- Posts: 3208
An interesting supplement to our discussion on the Confidant
- Breeze el Tierno
-
Topic Author
- Offline
- User
-
Registered
-
- Visitor
-
Public
-
- Visitor
-
Public
- Alexandre Orion
-
- Offline
- Master
-
Registered
- om mani padme hum
8 years 5 months ago - 8 years 5 months ago #207582
by Alexandre Orion
Be a philosopher ; but, amidst all your philosophy, be still a man.
~ David Hume
Chaque homme a des devoirs envers l'homme en tant qu'homme.
~ Henri Bergson
Replied by Alexandre Orion on topic An interesting supplement to our discussion on the Confidant
Reliah wrote :
Not really.
First of all, there is not a "reason" for everything. The Universe does not 'Reason' ; nor doth the World, nor even the local ecosystem. Causal 'reasoning' - application of the hypothetical imperative - is proper to only thinking things that manipulate their environments (including other 'beings' thereof). The "everything happens for a reason" fallacy is nothing short of the "world as an artefact" model of the Cosmos that Watts showed us clearly doesn't hold up. The article brings to light something that I've been telling you for a while too : some things just suck and we need to let them suck (properly grieving) with integrity.
Now, having 'integrity' does not mean an artificial dignity -- it means weathering 'what is' with whole-heartedness, 'integrally' feeling what one has to feel without necessarily making too much sense of it. On one hand, we need to express ourselves to people who can listen (be there) well and don't insist that we be "reasonable" about what is plainly intuitive. We don't want to dump our grief on people who can't -- incidentally, the ones who just say "everything happens for a reason".
There may be clear causal factors, or they may be so obscure that no one could ever puzzle them out, but either way, the facticity is that circumstances have come to be arranged in such a way that someone feels pain. The person may grow from it, or may not, but their pain was not brought on through some Celestial pedagogical method aimed at teaching them a lesson. It is just the "is-ness" of the Force. Other aspects of that is-ness is our being present, compassionately accompanying the suffering person without expecting them to get better (or 'how' that better is supposed to be) or worse (idem).
And also "being there" but giving the person enough space to not make any sense until s/he get to where things can be reasonable for him/her again. Human beings are pretty resilient provided that they are permitted a natural and very salutary period of grief.
Though I'm not entirely sure if I understand the difference between there being a reason for everything and that people have to grieve, hurt, and carry things. Can both not be true?
Not really.
First of all, there is not a "reason" for everything. The Universe does not 'Reason' ; nor doth the World, nor even the local ecosystem. Causal 'reasoning' - application of the hypothetical imperative - is proper to only thinking things that manipulate their environments (including other 'beings' thereof). The "everything happens for a reason" fallacy is nothing short of the "world as an artefact" model of the Cosmos that Watts showed us clearly doesn't hold up. The article brings to light something that I've been telling you for a while too : some things just suck and we need to let them suck (properly grieving) with integrity.
Now, having 'integrity' does not mean an artificial dignity -- it means weathering 'what is' with whole-heartedness, 'integrally' feeling what one has to feel without necessarily making too much sense of it. On one hand, we need to express ourselves to people who can listen (be there) well and don't insist that we be "reasonable" about what is plainly intuitive. We don't want to dump our grief on people who can't -- incidentally, the ones who just say "everything happens for a reason".
There may be clear causal factors, or they may be so obscure that no one could ever puzzle them out, but either way, the facticity is that circumstances have come to be arranged in such a way that someone feels pain. The person may grow from it, or may not, but their pain was not brought on through some Celestial pedagogical method aimed at teaching them a lesson. It is just the "is-ness" of the Force. Other aspects of that is-ness is our being present, compassionately accompanying the suffering person without expecting them to get better (or 'how' that better is supposed to be) or worse (idem).
I acknowledge your pain. I'm here with you.
And also "being there" but giving the person enough space to not make any sense until s/he get to where things can be reasonable for him/her again. Human beings are pretty resilient provided that they are permitted a natural and very salutary period of grief.
Be a philosopher ; but, amidst all your philosophy, be still a man.
~ David Hume
Chaque homme a des devoirs envers l'homme en tant qu'homme.
~ Henri Bergson
Last edit: 8 years 5 months ago by Alexandre Orion.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
-
- Visitor
-
Public
8 years 5 months ago - 8 years 5 months ago #207591
by
Yes, I see.. I was taking the saying far too literally.
What I mean is.. when I hear "there's a reason for everything", I think that's obvious and really quite a funny thing to say.
The reason we die is because we're alive.
The reason we suffer is because we have feelings and emotions.
At the same time, as I said, I think pointing this fact out to someone who is hurting is unkind and unnecessary.
But now I see what is meant. It is meant as a very cruel way to tell someone they're to get something of use out of something horrible while they're in the very worst parts of it.
Thank you, Alex.
Replied by on topic An interesting supplement to our discussion on the Confidant
Warning: Spoiler!
Yes, I see.. I was taking the saying far too literally.
What I mean is.. when I hear "there's a reason for everything", I think that's obvious and really quite a funny thing to say.
The reason we die is because we're alive.
The reason we suffer is because we have feelings and emotions.
At the same time, as I said, I think pointing this fact out to someone who is hurting is unkind and unnecessary.
But now I see what is meant. It is meant as a very cruel way to tell someone they're to get something of use out of something horrible while they're in the very worst parts of it.
Thank you, Alex.
Last edit: 8 years 5 months ago by .
Please Log in to join the conversation.
-
- Visitor
-
Public
- Carlos.Martinez3
-
- Offline
- Master
-
Registered
- Alexandre Orion
-
- Offline
- Master
-
Registered
- om mani padme hum
8 years 5 months ago - 8 years 5 months ago #207670
by Alexandre Orion
Of course we can decide to include whatever is helpful (hopefully) to us - as it may pertain to ourselves - in any narrative that we might choose. It doesn't necessarily mean that we are going to believe it, no matter how much we really want to. Belief without that element of "certainty" is what faith is. Faith in what your intuition tells you is apt, not what comes out of a book or someone else's chattering (especially not mine !) So, I guess it is fine when your own soul feels a reason for stuff.
But to the interesting part of your question, K : does it have to happen for a reason to be a learning experience ? Can't one learn from events whether they are reasoned (designed) or not ? Not all lessons need a teacher, some of them are quite well enough taken just in the natural, seemingly happen-stance, messy living of them ... Thus, just because we've learnt something from Life, does it mean that the 'accident' was mystically master-minded ?
If we are including the divine purpose 'reasoning' as part of our narrative, how are we going to be able to really empathise with others ? That is, if we ourselves need rely on accidents "happening for a reason", how well can we be present with and for another without some of that 'purpose' being wished for ? I'm not saying that we can't be ; I don't know. It just seems to me that it would make things a little lop-sided :
Shite things happen to me because "everything happens for a reason" (to make me grow) but I acknowledge your pain and am there with you just because things sometimes suck. Hmmm ... not very convincing empathy, is it ?
Be a philosopher ; but, amidst all your philosophy, be still a man.
~ David Hume
Chaque homme a des devoirs envers l'homme en tant qu'homme.
~ Henri Bergson
Replied by Alexandre Orion on topic An interesting supplement to our discussion on the Confidant
Reliah wrote: I had another thought. I'm not sure if I should create a new thread - I don't want to derail this one.. so if I need to, please let me know and I will.
My thought, or rather question is..
Can we decide for ourselves that anything that happens to us is for a reason and try to use everything as a learning experience? Does it work that way, just because we decide it does? Is that a good thing to do or is it harmful?
While at the same time being empathetic towards others and realizing that isn't their reality and thrusting it upon them in the process, of course.
Of course we can decide to include whatever is helpful (hopefully) to us - as it may pertain to ourselves - in any narrative that we might choose. It doesn't necessarily mean that we are going to believe it, no matter how much we really want to. Belief without that element of "certainty" is what faith is. Faith in what your intuition tells you is apt, not what comes out of a book or someone else's chattering (especially not mine !) So, I guess it is fine when your own soul feels a reason for stuff.
But to the interesting part of your question, K : does it have to happen for a reason to be a learning experience ? Can't one learn from events whether they are reasoned (designed) or not ? Not all lessons need a teacher, some of them are quite well enough taken just in the natural, seemingly happen-stance, messy living of them ... Thus, just because we've learnt something from Life, does it mean that the 'accident' was mystically master-minded ?
If we are including the divine purpose 'reasoning' as part of our narrative, how are we going to be able to really empathise with others ? That is, if we ourselves need rely on accidents "happening for a reason", how well can we be present with and for another without some of that 'purpose' being wished for ? I'm not saying that we can't be ; I don't know. It just seems to me that it would make things a little lop-sided :
Shite things happen to me because "everything happens for a reason" (to make me grow) but I acknowledge your pain and am there with you just because things sometimes suck. Hmmm ... not very convincing empathy, is it ?
Be a philosopher ; but, amidst all your philosophy, be still a man.
~ David Hume
Chaque homme a des devoirs envers l'homme en tant qu'homme.
~ Henri Bergson
Last edit: 8 years 5 months ago by Alexandre Orion.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- Breeze el Tierno
-
Topic Author
- Offline
- User
-
Registered
