Fantastic peice Andrew. We are attracted to the negative, a biological remnant of a time when not imagining the worst could mean being trampled by a wooly mammoth.
The modern media feeds on this, “if it bleeds, it leads.” The news correspondents show up when a country decends into civil war, but leave when peace is restored. How silly is that?
This is also why our leaders keep telling us that everything is horrible and that they alone can “fix” it. No NGO or politician is ever going say…well things aren't so bad, let's keep doing what we're doing.
This doesn't dismiss the problems we face and there are many, but puts them into context.
Exactly. We can't rest on our laurels, and justice demands that we attempt to right the wrongs we see. But no utopia is going to magically make us happy. We should stop telling ourselves that "just one more x" will do it when the last hundred x didn't permenantly move the needle.
I'm not an expert, but I suspect the Stoics weren't all that interested in placing money as the pinnacle accomplishment of an individual or as the measure of things.
I grew up in the "third world" even though I was born in the "first world" and I agree with the premise of not seeing the abundance we have and misrepresenting the past, forgetting all the hardships we today do not endure.
That being said, today we are "like slaves on a ship talking about who has the flyest (coolest) chain".
We've built an edifice of civilization (since 13th century, the "west") based on money and usury.
You could argue, and rightly so, that this has always been the case and it was worse in the past.
But don't think for a moment that the interior corruption of minds and souls has nothing to do with this filth we call money and greed.
I don't have a solution, but we can't start on a solution until we identify the problem.
My apologies for the tone. About halfway through the essay, which says many things I agree with, I became fed up with the graphs about income and wealth.
I do think the Stoics and philosophers of old would abhor the wage labor slavery that permeates the world today and suggest that in all fairness, it's not altogether clear that we are as "free" as we claim in the "first world".
No worries. You're right that Stoics are skeptical that wealth and material "growth" will make us happy. The complaints we hear about the horrible circumstances we live in are just delusional given how far humanity has come. If the last century of growth failed to do it for us, why would anyone suspect the next would be any more effective? Even if we managed to make everyone a lot wealthier, it's not clear that anyone beyond the impoverished would be happier.
The point is that we need to get off the delusional treadmill and start looking beyond the next promotion, the next car, the next bonus if we're going to find any contentment.
Fantastic peice Andrew. We are attracted to the negative, a biological remnant of a time when not imagining the worst could mean being trampled by a wooly mammoth.
The modern media feeds on this, “if it bleeds, it leads.” The news correspondents show up when a country decends into civil war, but leave when peace is restored. How silly is that?
This is also why our leaders keep telling us that everything is horrible and that they alone can “fix” it. No NGO or politician is ever going say…well things aren't so bad, let's keep doing what we're doing.
This doesn't dismiss the problems we face and there are many, but puts them into context.
Exactly. We can't rest on our laurels, and justice demands that we attempt to right the wrongs we see. But no utopia is going to magically make us happy. We should stop telling ourselves that "just one more x" will do it when the last hundred x didn't permenantly move the needle.
I like the simple language you use. Philosophy is for e everybody.
Thanks!
Thank you for the reminders. Like Superman, “it’s a never ending battle for truth, justice, and the <rational> way.”
I'm not an expert, but I suspect the Stoics weren't all that interested in placing money as the pinnacle accomplishment of an individual or as the measure of things.
I grew up in the "third world" even though I was born in the "first world" and I agree with the premise of not seeing the abundance we have and misrepresenting the past, forgetting all the hardships we today do not endure.
That being said, today we are "like slaves on a ship talking about who has the flyest (coolest) chain".
We've built an edifice of civilization (since 13th century, the "west") based on money and usury.
You could argue, and rightly so, that this has always been the case and it was worse in the past.
But don't think for a moment that the interior corruption of minds and souls has nothing to do with this filth we call money and greed.
I don't have a solution, but we can't start on a solution until we identify the problem.
My apologies for the tone. About halfway through the essay, which says many things I agree with, I became fed up with the graphs about income and wealth.
I do think the Stoics and philosophers of old would abhor the wage labor slavery that permeates the world today and suggest that in all fairness, it's not altogether clear that we are as "free" as we claim in the "first world".
No worries. You're right that Stoics are skeptical that wealth and material "growth" will make us happy. The complaints we hear about the horrible circumstances we live in are just delusional given how far humanity has come. If the last century of growth failed to do it for us, why would anyone suspect the next would be any more effective? Even if we managed to make everyone a lot wealthier, it's not clear that anyone beyond the impoverished would be happier.
The point is that we need to get off the delusional treadmill and start looking beyond the next promotion, the next car, the next bonus if we're going to find any contentment.