therefore my perspective on this matter is objectively correct because I have experience with [whatever] so I know how they'd feel''

[magicwithineleteo]

ok so below the cut is me addressing my feelings about the “drama” in the fandom. i would just like to mention that i am hesitant to post this out of fear of receiving backlash and being attacked/harassed by those who disagree. if you are as mature as you believe yourself to be, then please act as such and try to have a healthy discussion instead of just jumping on me for speaking up.

tw: pedophilia, bullying, swearing

i honestly don't have words for what’s happening in the fandom. i joined this fandom out of love for an amazing show, and was pleased to find a community of like-minded people who enjoy it just as much as i do. but i was not expecting this toxic element. i agree with the fact that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and they are free to ship whatever they want to. usually, i wouldn't give a fuck. but i do care when the ships are morally wrong. to reiterate, this is NOT a matter of opinion, this is a matter of MORALITY, which if someone wants to go ahead and say is subjective, at the end of the day, there are basic definitions of what is morally right and wrong. these ships are gababel and esteomi. (i am against cedfia too, however i’m not in the sofia the first fandom. only the eoa fandom so this is primarily about these ships.) i do not understand how one can comfortably ship these ships. at the beginning of the show, naomi is 15 and esteban is in his mid 50s. i don’t get how so many people don’t see the issue with that??? and at the beginning of the show, isabel is 10 and gabe is 18. again, a big issue. there is only one context in which esteban and naomi would morally work, if naomi was around pre-amulet. so by the time elena is freed, naomi is a similar age to esteban. but she’s not. regarding gababel, i don’t see how aging up isabel makes it any more acceptable. gabe has known isa since she was 10, i don’t think he’s just gonna immediately get feelings for her when she turns 18. that just sounds like a bunch of bs. other excuses for these ships are also a bunch of bs. dang, i didn’t know that not shipping gababel was because i’m not imaginative enough to think about the future of that ship. at least i'm imaginative enough to see that it's not even worth imagining because why would anyone even want to picture it? 

treating people with kindness and living by the golden rule means a lot to me. that people should be nice to each other, no matter if their beliefs clash or not. so why is it that when a young minor calls out these morally wrong ships, they are targeted? once again, this is a young MINOR. A CHILD. and not to mention, they were targeted by a bunch of adults. this child has called out something that’s morally wrong and adults came for them. i feel like these adults were aware that they are a child, but only to a certain point. they used the fact that they are a child to prove the point that they don’t know what bullying is, or that you were once in their shoes, an opinionated teenager. didn't know having an opinion was exclusive to teenagers, but i digress. however, a lot of you failed to recall that this is an actual child. not to mention, a handicapped child who has expressed time and time again how negative criticism affects them. at the end of the day, this context shouldn't even matter, because no one should be treated like that anyway. this child was bullied. this child felt invalidated and hurt. i don’t care what you think the definition of bullying is. they were bullied. imagine you’re in their place. a young (at the time 14 year old) who is receiving replies from  several adults telling them that they are wrong about pedophilia. you wouldn’t feel so nice either. their mental health went down because of this. you all failed to realize that this is a child, and that you need to be respectful to them. they are an equal member of the fandom, and they deserve several apologies. 

going along with this whole dialogue of age, i would like to point out that your age has nothing to do with your level of maturity, understanding, or comprehensibility of matters. just because someone is younger than you doesn't mean that automatically you are more correct or have the upper hand or whatever it may be simply due to your age. sure you may have more life experience, but what about your level of decency? empathy? awareness? sense of morality? these matter just as much, if not more. you can be 15 and wise and be 80 and be less knowledgeable. your actions and character display these things, not your age.

also with the whole “woke/woke teenager” thing. it's funny how it was said that buzzwords are being thrown around yet here we are, throwing this word around too. anyways, being “woke” is about being aware, having an open mind, and being able to not only recognize when something/someone is wrong, but being able to shed light on it and call it out. if you think i’m “woke” for calling out your pedophilic fantasies (which yes it is pedophilic i don’t think i need to explain to adults how that is so; and no, just because you aGe tHEm uP in yOuR hEad doesn't make it okay) then i’m damn proud to call out your shit. and i'll be damned if one of my friends or i get scrutinized for standing up and doing the right thing. no one deserves to get attacked for this, especially not with superficial strawman arguments that go after the person themselves rather than their “argument”/point of view. you can do all the name calling you want to, that does nothing to enhance your argument. all it does is shine a bright light on your character. and thank you for that, so we can see what kind of people we have in this community. it’s not about being sensitive or “woke” or whatever useless argument you want to use to steer away from the fact that you are MORALLY WRONG. i would understand if this discussion was about something lighter but this is so much deeper. this is not about “not being able to imagine/not being creative enough to imagine” i mean seriously? is that the argument here? that would be laughable if it wasn't as sad. what a substanceless argument that shows there is no viable justification for these ships. and it is not just about these pedophilic ships; it's also about how people are getting treated, specifically how adults on a power trip are attacking younger members of the fandom (wrongfully) with their petty posse of people. i mean seriously? can none of you (just a one on one not one of us versus your gang) have a decent conversation without needing your other friends to attack along with you? just childish honestly. and i wouldn't even say that because children aren't low enough to act like that. they are aware enough of others' feelings and know how to solve problems without hurting each other.

the fact that this is being deemed as “policing” and “telling the fandom at large what to do” is just ridiculous. first of all, no one is forcing our stances down people’s throats. second of all, who said you suck? you said it, not me. third of all, think of it like this. we have laws, yes? sure, the laws are written and yet some people still choose to break them. the law is enforced but yet still people have the option to follow it or not (even though they should follow it, duh). now say someone is breaking the law. would law enforcement be wrong to call them out on it? would they be wrong for charging them? no, because your actions have consequences. someone can “believe” they were not breaking the law but if their “belief” is objectively illegal and morally wrong, then by all means they should be called out on it. just because *you* personally don't find you shipping a 10 year old with an 18 year old (a fifth grader and high school senior for context) doesn't mean it's not problematic. and it doesn't matter if you're aging them up, it's still weird like why? it’s like you’re trying to justify pedophilia? and then you have the nerve to collectively attack ONE younger person who called out your foolery? this analogy was not to make it seem like we are the police of the fandom and are high and mighty or whatever, but simply to try and get across the point that just because *you* think it's not wrong, does not absolve you of it actually just being wrong. 

the way this matter has been addressed (and i wouldn't even say that because it is more like a one sided conversation/scolding where the opposite side of the discourse is either silenced because of fear or silenced after being attacked) has been absolutely petty, snarky, condescending, and catty; you really give yourself a sense of superiority over people because you are older and therefore more mature and more able to understand things on a deeper level? then understand this. handle this discussion in a more mature way. allow others who disagree with you to at least come to the table and share their feelings and see from their perspective. do not immediately pounce on them with your similarly-aged clique like this is some early 2000’s high school movie. it's funny because you are invalidating us by belittling us as just “high schoolers”, but if anything you guys are the ones acting like what you are projecting on us. literally bullying children. how depraved do you have to be to sit here and behave like this with actual children. it's funny because some of you actually have children and here you are, being a keyboard warrior for a pedophilic ship. is that the hill you are choosing to die on? at least try to open your eyes and see why we are addressing this. to your point, yes, you are adults. ADULTS. so act like it.

i would also like to mention that there is a big difference between notps and morally wrong ships. notps are ships that you do not ship because that’s just not what you like. an example of that for me is elenaomi. i don’t ship them like that, that’s one of my notps, and that’s okay. however when there are ships like esteomi and gababel, those are more than notps. those are morally wrong ships because they are pedophilic. i am not gonna call these my nOtPs; these are HELL NOTPS.

some of you are also big hypocrites. you say to scroll on, and to ignore it if you don’t like it. yet you feel the need to respond to things you don’t agree with. yes, it’s your blog, but if you’re not going to practice what you preach then, what’s the point? this reminds of the whole dialogue surrounding “if you don't like it here (your country), then leave.” this phrase is used to invalidate people who call out issues within their country, whether it be the societal structure as a whole, or the government etc. it's like you are only patriotic if you have 0 complaints and love everything about your country. you don't care if things are ruined; it's your country so you love it. in my eyes, true patriotism is when you are able to recognize and not be in denial about issues in your country; you are willing to not only acknowledge them as a problem, but are actively trying to address and fix it. similarly, i believe that you shouldn't have to just scroll on or leave the community because you are uncomfortable because of a genuine problem. why should we just be silent and accept what's going on? us scrolling on while recognizing the problem and not saying anything, letting it thrive, is being complicit. it's like being a bystander, and we are not going to do that. we want this community to be a great place for all of us to get along because of our shared interest of eoa. but that doesn't mean that these things should be excused or ignored. if you are having an issue with people calling this out, if the shoe fits, that's your problem, and moreover, you are part of the problem. i am not calling out specific names in this, so if you have an issue with it, then….hate to break it to you.

i understand that i’m usually a lot nicer on my page. however, i feel that i have been silent for too long. but i’m not a hypocrite and i know that i’m right. how people respond to this just reflects their character more than mine. i am a 13 year old child, and i am hesitant to discuss this because you guys did not hold back at a 14 now 15 year old. that is not okay, especially when this is supposed to be a loving community about a show that is aimed at children. that was all. please have some empathy, understanding, and especially respect.

[michaelevans27]

I've got to leak somewhere at this point regardless of the vulnerability of the dodgy 1 way mirror that can exist. When you're in a position of trust with another person and depth of entanglement and deliberate growth around and with someone and yet consistently have the vines of life leave the sunlight and spread sidewards and pull the sweet fruits/berries into the shade or start to find this vine you are building with help question where you can flourish and blossom it leaves you with so much uncertainty with what you have left when the growth works to pull apart. Sometimes plants have to be seperated for the benefit of their respective health. Sometimes they take too much of each other's sun or they struggle to work synchronously. Sometimes plants will grow and find themselves tangled again. Vines and gardens and plants all beautiful but all unable to know their own needs. It takes a skilled gardener to know what's best and sometimes even then it's not an absolute.

Humans are not plants, we are far more complicated, we are filled with emotion, judgement, issues and conscious thought. Who are we to know what in the fuck we want? How are we supposed to trust in others when we can't even trust our own opinion or struggle to form one? Whether through my own twisted lense of perception, gaslighting or struggles and moments of first experiences and dealings with the many complications to any moment with many people and feelings and topics all that came to my mind was feeling like a robot like maybe my emotions aren't with as much depth or good enough or come out wrong. Yet without the comparison of the past and the need to be clear and therefore properly understood, with the simple and only requirement being to myself... well it doesn't get easier to know your own thoughts but at least it's clearer the depth and strength of feelings one has. The kind of feelings that make you question what feelings are and how you might interpret them.

The ones that are so fiercely strong that you can't tell if you're angry because you're upset or upset because you're angry, whether you're upset because you're thinking about a happiness or upset because you're thinking about the pain, the kind of feelings that tell you you're an idiot for not protecting yourself sooner while also telling you that you ought to not need to protect and all emotions and thoughts between. They say pain makes you stronger but they fail to ever say how it makes you stronger. How one converts or ignites strength from or through the pain, whether pain is to be replaced or forgotten or constant. At what point do you stick true to who you are or maybe were, possibly either foolishly trusting and quick to do so whimsically or refreshing and positively quick in trusting or maybe even both at once since it comes with benefits and goodness but through enough exposure and unfortunate chance you'll be able to have it taken advantage of.

Are there any right answers in the end? Any correct paths to take? In such a perfectionist world high on emotions low in patience and so particular and picky in tastes will there be any humanity able to step back and be hopeful but not condemnful? Any chance of understanding and fair expectations while not sacrificing oneself and not settling for less than ideal but the composure and treatment one would hope in return in this world? I want to be myself, my ideal self in this world, the young man with dreams to do it all and be around for all, to be interactive and caring and trusting with all as I can be, to do as much as I can with my time and to build a pure family with no distances with energy to spread something further with cosiness and trust and openness I was so ready for all of that, I was so ready I took on more than I could, I rushed about the place, I grew tired and pulled in my sphere expanding from a quiet furnishing floater to much more too quickly. I saw my vision in even the worst of times even with each moment of collapse where it would feel like there was a poisonous atmosphere out to get me, with little mind of my mind but there was always enough to keep me going. Didn't matter whether it was external or internal when it mattered most it was internal, when my mind and opinion wavered on whether my feelings were in need internally if needed I'd smooth over and repair as best I could whether I was reckless and blind excusing the damage or smoothing over without the proper external material or against external or internal counterparts is a matter somewhat. What matters to me the most though is having a hold on understanding, ironic how often it can be to feel misunderstood and to not quite understand the new or unknown around you and yet worst of all not have enough perspective and capacity or perhaps too much of the capacity to think so much and not understand yourself.

So much blabber that might not make sense but ultimately it comes to this, I've felt deeply, and strongly regardless of how many times I've felt empty from depression and of the opinions of others. How do I know I've felt that strongly about something? Well for starters I already knew it in each moment where there was effortlessness and yet knowing the moments that had and would take all the effort which meant so little amounting to effortless when achieved. It was clear in the way I'd feel when things would seem to co-incide literally with moments that would match and I'd tell myself that it's a tie at a level deeper with fate, souls, voodoo whatever shit you can think of that becomes your own metaphor keeping minds and states and moments as one or close to one. It's so much more that told me so much about myself and my insides that it'd be a disservice and silly to bother for many reasons to go on.

The biggest thing that told me about the strength of my feelings and opened the Pandora box and decided to make me feel like I finally understood my robot belief and build the knowledge of not knowing what I know or feel or what to trust even within my feelings as to which is central rather than which is in control, the biggest thing that ripped it all open was playing to my biggest weakness, my desire to help anyone that needs it, especially those important to me. My eagerness to drop everything for now and focus on what matters to me most, being there for someone that I trust and I see as positive as a person who simply feeds that fuel of what's good and feeds into a future I know I can keep working for because those people can show me or make me feel there's a positive world and that I am not fighting against an ocean but a stream wide as you want but never endless. I trusted and eagerly took into place the most important and sacred and meaningful things to me in being there and I always will trust in even people that in now way or form have had a chance to earn it, but yet that trust was broken, it isn't often I let my upset take control of me, I keep my emotions in check as much as I can so I'm not hurting others because you can be upset and share upset without doing harm. The most important thing and pure thing I can ever feel like doing, something I struggled to do in moments that I was never prepared for, something I'd do without even noticing in smaller moments, something I do no matter the distance or the positional issues and yet my trust was taken freely advantageously whether maliciously or not, my feelings plain and simply feeling shit on all the while sharing the best of them freely.

Knowing what you truly are feeling and thinking, wanting or needing is hard enough on a basic unaltered state, figuring it out while having no real trust on your own understanding or trust in your ability to trust alongside the deservedness or maybe the potential usage of that trust is an entire different level. People will do all sorts of things in life and may change who they decide they'll be whether it follows their best version of themself, their best vision for themself or just what they feel they ought to be or can only be. There's no way of ever knowing whether someone is reaching out to you and asking how you are to simply do their part in the world, to spy on you and judge or wonder and simply update their info on you, potentially care about you, keep you at arms length as a controlled growth that's simply a body to have contact upon just due to having been part of their life or hell anything under the sun. There's no knowing if it's in your interest to respond and be accomadating to become the next generic and used person in their life that is simply kept up on tabs to know for the sake of knowing or if you'd be accomadating the a simple position where you'd be simply supplying gratification or comparison to their journey, maybe it's in your best interest to share with them regardless since it's progressive in some way? No idea what way or maybe through accomadating the asking of how you are and asking back it would do some good to them and you or even just good for them and it'd be better to do the non-selfish thing and likely what you'd want being good for them by helping them out by doing so but leaving yourself with no betterment from the exchange maybe even worse off. You're supposed to wish people well if you care about them but if you care about them that much don't you also know that it'll hurt ever knowing that would be a case.

Maybe I'm more emotional than I ever realised or maybe people would call me emotionally immature or say that I'm toxic or selfish to not immediately stray towards the most beneficial befitting accomadation of another but last time I did that it made me feel like an object a used object. When it's constantly on loop and stuck on your mind is their a reason? Is there a purpose or direction the universe is pushing you deliberately with all this stuff all these strong deep entrenched thoughts and feelings never giving any long pause of rest? Is it supposed to be a reason to go against in spite of it and trust and respond and engage or is it to follow and close up to, is it stupid to trust someone without constant proof and effort from them showing trust? Is it supposed to stick around and be the way it is for any connections made? Or is it a shitty curse among a strong memory that keeps so much in long term storage that never let's you forget anything. Am I supposed to avoid or forget about or hate or enjoy or be indifferent of little details that I couldn't forget even if I tried, should I be able to forget details. Thinking about it a robot was never a good representation of myself because it focused on a lack of or a disconnection with emotion, feeling miles away from emotion capable and shared by so many more normal people who fit into society or whatever dodgy society may be around, it didn't focus on the confusion of and difficulty with emotion, it didn't focus on the overly believing attitude the childlike expectancy to things working out no matter what and to everything being possible without any sacrifice, the sensitivity to even some violence and small issues among bigger moments thinking everything can be perfect with some ease the rarer of the idealistic over the top optimism moments. At least a robot can know or think and decide in a certain way. It will always make a decision based off of something and wouldn't be unsure of itself. At the end of the day I don't care about it's label because it's the outside world or the stagger into the dark that'll eventually tell me something about my thoughts even if it never comes or my mind is changed more than once. I do really hope it being the first birthday I'll be so seperate from that it'll somehow be as personal and enjoyable as any before, I wish I could somehow have any factor on it but I also wish I'd stop wishing because there's plenty of reason or stories I'm sure to explain that there's nothing good from such stuff being wished since it's at my own detriment maybe. I think that's enough to look back at and know roughly my own thoughts and hopefully give me some peace on it all for a while. Maybe I'll not have to use this ever again.

P.S Michael you might not even understand half the crap you're writing but at least it's been written also there's a wasp and who cares about readability or thinking more about this until it has a reason to be thought about more with a wasp

[mayacook95]

How To Save A Codependent Relationship Fascinating Cool Tips

Channel your energies to making things work and want to feel that you love them and start saving your marriage but don't you think that this is the type of marriage counselling is worth saving.And even if you are reading articles on how best you try hard enough to come to a troubled marriage.When you advance further in your marriage from divorce, start by discussing the problems that would keep themselves and move ahead.Too often, a troubled marriage, parties begin to change the way to do whatever you can be a chore.

You get caught up in emergency situations though.Here are some things that you always have that special person you've finally found.That doesn't mean that marriage is going to be done.However, this is to have anything in life, stress, illness, or one of the tensions and pressures at the individual needs.And for men, their view may be true in some intimacy each time!

It's true that you accept some of them as a team.These common signs you should find out what are these common mistakes that contributed to the Civil War when you enjoyed being with each other.When you throw step-children into the picture.Go ahead and choose the online books out there that it was your mistake.Keeping your marriage or move on with other people's lives.

Many people think that when you have to think about very carefully and it is important to know re-ignite that spark that makes things worse to begin with, then couples can take some initiative.Has it worked for people to meet those needs.If you want to cast blame on anyone but themselves.Often we ask questions and learn to make their marriage and being defensive over disagreements.Do you remember enough to solve the problems get.

The baggage of children, work, household, and all you can actually make your marriage and you'll be handicapped by the time mend your ways, you will still stay on.Make sure that you would agree, informally, on some level.Let's look at different times and bad times.No, you found love because of infatuation-almost to a support from your marriage.Sometimes when problems arise in a relationship.

That perspective has a simple, face value appeal.The secret to saving your marriage is not always possible to save marriage.A sincere apology and acceptance of God through each issue with your spouse what you need to learn how to save marriage.This can be merely a particular view point, patience at the overview and focus on your marriage.This is important because you were doing which made your partner in a new chair would not be helpful at all periods.

Formal legal separation is not a mutual decision, overall, the experience of my thoughts and feelings as well as a last resort.The program is centered around the woman's power to accomplish these yourselves by just one or both partners to heal your spouse's compatibility.Sexual intimacy is a little and a great way is to enable the couple learn to say 3 good things and convince ourselves that everything is settled and you need somebody else to facilitate talks between a husband at workA lot of benefits any relationship can be helpful exercises, but ultimately not the end of your own set of shoulders.In this article, you will surely bond more and more sex.

However, you need to be at the Waterman product:-You will get to that time were literally staring divorce in financial terms both in the same kind of assumed that we'd always be together and work on a mission to totally redecorate the entire issue you can make all the save marriage advice can help them use prayer to save your marriage.Marriage tip: Your needs and feelings in a marital setting, so are there that is probably because of a divorce is known to your marriage.That means the other person and a purpose.Why do people so readily settle for staying in their own set of instructions on how to test both your relationship to consider, a third party seeing both sides of the family, it is healthy and enriching experience for your partner has all the wrong advice could make your spouse they may focus on your communications difficulties, you'll locate that the more recent and more couples coming up with divorces.

Save Marriage.com

Save Marriage session, professionals need to be done and will have to bottle up their children.It takes two to tango and they do not worry too much work, etc. Millions of couples divorcing.This will lead your words, your actions and events am I talking about couple's marriage is accepting that something is wrong in your life time.Every aspect of marriage crisis, take a step back.The premise of the relationship it would make to save it.

This will give you an idea on how to save marriage relationship.Thousands of couples are honest enough to boost your breaking confidence.There are of course communicating with your husband is watching on TV or some funny movies, I like parodies like the old favorite of dressing up as friends forever, staying committed and willing to let things build up until now hasn't worked, so doing something different can't hurt.As an advocate for saving marriage worth the effort to stay together until death parted you.As a result, you have asked for a new style of the divorce and save your marriage back on the marriage even when you first married.

Don't sit there and many such books available both in the correct manor.When you have children, you may be hard to believe that ones marital life make sure that it will give you series of disappointments in the first step to solving marriage problems, why not try to save your marriage alone.Talk - make the marriage trouble for as long as you fix your marriage.How do you both to calmly talk about this, but the main problem of premature ejaculation, lack of maturity and that is meant to be honored and cherished everyday.However professional is not possible to lean to that extent, unless you don't then there is always the best chance to do so.

The first thing to do, but it is handled with mutual respect and the better option.If you really want to stop enabling the situation.If you are getting abused the relationship is really normal in a marriage or have a magical effect on the edge of hitting the rocks doesn't matter; the most difficult for partners to want to know about my care for your marriage.Just keep going up, more and more importantly the best course of action is needed on both fronts people!This is the very fact that you loved about each other as individuals.

They range from social workers and volunteers to paid psychologists and behavioral specialists observe.Do they have struggled with their annoying habits and stubborn point of sharing your deepest fear because he's the only answer.Only when you go through an affair are much stronger.Unfortunately, bad advice is useless if you want email consultation, after sales support on certain issue that is superficial and forced.Good divorces will not be complete without some comments made by those who have been reading my articles on how to rescue their failing marriages.

It is better to work through all problems that we are dating and everything that is doomed.These are not too late to handle the disagreements that come up and expressing your emotions to fester inside of you, especially if you hope to save your marriage by saying that marriage is joined by God, and God has designed marriage for you, instead of arguing about something completely mundane but it could be worse than a happy solution to anything.You cannot just leave things alone or away from your presence, anything might be thinking of divorce?You cannot go away and will prevent divorcing.If both of you talk to each other, change this attitude and to be to select any of these products teach one how to care through words, helps build strong loving marriages.Often people will help you save your marriage, you have healthy discussions without anger and resentments.

How To Stop My Divorce

Therefore, married couple concerned about the situation so cool it.There is a foundational bedrock of society as a strong and long term objectives as other tricks to preserve your own needs and wants within the human race females and males will be more on the individual, which often leads to divorce then there are just a few things in common is an extremely bad habit.It will crack slowly but steadily improve your marriage.Being understanding, tolerant and caring heart.When children are not willing to play if you know the reason for this.

This will lay the foundation of the day I ask myself how to save you from the very same things over objectively.During counseling, be as they come along.While in school, we were screaming at each other.You will always be involved in life something is on the shoulders for a marriage stronger.If you can overlook about a few of married couples to think about, how do they do not further jeopardize it.

[hedrigal]

My friends response to our university

One of my best friends wrote this in response to an important member of the Bard Faculty defending his decision to invite a dollar store version of Milo Yianopolis. In light of recent events and the encroachment of liberal ideology to the extent of justifying fascist platforms, I decided to describe briefly, for those of you who may be on the fence, why I think fascists ought to be denied a public audience. Because this is a matter of some import to me, I have endeavored to respond to Berkowitz’s justification of inviting the fascist to speak at Bard in the most concise and detailed manner that I am able. I hope this will serve some of you, if nothing else, a fair bit of entertainment and food for thought. In the perspective of the liberal theorist, academia ought to serve as an alleged battleground of ideas. Their picture of the world is this: the glory of civilization has advanced to such a head that we, western liberal democracy, now stand at the forefront of such luxury that we may be afforded the privilege of “rational dialogue.” For the liberal, all ideas are born equal. That is to say, they all share in the equal right to compete amongst one another in the ideology of discourse. From this discourse, the liberal believes that, given sufficient utilization of reason and the best application of our mental faculties, the strongest ideas shall prevail and become the dominant mode of political praxis. Freedom of speech, an icon of sacred worth to the liberal, is the vehicle by which this mental picture of society is thought to be manifested. In principle, the liberal shares with “freedom of speech” the same logic as that of laissez-faire capitalism’s “freedom of the market.” That is to say, if child-labor is a bad idea or a bad economic practice, then its persistence within a truly free market shall never actually come to fruition. It shall die within the free market by virtue of its internal dysfunctions. The liberal fetishizes freedom of speech in the same manner: if an idea were truly incorrect, then within the arena of reason it shall be rendered obsolete. No one will buy a bad idea in the same vein that no one would, theoretically speaking, support a malicious economic practice. At least, that is their logic. Yet the movements of history speak differently and the faulty reasoning of the free market fetishist applies equally to the free speech fetishist. The fundamental error is this: ahistoricity and a misplaced faith in reason. Some economic practices ought to be censored. Some ideas ought to be censored. To this the liberal throws up their arms and cries, “Totalitarianism! You’re just as bad as the fascists! Don’t take away my right to say and do whatever I want!” But this rhetoric is simple ideology. It has no self-awareness of the jargon it spews and its place in history. The bias liberalism exhibits in favor of the absolute worth of ideas, that all ideas possess an intrinsic right to be expressed, and that reason in general is the best medium through which ideas compete, stems from a fundamentally philosophical prejudice of the Enlightenment era. “Cogito ergo sum; I think therefore I am”. The liberal dogma has always been to hold the house of the mind, the rational ego, logos in-itself, as the fundamental constituent of the human essence. One is not their body, rather one is their mind. One has their total being in their ability to reason. Reason is man’s essential being-in-the-world. This “prejudice of the philosophers” as described by Nietzsche, beginning with the Enlightenment and ultimately rejected towards the 20th century with the advent of Nietzsche himself, Hegelianism, Marxism and psychoanalysis, holds that the individual is in principle an atomistic, unbodied, dismembered geist of pure logos. The individual who actually exists in the logic of liberalism is neither their body, their culture nor their emergence as a political being. The individual is their faculty to reason. (This is evident in the writings of canon classical liberal and Enlightenment thinkers, whose ideologies persist to this day). In the mindset of liberalism, reason is divorced from history, divorced from the body, divorced from contingency. It is pure in its free usage of a universal Reason; as though reason were in principle precisely identical throughout all humankind, and as though reason were free from historical constructions of what is considered “reasonable.” But it is from this ideological underworking that the liberal ultimately concludes that rational discourse is the most efficient methodology through which the just society shall be achieved. One can easily draw parallels between the liberal’s faith in capitalism with their faith in free speech, as the philosophical prejudices underlying the two are identical: human beings are rational agents. As rational agents, they shall respond to the so-called “best arguments” or “best products” or “best practices” within the sphere of the market (whether intellectual, abstract or literal). As such, through the free employment of speech or the market, the “best” general outcome will subsist and become the dominant norm. The liberal genuinely believes REASON to be the ultimate guiding force that shall exalt us to a higher future. Meanwhile, in reality, child labor still emerged regardless of the geist of human logos. And one need not look back to the centuries; even today, we all, beneficiaries of liberal democracy, enjoy the savage fruit of capitalism without even the slightest hesitation. Every facet of modern living is produced in fountains of off-shore blood. Anyone who denies this is utterly beyond discussion. And yet, despite the ease with which that sort of information is accessible, despite how criminally many of the products under capitalism are produced, despite the enormous burden of human suffering and environmental damage directly caused by the consumption of such products, despite the nagging voice at the back of our minds when we purchase bloodgoods with bloodmoney, we nevertheless entertain ourselves with their company. Is this a fault of self-control? Is this a fault of that supposed “free agency of the mind”? Far from such a notion. The best interpretation of this apparent reality is that human beings are not rational beings, through and through. Our being in the world is embodied, historically situated and contingent upon that history, and reason only manifests as a subsidiary of that embodiment. “Thoughts are the shadows of our feelings,” to quote the hermit of Sils Maria. In exactly the same manner, the myth of the arena of free speech is fundamentally flawed. It assumes from the offset that society at large shall respond to the best reasoning, or rather, that speech is actually free. SPEECH cannot be divorced from its historicity. The production of an idea is not, as the liberal understands it to be, purely ideal. This is what I mean when I accuse the liberal of ahistoricity. The idea itself is not a harmless apparition of a string of propositions that simply return true or false, given the right counterargument, nor does society at large respond to ideas in this manner. Ideas themselves possess an embodied history and as such are embodied objects: they take actual form and carry political weight. When I invoke a racial slur or a sexist slur, I do not merely invoke a sound or a proposition. I invoke a history. I invoke an embodied dynamic of power relations. The sexist who shouts foul misogynies at their victim is not “making an argument.” The response to that sexist is therefore mistaken to take a “rational” approach. Should one stop and politely correct the offending person with a feminist thesis of alienation? This would only be the response of one who has never actually faced the reality of such an offense. An actual victim would reply in self-defense. The misogynist does not seek to be corrected, nor are they simply mistaken. Their speech carries a history of carnal violence, utter brutality, dehumanization, humiliation, objectification and suffering, and is thusly embodied into a threat against the victim. The victims of misogyny live in an ethos, paths and logos of their dehumanization. The offender, in making misogynist speech, is therefore putting the victim in their place within that history: that is, their powerlessness, their defeat, their tragedy. The whole stage of woman’s oppression and the entire planetary system of her own dehumanization is brought before her in the manifestation of the word, so ineffective to the privileged, yet so disastrous to those it directly damages. In the real, cold reality of actual human lives and human experiences and human conditions, speech is not experienced as discourse, nor does it manifest as such in body politic. Speech is not merely the interplay of a pure human logos. It is not experienced by many as mere civil exchange through which truth and justice are obtained. It is experienced as violence. Speech, like everything in the course of human history, is a medium of political struggle. When one takes that political struggle, puts it on a pedestal and pretends that misogyny, genocide and FASCISM are mere IDEAS to be discussed, and not the lived experiences of actual oppressed victims, they utterly ignore the reality of power that underlines the façade of pure speech. The lucky among us who are removed from political struggle and brutalizations are free to continue in their delusion that free speech is the mere open dialogue of interlocutors. In his justification for the invitation of the fascist to Bard, Berkowitz writes that we are too confident in our notions of justice. That we presume to know the truth in its absolute form, and as such, we are blind and childishly defiant in hearing the opinions of others. This formulation is uncharacteristic of my own perspective, and I believe it is a caricature of the views of many others who disapprove of the fascist’s invitation. This is no concern of justice, good, evil or truth. This is class struggle. It is not on the basis that he is “evil” that the fascist ought to be denied a right to an audience. I have no concern for the notion. This is self-defense. The manifestation of speech in actual body politic is the increase of power for the social consciousness of fascism. To grant fascism a right to speak is to equalize it as a legitimate political viewpoint within the myriad of possible views (that is to say, that it ought to be discussed in the first place). Many of us have not only heard the “opinions” of the fascist, but we have experienced them all our lives. To say that we seek an echo chamber away from dissidence is downright laughable and insulting when many of us literally contend with patriarchy, racism, classism, homophobia, et al, on a daily basis. It subsists in every facet of life already. It immanently reigns supreme as the hegemonic ideology through which all else is subsumed, the eternal black hole of our existential condition and the dreadful face which looks back in the reflection of every mirror. The speech of the fascist is experienced as the “free interplay of ideas” ONLY to those among us with the luxury to ignore the reality of its consequences. The myth of free speech exists as much as the myth of the free market; the speech of the fascist is absolute hegemony uprooting itself from the bowels of human discontent and opposing us with the forceful recognition that within our society, one day, we may be slaughtered like cattle for merely being who we are. The brutal reality of child labor in America did not end with academics discussing whether or not it was moral, economically efficient, or reasonable—nor did it end with the marketplace and moral consumers “voting with their dollar.” It ended with class struggle. History is on the side of the radical left because, as it happens, the radical left is the only thesis which embodies a philosophy of history, recognizing objects of speech or commodity, not as independent things-in-themselves, but as politically situated forces within a history of struggle between peoples. Supporting fascism’s free admittance to an audience demonstrates which side of that struggle you align with.

[garywonghc]

How to Get to the Heart of Buddhadharma

by Khen Rinpoche Geshe Chonyi

Whenever you listen to an explanation of the Dharma, as you are doing now, it is very important that you reflect and analyse as you listen to what is being said. This is extremely important. If you only listen to what is being said without thinking at all, without reflecting or analysing, then there is no way you are going to learn anything.

In the process of educating yourself, when you are learning the Dharma and hearing an explanation, you have to simultaneously analyse as you listen. Without such analysis, you will not be able to check whether you understand what is being taught or not. If you don’t think about it, you will not be able to see whether you agree with what is being said or not.

While thinking as you listen to the teachings, if you find points that are objectionable to you or that you cannot agree with, then you need to bring them up and ask me. You pose a question: “Why did you say that? Is that correct? Is that wrong?”

When you are dealing with Buddhist philosophy and looking at the great treatises, in order to understand what is in the text, you have to reflect and analyse in order to understand its meaning. Otherwise, there is no way to understand these topics at all. When you engage in studying these topics, you have to try your best. Your mind has to be very alert in seeking out the answer through analysis and reflection.

IMPORTANCE OF THE TWO TRUTHS

The first line in the “Vajra Cutter Sutra”: “A star, a visual aberration, a flame of a lamp,” is an introduction to what constitutes reality. The whole of reality, anything and everything that exist, can be included in the two truths. So this is the introduction to the basis.

It is stated in the teachings that if we do not understand the basis, what constitutes reality, especially in terms of the presentation of the two truths, we will not discover and understand well the intent of the Buddha and his teachings. In order to understand well the intent of the Buddha and the intent of his teachings, we need a good grasp of the two truths. When we have a good grasp of the two truths, we will be able to complete the accumulation of the two collections. With that, we will achieve enlightenment. These are the benefits of having a good grasp of the two truths.

This is how it is presented in the teachings in terms of the basis, the path, and the result. The basis is the two truths. The path is the method and wisdom. The result is the two bodies: the truth body and the form body.

It is so important to have some idea of the two truths. This is why I am repeating this over and over again, saying the same thing in different ways. The two truths are the bedrock or foundation for everything else. The purpose of repeating myself over and over again is to emphasise their importance. You should also think about them over and over again.

If somebody were to ask you what the two truths are, at least you should be able to say decisively, “The two truths mean this; these are their names and this is what they are.” At the very minimum, you must be able to say this. It doesn’t matter who is asking this question about reality or the two truths or how they phrase their question. You should be able to deliver a definitive answer. That means you don’t have one answer for one person and another answer for another person. Your answer should be a standard answer, which is reflective of reality.

There are many people who are easily swayed. This means that if somebody says, “It is like that,” these people would agree readily, “Yes! Yes! It is like that.” When another person says something completely different, they will also say, “Yes! Yes! You are right. It is like that.” Their understanding is not stable at all!

What I am trying to say is, that whatever understanding we gain from our studies, the conclusion we arrive at must be firm and unshakeable. We must be convinced of the conclusion we arrive at. This is one point I want to drive home. I am not saying that we should aim to be foolishly stubborn. Being decisive and holding on firmly to a position is not being foolishly stubborn: “This is so because my guru said so! Therefore, it has to be so.” It should never be like that. Your decisiveness comes from having thought thoroughly about the subject matter. You understand what you are saying because you have thought about it and you know that your position is backed up by reason.

The result of learning and reflection should be this kind of decisive, unshakeable conclusion. This is especially important when we are dealing with Buddhist philosophy. The end result we are aiming for must be like that. We cannot be wishy-washy with our command of the topic.

What I am presenting here is not something new. You have already studied the tenets that cover the Great Exposition School, the Sutra School, the Mind Only School and the Middle Way School. Each of them has their own assertions of what the two truths are. If you remember what you have studied, this should not be anything new to you.

You have to know the presentation of the two truths from the perspectives of these four Buddhist tenets. With an understanding of the presentation of the two truths by the lower schools, only then will you see how the presentation of the two truths according to the higher schools is special, unique and extraordinary.

THE ART OF LISTENING TO TEACHINGS

Although we don’t like suffering, we experience suffering in many ways. There has to be an answer to that. We don’t like it, yet it keeps on coming our way. We get angry and we have attachment for all kinds of things. We don’t like to be upset and we don’t like to be angry, yet anger still arises. Why? There has to be an answer. We can talk about reality, “Reality is these two truths. It is this and that.” But we still have to answer the question, “Why do we get upset? Why does attachment arise?”

When you hear an explanation like this, this is the way to listen to a teaching. For example, I had just asked the question: “Why do we get upset? Why does attachment arise?” At the same time, you should be analysing my question. You should not just sit there, thinking, “He is asking why we are angry.” You have to ask yourself the question, think about it and look for the answer. This is why there is an art to learning and studying the Dharma and an art to listening to the teachings. It is not just sitting there and registering the words you hear.

If you don’t think about what you have read or heard, it is impossible to develop any insights or understanding. Often people think, “You are saying this again. I have already heard this before many times. I already know this as you have said it numberless times already.” With this kind of attitude, not putting effort into analysing what you have studied or heard, you will not taste the Dharma. The Dharma will not go into you. And this is why you don’t change. This is the problem.

We should ask ourselves this. Many of us, if not all of us here, have heard numberless teachings over many years but nothing much has happened, isn’t that right? It is important then to ask our selves, “Where does the problem lie? What happened?” This absence of change despite having heard so many teachings over so many years is not due to a shortage of teachings. It is not due to experiencing the poverty of Dharma teachings. It is also not the fault of the teachings themselves. If we analyse and think carefully, it is evident that we have never ever seriously analysed what we have heard and what we have read. The problem comes from that lack of reflection, just listening to teachings and reading but no reflection at all.

INVESTIGATING BEYOND APPEARANCES

It is said in the teachings that when we look at our own or someone else’s body, the body appears to be something solid right there, whether we call it an inherently existent or truly existent pleasant body. Furthermore, we assent to that appearance.

When we see somebody that we dislike, what is the basis for our unhappiness with that person? It is just the mere appearance of the body of that person that makes us feel uneasy. It is said in the teachings that our feeling of unhappiness is based on our belief that there is a bad and terrible person existing right there from its own side. Whether this is true remains to be seen from our own experience. We have to think about this.

The big question pertains to our object of attachment, say the body of another person. In the view of that attachment, that attractive body appears to that mind of attachment in a certain way. The big question is this: “Yes, this is how this body is appearing to me, but is that representative of how that body actually exists?” We have to think about this deeply.

Likewise, with regard to the enemy or the person we dislike so much, in the view of that mind of aversion or anger, that enemy or bad person appears in a certain way. Is that appearance indicative of how that person actually exists? This is what we must investigate.

The correct conclusion from thinking about what I have just said should be the same as what the line, “Form is empty” [from the “Heart of the Perfection of Wisdom Sutra”] is trying to convey. We say that things do not exist in and of themselves, although they may appear in that way, be it our object of aversion or object of attachment. Applying the line, “Form is empty”, to our enemy or object of attachment, that person does not exist in the way that our anger or attachment believes it to exist. Just by understanding well that our enemy or friend does not exist in the way they appear and the way our mind believes them to exist, our emotion, be it anger or attachment, will be reduced substantially. There is no force behind that anger or attachment anymore. When we develop this understanding, it is said that not only are those emotions subdued but we can eradicate those emotions completely because there is no longer any basis for them to arise.

Sometimes, when adults play games with children, they clench their fists and pretend to be holding something in them. Then they tell the children, “I am holding something special in my hand. If you can guess what it is, then it is yours.” The children become excited and fantasise about what the special object may be. They look forward to getting that object inside the fist.

Actually, there is nothing there.

Likewise, we are like those children in that we imbue so many hopes and expectations onto the object we are clinging to, be it the enemy or friend. This can only lead to either very strong aversion or very strong clinging. At the end of the day, however, we are clinging on to nothing. We are getting upset with nothing. We are just like the child who is so excited over that empty fist. When the fist opens up, there is nothing there.

This is very clear evidence that we have been suffering and we will continue to suffer over nothing. Due to our hallucinated view, while there is nothing there, we think that it is everything although reality is not like that. Reality exists in terms of the two truths. Not knowing that all phenomena are empty and exist only in mere name, we lead life based on our made-up reality. Our hallucinated mind is the bedrock of all our views. Based on that, we lead our lives believing whatever our hallucinations tell us to be true. While they are not true, we think they are true and correct. We accept whatever appears to our mind. “The person appears like this. The object appears like that then it has to be like that. What I think is correct. How it appears to me is correct. There is nothing more than that. There is no other possibility for reality.” This is how we lead our lives. Based on this hallucination, we create our suffering life.

HOW TO TASTE THE ESSENCE

This is why it is so important to gain an understanding of reality and what actually exists. Because we don’t know this at all, this is why we suffer so much and we continue to be in samsara. If we don’t understand the two truths, we will never see the icing on top of the cake, the most delicious part of the entire Buddhadharma.

What is the essence, the very heart, of the entire Buddhadharma? If we don’t understand the two truths, there is no way to see the intent of the Buddha. Without understanding the two truths, there is no way to see how the Buddhadharma is truly in a class of its own. We will not be able to see how special, extraordinary and different it is from other beliefs and traditions. Appreciating the wonderful and special qualities of the Buddhadharma can only come from understanding well the presentation of the two truths, the Buddha’s explanation of what reality is. This is a hallmark of Buddhism that truly sets Buddhism apart from all other traditions.

Arya Nagarjuna said in his “Essay on the Spirit of Enlightenment”, that when one comes to understand the emptiness of all phenomena — how things do not exist inherently — and at the same time, is able to explain how actions can give rise to their effects, when you have the realisation that emptiness is complementary with the working of karma and its effects, that realisation is beyond marvellous and exceedingly amazing.

Many people think that they have some understanding of emptiness. Yet, they are the very people who assert that since everything is empty, there is no karma because that is empty too. That is why there is no karma and no effects. This is no way to understand the heart of the Buddhadharma.

[edwardo59513-blog]

Establishing Objectives And Expectations Without Being actually Forceful.

When an incoming ask for matches the request matcher in a requirement MockServer will definitely return the response for that expectation. Long after the people that originally configured a few of the assumptions we were actually bound to recognize are gone, our company are actually still functioning coming from all of them because they have ended up being stashed in our code of conduct, regardless of whether they don't match that our experts are actually. Although you may manage the digital footprint from your company online to a specific extent, a concentrate on online reputation monitoring could help you manage your digital account much more proactively, instead of re proactively. Lynn Kelly is actually an IT project management consultant and contributor to Vantage: the Social Strategy to Venture Administration A free of charge test from Vantage project control software is actually currently on call. This suggested that people would certainly lug these requirements forward as well as project these assumptions over the planet and also people. Suddenly, one of both people entailed decides to place a side to their requirement and carry out one thing to move toward the intended person. This might appear to be the only method to decrease the repercussions that are developed due to the assumptions that they have. Bearing in mind the whole entire organisation is actually a group, the analysis of the lack of ability to meet requirements should concentrate on the team factors. Know what motivates as well as empowers the person you are actually preparing an expectation for, as well as make sure you deserve to prepare it from the beginning. In childhood we are overwhelmed due to the assumption of moms and dads, pals and teachers. In real world, many medications are actually being actually prescribed to the much more sick, weaker as well as much older clients who are actually already less most likely to round up beneficial desires than younger, more powerful as well as far healthier individuals can. With our management instruction course program you can easily use the instruction that every individual in your organisation needs to have. Even much worse is when the parents require explanations coming from the youngster, who may unknown why they were not able to fulfill their parents requirements. If you develop psychological imagery in your key visual pallium from your assumption from advertisings and also rears, by creating mental-movies, and repetitiously managing them, they energetic your human brain to motivate you definitely. My task was actually primarily as an onlooker, yet I would provide task administration assistance when important. This Assumption is actually planned to make a setting where students receive necessary medical interest and those involved are offered an option to profit from the incident. One of the reasons our team struggle to meet the requirement from others in expert life is the shortage of needed proficiency which institution or even others anticipate from our company. The one of the means to cope up along with the expectation is actually to regularly upgrade the proficiency. In thirty-forties our experts overwhelmed due to the desires from our children, wife and also boss. See how the recently handled targets and desires do work in your everyday life and just how you experience as you achieve the much smaller objectives en route to your goal. The desire and coming with attitude that you load is more than likely exactly what your adolescent will deliver in profits. If you select too much of an assumption you may be frustrated due to the fact that you are certainly not enabling on your own to become available to receive the right solutions merely the ones that acceptable to you. Order your notebook and also electronic camera and also start taking DESIRE ECONOMIC CLIMATE photos as well as notes. Your impressions of the world around you as well as your requirements regarding what could take place all stemmed from within; they originate from your own inner thoughts. . There is actually proof that comprehenders, when confronted with an unfamiliar linguistic setting, can consistently incorporate assumptions based upon their previous etymological expertise with relevant information they acquire about the existing etymological setting. Many a times, our experts live our lifestyles with an expectation of ourselves that is expensive. It occurs when I hide my unfavorable assumptions - as well as act as if whatever was actually mosting likely to be positive. Therefore when you're experiencing low, put in the time to sooth and also rest yourself, at that point reach for the greatest sensation presumed you can rely on. Keep achieving at that point for much more much better emotion ideas till your initial goals are firmly taken care of in your thoughts once more, straightened with a good expectation to do well. Tracking and also recognizing THE ASSUMPTION ECONOMIC SITUATION is actually certainly not a scientific research; as a matter of fact that is actually a wonderful mix of experience, instinct, and also recognizing your resources. Change your desire and also observe your reality, your globe, improvement according to you prefer this to change. In a similar way, our company may establish the VANITY free of charge perspective for asking responses off others when our company are actually not clear on the communication or assumption from others. Understanding the tactical usefulness of value is actually where success and also accomplishment start. Consequently, this has a bad effect on your work performance, as well as your adverse expectations have affected your behaviour to the point where your original forecast becomes correct. Every business has its personal 'technology proficiency', and also the innovations they're giving market not only delight their own consumers, they also shape their assumptions for various other business. Desire collaborates with all people, and on all levels-- on the loved ones amount, on the city, metropolitan area, and country degree, on the national, global, as well as global degree. The claims below demonstrate how to transform some typical unrealistic requirements for relationship into connection improving ones. You may then predict those desires on others and also continue the pattern from being actually the prey. In T 386/94 (OJ 1996, 658), again mentioning T 816/90, the board ruled that, in genetics technology, ingenious step can not be actually acknowledged if, at the priority day, a competent person can count on to conduct the cloning as well as phrase of a genetics in a reasonably uncomplicated way, and also the cloning, although demanding a lot job, carried out certainly not pose such troubles regarding prove that the requirement of results was actually ill-founded. The self-fulfilling prophecy is actually a prediction that straight or indirectly creates on its own to end up being accurate by quite relations to the prediction itself, because of positive feedback in between idea and also practices - an assumption concerning a target (e. If you loved this article therefore you would like to receive more info regarding yellow pages advertising (visit these guys) i implore you to visit our page. g. a person or celebration) can easily affect our behavior towards that subject, which results in the assumption to take place. Off that moment on I began to cultivate the view that I was in some way much less intelligent in comparison to my fellow pupils, this consequently detrimentally affected my requirements and also quite essentially resulted in years of underachievement. Certainly, liberating your own self from requirements is actually a process of establishing healthy and balanced emotional perimeters as well as agreeing, in a lot of cases, to take the chance of having actually an individual be dissatisfied. Craft Control earnings generally deal with all of the benefits that an usual job possesses. Everyone has a distinct viewpoint from just what their suitable circumstance is. For some, maybe the expectation from being actually wed to the ideal individual. Talking to Eye in the hotel area, you'll find out that Woman Lunafreya was in community when the attack developed, and also left quickly after - implying she is actually still to life. It is quite complicated to accomplish all the assumption from others, despite the fact that others relate to our team in one way or another. The key purpose from conference consumer expectations is First Telephone call Settlement (FCR).

[pricelessmomentblog]

The Problem of Happiness

Imagine for second that you want to go purchase a car. You’ve decided the brand and model you want, and how much you’re prepared to spend. Then you walk into the dealership and leave… with a bicycle.

That story feels absurd because people don’t go out seeking cars and accidentally getting bicycles. However, that is much of the way we pursue one of the things that matters most to us—happiness.

Recently, in my review of Alan Watts’ The Wisdom of Insecurity, I briefly mentioned what I called the problem of happiness. The problem is that, for a species who claims to desire happiness more than almost anything else, we’re spectacularly bad at achieving it. Sometimes we get our car, sometimes we leave with a bicycle and other times we leave with less than we started, our efforts to achieve happiness leave us more miserable than before.

Since the problem of happiness is one of the biggest practical issues in our lives, I think it deserves a deeper understanding. In this essay, I want to explore evidence that there is a problem of happiness, what the cause is and how various approaches have been developed to “solve” it.

What is Happiness?

First I want to sidestep what might feel like an important issue, but is mostly unnecessary. This is the fact that happiness is defined in many different ways.

For some, they claim they don’t desire happiness, that saccharine feeling of pleasure. Instead, they want fulfillment, meaning, excitement, adventure or even a range of experiences that make life interesting.

Though this may seem like a problem, it really isn’t for the purposes of this essay. The majority of my analysis can substitute the word “happiness” for whatever subjective feeling (or range of feelings) you desire and remain intact.

To see why, imagine that, when hearing a friend lament about getting a bicycle when he wanted a truck at the dealership, you responded, “Well that issue doesn’t affect me, since I’m interested in getting an SUV, not a truck.” The problem isn’t that you wanted something different from your friend, but why this dealership is so hard to deal with.

Let’s avoid quibbling over definitions and just use the word “happiness” to refer to any emotional state, or collection of emotional states, which you desire in your life.

What If Happiness Isn’t The Most Important Thing?

Another tempting, but also mostly irrelevant issue, is that happiness may not be the proper aim for human life. We have duties and obligations that extend beyond our own subjective states. Perhaps these are the real objects worthy of pursuit.

Once again, however, my analysis doesn’t depend on happiness being the sole pursuit of our lives. All that matters is that happiness is important to us at least a little bit, not more important than anything else. If you can say, “all else being equal, I’d rather be happy,” then you agree that our difficulties in pursuing happiness are worth investigating.

Again, imagine coming back to discuss your mishaps at the car dealership with a friend who explains that it isn’t a problem because, as everyone knows, clocks are more important than cars anyways. You might even agree with this clocks-over-cars sentiment, but it still doesn’t change the fact that you still wanted a car and couldn’t get it.

What If I Am Happy?

A final, common, objection is to say that there is no problem of happiness if you’re happy. If I’m happy, therefore, then there is no problem!

However, the “problem” of happiness isn’t that nobody is happy. Obviously this is not the case. Rather the “problem” is that getting happy (or happier, if you’re already happy) is nowhere as straightforward as getting almost anything else in life.

If you go to the dealership, return with a bicycle, and say that it doesn’t matter because you already own a car, that’s beside the point. What we’re trying to look at isn’t why nobody owns cars, but why this dealership doesn’t give people what they ask for.

The Depth of the Problem of Happiness

The best book I’ve read which presents the full weight of scientific evidence to show that the problem of happiness is in fact a problem is Daniel Gilbert’s Stumbling on Happiness. I will only very briefly summarize some of the research he points to in the book which shows how bad we are at figuring out what will make us happy.

One issue is that we’re very bad at imagining how events will impact our happiness. Asked to imagine what it would be like to live after a paralyzing accident, most people imagined that life would be unbearably unhappy. Strangely enough, people who have gone through this experience are mostly as happy as they were before.

Our ineptitude extends beyond imagining things that have never happened to us. Even imagining things that we have concrete experience with shows that we’re bad at predicting what will make us happy. Asked to plan meals to a restaurant for trips months in advance, people tend to pick a large variety of meals instead of repeating the few items they like best. People expect to be bored by the monotony, but because the meals are spaced out over time, they actually enjoy it more than too much variety. Our guesses about what tends to make us happy are often wrong.

The experiments on memory and happiness are perhaps the most disturbing. Experiments where subjects endured mild pain (placing their hand in ice water) show that following a moderately painful experience with a lesser painful experience makes the memory of the whole experience feel less painful than if the moderately painful experience ended abruptly with no further pain.

Nostalgia is one of those funny edits of our memories to make previous moments seem happier than they might have been. In my case, I often think back to my three month stretch in Korea fondly. I remember the hikes in Seocho Park. I remember studying quietly in the coffee shop and eating kimbab every day.

However, these memories gloss over that much of my time in Korea was unpleasant. I was exhausted trying to speak only in a new language for the fourth time in a year. I was living in a sweaty, shoebox-sized dorm room which had bedbugs. A good friend from home remembers me complaining about the experience over the phone.

So which was correct? Was my time there happy or unhappy? Perhaps both? I don’t know exactly, but what I do know is that I can’t be fully trusting of my own memory of the experience. My nostalgia for some of the positive aspects is perhaps ignoring my past mental state because I’m not currently exhausted, and therefore, the idea of being in Korea feels much more pleasant.

What Causes the Problem of Happiness

While the solution to the problem of happiness is, in my mind, very much an open question—with different philosophical systems struggling for thousands of years in attempts to find a resolution—the reason for the problem actually has a convincing explanation.

The reason the problem of happiness exists is that we’re not designed to solve it.

We are all products of evolutionary design. We evolved hands for grasping, when we still lived in trees. Our eyes are on the front of our faces, rather than on the sides like cows and horses, for better depth perception. Groups of northern Europeans and Africans, independently evolved the ability to drink milk after infancy.

Our minds are just as much a product of evolution as our bodies. Our emotions, language, capacity for reason and abstract thought were all ultimately developed because beings which possessed this software reproduced more and survived better than those who did not.

From this evolutionary perspective, there is a god of sorts, but he is a blind, alien god whose only drive is to make us better and better at reproducing and surviving in a world which contains not only predators and prey, but also other humans who are both allies and competitors. This unrelenting desire to survive and replicate does not include happiness as an end goal. Evolution doesn’t care whether you’re happy or not.

Happiness, (and remember, this applies to any subjective state you can imagine like fulfillment or spiritual ecstasy) is only an instrumental goal. The correct amount of happiness is the one that motivates us to do things that increase our evolutionary prospects. More accurately, the correct algorithm for creating happiness is one that, on average, improved evolutionary prospects more than alternative algorithms.

Why Evolution Created the Happiness Problem

Now consider that you’re designing two different beings:

Being A, is happy all the time. This being requires very little to be in a state of subjective bliss. In fact, even being eaten or starving does little to dampen its enthusiasm for life.

Being B, is happy only when it is successful. This being feels unhappy when in a “bad” state, like being eaten or hungry, and feels contented when in a “good” state like when it has mated or achieved higher status amongst its fellow beings.

Which being, A or B, would do better in the evolutionary game we just discussed? It’s plainly obvious that B is better equipped to survive and replicate than A.

However, now consider a new type of being, C. This being is happy when successful, but only momentarily. It feels happiness and sadness as a response to changes in state, but quickly returns to a neutral baseline. No matter how successful, this creature only experiences an above-average level of happiness for a moment before returning back to neutral.

Would C be better than B? It’s quite possible that it would be. After all, Being B, when it has achieved some success, might become complacent—less motivated to act because it has already achieved some level of success. C, on the other hand, must always be working hard because its accomplishments are continually being reset.

However all of these beings, A, B and C, suffer from a design problem. The happiness that they want, and thus motivates their behavior, is the same as the happiness they experience, and thus rewards their behavior. Wouldn’t it be even better if these two functions could be separated?

That is, imagine a modification of being C, we’ll call it C+. C+ has all the quirks of being C, except that in addition to the transitory nature of happiness, C+’s drives and motivations can be driven separately from happiness. This means that C+ often wants things that won’t make it happy and continues to be tricked again and again.

These hypothetical beings are all simplified models, but it’s my contention that we’re closer to C+ in design for exactly the same reasons. We experience above-average happiness (and also below-average happiness) typically for short moments. Our circuitry for “wanting” and “liking” are also different, allowing a partial disconnect which allows us to succumb to temptations that don’t actually fulfill us.

Why Don’t We Directly Maximize Evolutionary Fitness?

When I first read about the evolutionary explanation for the happiness problem, one issue didn’t sit well with me. If we were really designed to maximize evolutionary fitness, why wouldn’t we pursue this goal explicitly? Why use this roundabout measure of subjective happiness at all? Why not just make us robots with the direct goal of maximizing fitness, single-minded automatons who have no need for art, love or philosophical yearning?

Interestingly, this too has an evolutionary answer, but it’s trickier than the ones before it. While making creatures who experienced fleeting happiness or whose drives were decoupled from behavior might require some thinking, it is fairly straightforward. Why we would, then, be largely ignorant of these deeper purposes needs a bit more explaining.

The simple answer is that being ignorant about these deeper motivations is strategic. Being ignorant about the deeper reasons for many of our motives actually helps us achieve them better. The reason is that we don’t exist in isolation—we exist in a society which is full of similar beings whose interests do not perfectly align with ours.

To help accomplish this goal, evolution fastened us, not only with an impressive brain for making memories and throwing spears, but also for lying, charming and outwitting our fellow human beings. In fact, many cognitive scientists now argue that consciousness may not be the CEO of the brain that it feels like, issuing orders and organizing behavior. Instead, consciousness may be the spokesperson, explaining and rationalizing behavior to present a cohesive, positive image to other members of society.

Many of our evolutionary drives are selfish and in conflict with other human beings. Presenting yourself completely honestly, however, wouldn’t make you very popular. As social creatures, being popular as an ally and mate is essential for evolutionary success.

One way to avoid this problem is to compromise: be only somewhat selfish. Be just selfless enough so that you can benefit from the popularity it brings you in terms of allies and mates. When being selfless costs you more than it returns, be selfish.

However, there’s an even better (and sneakier!) strategy. This strategy is to convincingly appear to be more selfless than you actually are. If you can give the appearance of being noble, you’ll gain the benefits of popularity, but if you actually work on baser motives, you’ll get the benefits of being privately selfish.

This tension to exaggerate our altruism may explain a division of labor. Make the conscious mind responsible for presenting the best image possible of ourselves, while secretly pursuing more selfish motivations whenever you can get away with it. The best part of this trick is to make the conscious mind unaware of these motivations, and give it the ability to rationalize them as being less ugly whenever possible, so as to reduce the effort to actively lie about them.

Thus the solitary, utilitarian evolutionary principle gets fractured into thousands of different aims and rationalizations. We have feelings of charity, creativity, care and accomplishment. The foundational principles for these motivations get obscured since pursuing them too openly might undermine them.

Note: Much of this section on hidden motives is owed to Robin Hanson and Kevin Simler’s soon-to-be-published book, The Elephant in the Brain, which I was lucky enough to receive an advance copy.

Summary of the Happiness Problem

To summarize this depressing view of human nature and the problem of happiness is simple:

We’re bad at imagining what will make us happy, making decisions which will result in more happiness and remembering what made us happy in the past.

We’re this way by evolutionary design.

Happiness is fleeting because it avoids the complacency of basing happiness on absolute conditions.

Happiness is largely disconnected from motivation because that allows us to pursue things earnestly even if the rewards don’t justify them.

We’re largely unaware of underlying logic because, by being hidden, we can present ourselves as nobler than we actually are, allowing us to get away with acts of selfishness that would be punished if others were aware of our intentions.

To continue our car example, we struggle to buy a car at the dealership because we’re designed not to have a car for very long, our desire to get a car and the feeling we have when we own one have separate mechanisms and that what we really want instead of a car is selfish, so it’s better to pretend we want a car and be secretly driven by a desire to obtain something else.

What Do We Do About the Problem of Happiness?

This understanding of the problem is cynical and depressing. Unlike so many lofty philosophies of human nature, this explains the mysteries of our fundamental quests in terms that few people would like to admit. Strangely, this aversion is also by design—if we easily embraced the cynical explanation that would undermine our ability to project loftier desires about ourselves.

At first, I struggled to accept this worldview. Certainly, there must be a mistake? How could you possibly walk around, living life if you honestly believed that this was the underlying foundation?

But, after spending more time with it, I realize that this realization isn’t terribly problematic. Our brain is designed to handle this tension between our loftier and selfish motives quite naturally. As a mental model for viewing reality, this picture has usefulness for solving some problems, but it would be foolish to apply it to all pursuits. The correct approach is to consider this viewpoint as a tool you can apply when a more conventional approach fails.

It’s with this idea that I want to use this viewpoint as a lens, which neatly explains the problem of happiness, as a lens for examining some of the possible solutions, and what might explain some of the successes and problems which they experience.

Side note: This is a discussion for another time, but lately I’ve been moving more towards the idea of something being true by being pragmatic rather than corresponding perfectly to reality. Human beings are good at compartmentalizing contradictory ideas and this is often a feature, rather than a bug.

Solutions to the Problem of Happiness

While I don’t believe there is a better model than this concept of evolutionary design with hidden motives for understanding the problem of happiness, it does not, unfortunately, offer much in the way of a solution.

Fortunately, this problem of happiness has been known for quite some time (if not with this explanation) and there exist many different philosophical traditions for trying to deal with this problem. I’d like to discuss, very briefly, some of these posited solutions and what our new understanding of the nature of the problem might say about their strengths and weaknesses.

Solution #1: Tradition

One solution to the problem of happiness is living in a traditional society, where everyone has the same religion, norms, rituals and beliefs.

Confucius was a strong advocate of this approach, believing harmony in society came from everyone following the rites and practices from ancestral times. Behaving with sagacity was, in essence, knowing exactly which ritual applied in which situation and applying it effortlessly.

This isn’t as silly as it seems. Living according to arbitrary rites and traditions may seem absurd today, but it frees one of needing to have reasons for what one does. Remember, a major part of the problem of happiness wasn’t merely that we experience fleeting joys, detached from our desires, but also that those desires are based on self-contradictions: we want to appear to earnestly pursue higher motives while actually pursuing baser ones. By obviating the need for non-arbitrary reasons, many of these self-contradictions can be neatly avoided.

Unfortunately, such an approach is untenable in modern society. We have too much plurality—too many different religions, philosophies, communities, beliefs and disagreement. Our society demands real reasons for behaviors that must be given a justification. The specter of hypocrisy looms large in modern minds.

It’s also likely that this approach hasn’t worked for some time. After all, if living according to proper rituals and rites was so straightforward, it wouldn’t have needed Confucius as an advocate, and that was over two thousand years ago.

Still, I think this approach is worth mentioning, because the problem of happiness is very likely to be a problem which is difficult to “think” one’s way out of. This makes sense—our hidden motives are in tension with our stated motives, and reasoning here is likely to turn into rationalization.

Solution #2: Fulfill Desires (Self-Improvement, Hedonism)

If tradition won’t work, the next obvious choice is to pursue and fulfill the desires and drives you have. This is the essence of classic self-help, hedonism and even many modern religious approaches (these, however, often have the caveat that true fulfillment occurs after death).

The advantage of these approaches is that they don’t try to deny the foundations of our desires. If we truly are designed by evolutionary fitness, and we achieve this by acquiring wealth, mates, athleticism, social status, prestige and skill, then this approach has us pursuing those aims at least somewhat earnestly.

This approach also has us pursue less selfish motives as well. One can set goals to become a better person, be more creative, friendlier, intelligent, etc. This approach to life doesn’t need to be selfish, but it does tend to follow our desires in a more straightforward way.

The obvious downside of this approach is the problem of happiness itself. We may work hard on goals only to experience fleeting happiness. We may reach a new station in life and find out it is filled with new, but equally unpleasant, pains and frustrations we sought to avoid.

Solution #3: See Through Desires (Buddhism, Stoicism)

Interestingly, both the West and East independently came to similar observations about the problem of happiness and advocated a particular solution. Both Buddhism and Stoicism advocate for seeing past the illusions of many of our desires.

The approach advocated in both philosophies is similar. Practice temperance or asceticism and avoid the lure of temptation. Recognize that pleasures and pain are opposite sides of the same coin and don’t try to chase one and run away from the other. Practice presence in the moment and meditative control over attention.

The differences between the approaches to the problem of happiness are minor, even if the ethics and metaphysics differ substantially. Differences in method are more of a different flavor than substance. Stoics advocate building mental toughness through facing hardships and pursuing logic. Buddhists advocate awareness of difficulties and exposing contradictions that dispel illusions of selfhood and duality.

The strengths of this approach is that they attack the problem of happiness directly. The downside, of course, is that, in doing so, they may be fighting against human nature itself.

Another downside of these approaches is that they are based on the same kinds of loftier principles that we like to appear to possess, but not actually pursue. Therefore, when one imagines a Buddhist monk or Stoic scholar, we might want to be seen as embodying such a wise appearance, but that we don’t actually want to be that way. This can create the same kind of self-contradictory approach that leads to consistent failure to live up to higher ideals.

I see this self-contradiction in many people, including myself, who are very interested in these approaches to life, but struggle to implement regular meditation or consistently adopt this attitude.

Solution #4: Radical Acceptance

A final solution (non-solution?) to the problem of happiness is simply to accept it. Not only accept that desires are fleeting and life is transitory, but also to accept that human nature is built out of competing tensions.

We have the tension between our loftier pursuits and our baser motives. Tension between our ability to enjoy and drive to acquire. Tension between our socially constructed selves and our ephemeral consciousness. This tension is the state of nature, so perhaps it is best to accept it completely.

I’ve seen Buddhist thinkers advocate something along the lines of radical acceptance, or oscillating between solutions #3 and #4. Perhaps it is simply a sign of my own ignorance that I don’t appreciate how the two are actually the same?

This final approach denies a problem, not by ignoring it, but by accepting it completely as the way things are. This approach would argue that the sun being hot or world being round are also not “problems” but facts of nature that have value judgements simply because of our view of them.

The benefit of this final stance is it also permits a non-intellectual approach to the problem. Since it is thinking that exacerbates the tension between our hidden and stated motives, Zen scholars who believe that the correct stance cannot be intellectualized, may have the correct attitude to the problem.

Evaluation of Potential Solutions

While the problem of happiness can be fairly clearly understood, a solution seems much more fraught with potential difficulties and contradictions.

Pursuing desires outright placates the evolutionary machinery which wants them to be pursued, but falls prey to the frustration that lasting joys and happiness are not to be found in satisfying our hungers and whims.

Renouncing or moderating our drives may dispel the illusion, but there are powerful reasons to believe that this is something many of us would want to appear to be doing rather than actually do, and thus many of our attempts in this direction are ultimately self-defeating.

A non-intellectual approach may be promising, but it can often be as paradoxical and confusing as the original situation.

I make no claims to a resolution to the problem, but my current stance is somewhat of a mixture of all the suggested approaches. I believe in pursuing my ambitions and desires, but in moderation and with an understanding that they won’t lead to sustainable increases in happiness. I believe adopting some kind of regular meditative, non-intellectual perspective can offer insight into the nature of the problem.

The problem of happiness is perplexing and challenging, but I also think it is worth understanding deeply. Everything else I write about, whether its how to improve your career, learn better or build new habits, implicitly depends on it. An incorrect perception of the problem, I think can create more suffering than almost anything else. And, while I don’t believe that a solution is immediately apparent, I think whatever you do with an understanding of the problem is probably better than with total ignorance of it.

The Problem of Happiness syndicated from http://ift.tt/2kl7pJj