I highly recommend you look into Buddhism. This concept is explored in depth.
Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !uspolitics@lemmy.world
7) No Hit-and-Run questions.
Please don't delete your post for no apparent reason. If you plan on deleting a question later, say so in the post, or if you feel that you have a good reason to remove it, message a mod beforehand. It's not fair to the ones who took their time to answer, and it's not in the spirit of the community.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
I'm not asking the Buddha about the nature of suffering. I'm asking you, the people. What is it to you?
I also think it's the thing the Buddha said. It was very well stated and made a lot of sense. You should go read about it.
Why are you asking?
Attachment.
You mean as a concept or as in file? I assume a concept, since there are no file attachments or links here.
Attachment is definitely a cause of suffering, but it is not the essence of it. There can be suffering without attachment, and attachment without suffering.
How can there be suffering without attachment?
Physical pain is not caused by attachment. It could be caused, for example, by electricity, or perhaps a sharp object. No attachment needed.
And no, the physical body is not a form of attachment. It is a part of you just like the mind is. You literally cannot exist without some form of a body.
And what about suffering due to desease? Like having a very bad fever dream. Where's the attachment there?
Do you get my perspective?
Physical pain is a signal in your brain telling you to stay away from electricity, sharp objects, and fire etc. It also tells you when something important for survival is absent like food leading to hunger headaches.
So basically all physical pain is caused by you (the brain) being attached to survival.
Physical pain has a huge emotional component. That's why we can train pain tolerance. Placebos and holding a loved one is sometimes as effective as morphine in reducing pain.
So all in all suffering is due to attachment. If you let go of the attachment by training your mind you can end suffering. That's what Buddhism is all about.
I think your line of reasoning falls somewhere between the "No True Scotsman" and "Persuasive Definition" logical fallacies.
While one can be aware of their own threshold for what they consider "suffering", one cannot set that threshold for anyone else. To some, a papercut may be suffering, while others may enjoy physical pain and suffer when their dog dies.
The point I'm trying to make is there is no true suffering. Suffering is whatever the sufferer says it is and it's a subjective experience, so that would apply only to them. We can, of course, generalize the idea of suffering, as Wikipedia has done in the definition you provided but again, this can really only explain the fact that suffering exists or maybe even the fact that many people consider many of the same things to be forms of suffering.
You may enjoy the teachings of Buddha, as his beginning premise is basically "all life is suffering" and his teachings largely revolve around the nature of suffering and how to accept it / overcome it.
I did not mean to look for scenarios of true suffering. That is pointless. I'm more interested in the concept itself. It's not just pain and futility. Suffering is something else, something distinct. I'm not trying to find the "true definition". I just want to know different perspectives to understand the concept better.
I do agree that the concept is subjective to a large degree, and what I am looking for are the parts that are not subjective, the "core" of the concept. Thank you for providing your perspective.
I go with the buddhist thing. suffering is when we don't get what we desire. It a bit tricky because things that are common or normal we don't think about desiring until we don't have them. People want to be safe and healthy and free and we can't have this is various ways and when we can't even have the slightest bit its way worse.
I define suffering the same way I define art:
- I know it when I see it
- I can look at someone’s suffering, call it suffering, while some pretentious jagoff next to me goes, “Pff, that’s not suffering. You clearly don’t know what real suffering is.”
- Some suffering I like, some suffering I don’t.
- I had to go to school to learn about other people’s suffering.
- Some of us hide our suffering and some display it
- Some people use their suffering to make money
- I tried to show other people my suffering and they laughed at it. So I don’t show people my suffering anymore.
So is it subjective in your view?
And could you explain what you mean by "Some suffering I like, some suffering I don’t."? I don't exactly understand that one?
I'm not the person you were replying to, but I read that as when you witness suffering.
Watching a news report about ongoing genocide is suffering I don't like. Watching a trillionaire get flensed is the sort of suffering I can get behind.
Although maybe it could be personal experience. Going to the gym can be a rather mild form of suffering, but it's probably something you would choose to do and learn to enjoy.
I guess that makes sense. But not even the corrupt elites should suffer. We should find a more humane way for seeing them off. But that's beside the point. Thank you for the explanation.
The description of suffering that I identify with is a desire for things to be other than they are. I may experience physical pain and want it to end; that's a type of suffering. I may desire for my annoying co-worker to stop bragging about his vacation and get to the point of the meeting; that's another kind of suffering. I know that there are people in concentration camps in the US, right now, suffering who knows what all torments and indignities of their own that I wish to end; that gives me some suffering even though I am not there with them, nor do I know their situation exactly.
All of these things, and millions more, are things about my experience of the world that I desire to be different. The fact that they aren't as I would like is upsetting, and I must either change them or, if I can't, I must suffer them.
I can't think about them all the time. It used to be that I thought my only options were to think about them all the time, which is exhausting, or not think about them at all, which feels callous to the point of psychopathy. A large part of my mental health journey has been tuning how I identify, deal with, and compartmentalize the suffering I do, on my own behalf and on the behalf of others.
I don't think suffering is bad, or to be avoided. It is a thing to become familiar with, like anger (itself usually a response to suffering), that needs to be identified for what it is and channeled. Suffering is very like an emotion in that it is an indicator in the brain that you want something different. Sometimes, identifying the suffering makes it easier to identify and remedy the cause. Other times, the cause is so huge and overwhelming (the whole US situation right now), that I just have to deal with suffering the whole thing while I do what small things I can to make things a little bit better.
Being upset about things not being how they ought to be isn't really "the essence of suffering". I agree, it's annoying, but what can you do?
I agree, suffering of itself is not bad or good. It builds character in certain situations, and it destroys people in other situations.
I'd say it's more about being able to change something, but not being able to do it. It's futility combined with self-imposed lack of action or idleness. Or at least it is to me. When you can see the right solution, it is right there in your grasp, but you don't grasp it, for whatever reason. Makes me uncomfortable just thinking about it. Like the concentration camp thing. Tou suffer because you can't bring yourself to help (not that I'm saying that you personally should go out there and help). But it's that nagging feeling at the back of your head that if you really tried you could do... something, anything. But you don't.
Or maybe this is just my personal interpretation based on my current situation as well as my past experiences. The world may never know.
Thank you for the comment.
Life. Life itself is suffering. Life is the worst thing to have happened to anyone.
Regarding purpose, no one has any purpose. Purpose is assigned to tools; not to sentient beings with consciousness. Life is utterly meaningless, and it is due to this lack of meaning, that we search for superfluous things like purpose.
The true nature of life is suffering. The default state of life is pain. Everything you do from there is just to temporarily alleviate that pain. You keep doing that until you die.
We have friends and lovers because loneliness is painful. We eat because hunger is painful. We sleep because deprivation from it is painful. We laugh so that we can escape from crying.
People say suffering is a hurdle, and see it as something essential for character development, and whilst I acknowledge the essentiality of some types of pain, I also see it as something contingent on life. We suffer because we are alive. All sentient and conscious beings suffer. It just comes with life.
Note that I am not however, promoting termination of life. By terminating your life early, you would be depriving yourself of all the potential pleasures you could have had (regardless of the pain around them). Once you are here, your optimization problem should be maximization of pleasure and minimization of pain. So, whilst the asymmetry still exists, the potentiality for pleasure might (/should?) be enough of an reason to continue living. I do acknowledge that exceptions do exist where the asymmetry is so skewed for some, to the extent that there is little to no potential pleasure for them, in which case, it might be preferable for them to terminate their own life (think extremely painful chronic/terminal illnesses). I'm sorry if this feels a bit loosey-goosey.
With all that said, I believe we are all sufferers from the incurable disease of life. And the only thing to do from here is to vehemently struggle and rebel against suffering. To help our fellow sufferers and maximize the pleasurable moments. To do everything we can to cope with life whilst still being aware of the true suffering it stands for.
That is a very bleak perspective. By this logic, we can say that everything ever is meaningless.
Life of itself is not meaningless. It exists to test, create, and replicate patterns at a faster time scale than the regular processes of the universe. Meaning is usually assigned after the fact. Or at least that's my experience.
I somewhat agree with you. The meaning you describe seems personal (correct me if I am wrong), i.e. we assign meaning to our own lives. The meaning I was referring to in my previous comment was a more absolute take on it; the kind of meaning people refer to when they are searching for it. From my perspective, people search for an all encompassing absolute meaning (or rather a guidebook) which tells them that they are here for something. I disagree with that perspective, and I think there is no such meaning or guidebook. We are not here for any grand purpose, we just exist because someone else got together and thought it'd be nice to be a parent (in the best of situations). I agree with you however, in that, we must assign meaning to our own lives, just so our lives won't feel empty. It is more like drawing your own scenery on a canvas instead of looking for the perfect one.
I understand that this is a bleak perspective, but I see this as the true nature of suffering; and by acknowledging it, we can be more compassionate to our fellow sufferers. Although the perspective itself is bleak, the conclusion need not be. You can learn to live, stuff your life with pleasurable moments, and make the most of it, whilst helping others do the same.
Not necessarily. There can be meaning in suffering. You learn and change through it. And sometimes that's a positive change.
I tend to agree with Wikipedia. Pain is tricky, some can be enjoyable in certain contexts, so you are right that it's a response to the stimulus more than the physical sensation.
But combined with "unpleasantness" it's spot on. When I get a migraine I am suffering even if I try to adjust my mind to accept it differently, it's unpleasant no matter how I slice it. It's one of the feelings humans seem wired for.
No offense, but you are like the third person to bring masochism into the discussion. What's up with that? Just because someone "can find pain enjoyable" doesn't mean that "suffering" means something else to them.
Or am I mistaken on that?
It's just a physical sensation, and amplifies my pleasure during sex, adds intensity in a good way, I'm surely not alone in that. So to me, it's not simply the physical sensation of any pain that is suffering, since some amount is pleasurable. It's not just a sex thing though, presumably you like spicy food, that involves some level of pain but is enjoyable.
Unpleasantness combined with pain causes me to suffer.
Queen sang a song with the refrain "pain is so close to pleasure" you don't need to be much of a masochistic to enjoy a little pain during sex
Intresting. I should investigate further.
Thank you for the contribution.
Suffering is an emotion, a mood, a state of mind.
The stimulus is almost irrelevant.
That is a very vague description. I'm not asking for a definition. What does it mean to you personally? Is it simply a "state of mind". If so, is it equal to other states of mind, and if yes, in what ways?
It's just like happy, angry, sad, bored, content, nervous.
Suffering is an emotion. Nothing more complex than that.
So, do you not understand your emotions? Are they just "things that happen" to you?
I'm not trying to be mean. And I'm sorry if I came off that way. I just want to understand.
Maybe I don't know what you're trying to understand.
Emotions do happen. Not sure what alternative you're thinking of.
Calling them things is only a convenient short hand. They aren't tangible objects in any way. They're patterns of neuron firing.
Reading your OP again. Some emotions may have a functional purpose, to guide useful behaviour, others may simply side-effects of having emotions at all. I'm not sure suffering would be one of the former. Sometimes people choose to make good of their suffering. Building character or what not. But that's far from automatic. Often people gain nothing from suffering.
Once upon a time, there was a fragile ape, too scared from climbing down from their tree, lest they ended up as a dinner for a hungry lioness just like their relatives once became. One day, there was this heavy storm, and a serpent made of a million suns climbed down from the skies onto the tree; the tree became a sun itself. The ape quickly jumped to a far branch and fell from it while trying to grip themselves to its tip.
They looked at the tree branch they've got at their hands and realized it was also becoming a sun-serpent. Before the ape could even process their own fright, they couldn't help but realize every animal was running: suddenly, the lioness was fleeing instead of jumping onto the ape. Drowning under their own epinephrine, the ape came to a conclusion which I could translate as "lioness fled, me still standing, me have sun-serpent, sun-serpent friend, me fearsome".
The ape smiled, before realizing their fur were being eaten by the sun-serpent, and this was painful as hell; they got struck by this sudden urge to keep running, until they accidentally fell into the river, and the sun-serpent stopped consuming their fur; but this was too late: they lost their fur. Now the furless ape found themselves in a covenant they didn't ask for: they lost the only thing that was barely protecting them from the maw of a lioness, but they got this sun-serpent to protect them, so they got to keep this sun-serpent with them.
Fast-forwarding to present time, the furless apes, the "modern" homininæ, are running in circles. Some of the apes have since been drowning the entire big blue tree a smart ape once called as "Pale Blue Dot" under the breath of the sun-serpent while desiring so badly to climb to this distant big red tree they call as "Mars". They've made big funny phallic rocks become big birds by attaching the sun-serpent to the bottom of big funny phallic rocks. An ape with orange hair have been trying to become the owner of the entire big blue tree and expecting all apes to hand him all bananas from big blue tree. Other apes are trying to make square rock become god-ape by making sun-serpent breathe onto it.
These are a few apes trying to control all the other apes like they (think they) control sun-serpent. As for the majority of the apes, they are too busy trying to be part of sun-serpent controlling underneath the whims of another furless apes, furless "boss" ape, hopefully in exchange for a banana by the end of the month because trees got scorched and no bananas can be harvested other than trees that furless "boss" ape control (and these bananas aren't even edible bananas to begin with, the tree is a fake plastic tree).
Among them, there's this strange ape writing a lengthy text about the history of apes using a small decade-old square rock, aware he's also ape but unable to revert his own nature to fully live in the arms of Mother Nature, because other apes require him to be among apes.
And we apes call this "civilization". Could this funny strange ape writing long text about history of apes call it "self-inflicted suffering", other apes would throw rocks at him.
Yet here we are, in a self-inflicted suffering, me included. We're apes who think we lost our home and have since then wandered around and yearned for a new tree, only for the sun-serpent we carry within us consume every new tree we finally got to stumble upon.
We're too afraid to return to that old, scorched tree and try to climb it again: we fear sun-serpent would wrathfully descend from the skies again... yet we're holding sun-serpent at our furless hands and we think we can control it. We fear the sun-serpent because we fear ourselves. Then we want to think we can control sun-serpent because we got no control over ourselves. Because we've been seeking to become sun-serpents ourselves; in this pointless endeavor, we've become too alienated from the very fauna and flora we belong to, too afraid of begging Mother Nature Her pardon (She is very unlikely to pardon us).
good for you bro 👍
or
sorry that happend 😞
I like the fact that "to suffer" can be a transitive verb, taking a direct object, of which "I don't suffer fools" is an example, albeit not one relevant to this theme, in which case it partially carries the meaning "to endure".
Firstly, I don't think that there is a predetermined or universal purpose of suffering. I think that the Wikipedia abstraction is in fact good, because it moves away from trying to generalize.
Secondly, your examples conflict with the question in the title, because your examples, while helpful for starting discussions, make it sound like you are trying to hear what people think are the worst ways to suffer, simply. The question in the title of your post, on the other hand, is to me much more intriguing, since it enables me to say:
To me, suffering can be sweet, although this interpretation perhaps deviates from its most common connotations, as in, the result of torture, agony, anger, fear, grief and so on. Whenever my self hatred reaches levels that drive me to start imaging hurting people around me in order to release, I instead turn all that destructive energy inwards, and when I do, I want to vomit, scream, bleed, explode, implode and die, but the total result of that, which is one example of what I call suffering, can give me such a kick of adrenaline that I experience some sort of euphoria.
Suffering in itself is nothing more than a Wikipedia abstraction. Only in a context with an active subject/actor does it have purpose or function. For animals, including humans, self aware or not, for instance, it can serve as an indicator that a certain behavior, place or adversary needs to be avoided and that this knowledge has to be passed on to their descendants.
Thank you for the comment. The examples I gave were purely for the purpose of roughly approximating my personal definition/understanding of "suffering". I tried to be vague, to avoid making people think of "worst ways to suffer". Seems it didn't work very well.
You say that to you suffering is a result. But I don't fully agree with that view. Suffering is not an emotion, it's more of a state. Emotions are reactions, states are different, more complex. And self-loathing is not the essence of suffering either. Not to me personally. But it is definitely a part of it.
Personally, I don't connect the concepts of suffering and catharsis. These actually seem like opposites. I tried to separate the concepts of suffering and pain (including mental pain), but they are too connected to do that. Although, what I can definitely say: Just physical pain or just mental pain is not "true suffering". At no point am I trying to deminish or "put down" people who say that these things make them suffer. It is just that I am looking for the central "concept" around suffering, and what it means to people.
Thank you for your contribution to the dicussion.
The true nature of suffering is the repetion of mistakes and the observence of the patterns that lead to those mistakes and being concious of the caused sufferung but being powerless and unable to stop it.
That seems more like futility than suffering. Futility is definitely a part of "suffering", but I do not think it is the essence. There's also the perception. If someone keeps making the same mistake and doesn't notice, they do not suffer like the person who does notice.
But thank you for contributing your perspective.
What greater suffering could there be but futility- suffering for nothing?
Yes, exactly, that is what I'm trying to find out here. Is it really just that? It can't be just that, because it is possible to be happy and fulfilled in a meaningless, futile pursuit. Let's remember that “one must imagine Sisyphus happy”.
It's a word made by humans.
The descriptor is not the essence. Do you look at an image and say that it is the thing it represents?
I mean you can interpret so much into that word if you want.. it's just self-destruction wallowing in Weltschmerz. That's not philosophical, that's depression
You can't just say that the essence of suffering is "the big sad". These are all aspects.
And what is so depressing here? I really don't understand. Is it that talking about suffering makes people sad? Is that how empathy works? This is a genuine question. I do not feel uncomfortable or sad talking/hearing about tragedy or suffering. I understand the feelings, but I don't feel them. That's why I would never link the philosophical discussion of suffering and depression.
Unless your point is that depression and suffering are linked? If that is the case, then I fully agree. One can cause the other, both ways.