entry 004

i suck at introductions so. have this. it has been sitting in my notes for a few months. 

fulfillment and meaning are incredibly important. however, many people believe that the ultimate goal in life is to live in a world without suffering. unless we kill off half the population this is utterly impossible, sadly. the fact that we haven't achieved the goal of having a world without suffering yet does not mean it's not possible to do so, however. why can't we achieve a utopia without killing anyone perhaps? if we had lived in a world without suffering, people wouldn't be able to learn from their mistakes. they may hurt others when angry because they wouldn't understand the pain they feel.

living in a world without suffering will ultimately create more suffering. suffering can be considered a necessary part of life. it is true that suffering can lead one to become a better and stronger person as a result of their experiences, however, that does not mean a world without suffering cannot exist, does it? surely there's a middle ground where one can understand the pain and challenges of life but still experience fulfillment and happiness? put it this way - and thus is my belief, so it isn't the final word on the subject by any means - the day we manage to rid this world of all suffering is the day that this world loses its very purpose, is no longer required, and ceases to exist. suffering and peace are the balance that makes this life worth living. there are obviously alternatives scenarios. for example, what if suffering ceases to exist, and as a result, there is only peace and harmony in this world? people would still have goals and objectives they want to accomplish, and that would make their lives meaningful, and worth living. although, these goals would not be achieved if struggling did not exist.

nietzsche’s philosophy often dealt with the idea that suffering is an important part of life and personal growth. he introduced the concept of amor fati: the love of one's fate, embracing life's challenges and suffering as part of one's journey. he also proposed the idea of the übermensch (overman), who transcends conventional morality and creates meaning through struggle. the overman being an aspiration also, not to justify immoral actions..... although suffering being inescapable for growth and fulfillment is a little bit of a pessimistic idea, i believe it to be true.

to me, the idea of making this world perfect and finding a way to live in it forever is nightmarish. there can be no curse save for an eternity in hell, worse than an eternity in this world. life would be so good and it would be so easy to accomplish your goals that it doesn't even matter anymore, it isn't special. i'd rather live a life filled with suffering and challenge, instead of living in an ideal and easy world. surely there must be other ways to have a fulfilling life other than experiencing challenges and suffering? and if so, then why choose to hold on to suffering? well, usually, there is a reward that comes after suffering. the suffering is what makes the reward worth it.

what if we got rid of suffering entirely, and yet the concept of rewards, motivation, satisfaction still exists? why does suffering have to be a prerequisite for a happy life? well, because if there is no suffering, rewards are basically pointless. we feel a sense of reward when we make progress toward our goals and perform tasks well. so even though a professional boxer, for example, is sure to feel pain in the ring, that pain is likely to be outweighed by the enjoyment of performing their mastered craft. that enjoyment is likely to come, in part, from the boxer entering a flow state, which activates the brain’s dopaminergic reward system. so, it's one's dedication to their craft and the satisfaction they get from pursuing it that makes their life purposeful and rewarding. therefore, we cannot experience these joys and fulfillments if we never suffer or go through pain.

obviously, there are many other sides to this argument. let's take my example about the boxing match. even though the boxer would experience some pain in the ring, their joy and sense of accomplishment from competing in such an important fight, could greatly outweigh that pain. and even if they lost, they might still get the satisfaction of putting their heart and soul into the fight, and earning the respect of the boxing community. so, we see that they've managed to have purpose, joy, and fulfillment without necessarily experiencing any suffering. some people may also think the only reason why suffering is thought to be necessary, is because that's all we've known. it's a tough life, and we all experience pain and hardship of some kind. but that doesn't mean there isn't more to life than suffering, like enjoying a game of chess with your friends, or cooking a nice meal. that's why they believe achieving world peace is possible, one day. it's something that make you want to strive towards this goal. if a world like that is really achieveable, that is a good goal to have.

but is it worth willing to defend world peace as a goal worth striving towards? even though this means you'll have to work hard to achieve this goal, even though sacrifices might have to be made? and even though it means you'll have to continue to keep an open mind, even if your views are tested and challenged again in the future?