![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hmm, sample of a tired ted's mind
Mar. 28th, 2005 06:54 pmMy thoughts reorganized themselves again. Yesterday, I was complaining about love songs, and how they are overrated. Why? because I momentarily thought that it shouldn't be as much of our lives as we make it to.
But now that I've cleared that up, what is important in life? what is it that we are underrating? I momentarily wondered about careers, life goals, interests and glory, is that more important than love?
We'd say no, but so many times people say that love is more important but still do otherwise. Practically, would you give up your entire future for love? And if you do, does the love last? would it be worth it? would it be worth it anyways, if it didn't last?
One thing I've used a lot is looking at the end to determine how to start. (kinda like that puzzle game u showed me, kevin. yes the one, brynn got addicted too) So, I've been using this to define morality, with my egoist views. One of my justifications for being a nice guy is that, when I'm lying on my death bed, I'd feel bad if I lived large, but was a jerk. But if I died a nice guy, that did things the way i have done it, and I died loved, I'd be happy. And we know that moment now dominately represents how we feel, so the last moment is essentially the eternal moment.
So, using this "purpose of life is to die happy" theory, we can also use it to try to sort out what our priorities in life is. If it was the last day of the world, and I knew that the earth was gonna explode and there was nothing I could do...what would i do? I wouldn't be making money. I might be looting... but most likely, I'd wish that I was next to friends, people that I could die with.
Of course, this opens up a lot of bias. I was conditioned to be this way. By my society, to be happy, with loved ones.
So, is Hannibal Lector wrong then? Maybe not. He knows what he wants, he can do bad things and not suffer the consequences, he does what he wants to make himself happy. He can die happy knowing that he's killed people, in fact, he'd die happier on his death bed, while looking back at his killing ventures. He gets away with it, so to him, there are no negative effects.
So, he's not any different from me.
Of course, Hannibal is a fictional character. Chances for such a perfect arrangement for an inconsequential murderous are slim. The way to live, is to fit as well as possible with yourself and your surroundings, so as to find the least painful path. If one is conditioned, like hannibal, to be a killer by his world, then, it is the world's fault that he kills it's citizens. Admittingly, that is not fair, to those who had nothing to do with it. But I guess, in a way it's all a cycle. So, to promote happiness of more people, if that's what floats your boat, you should work to stop cycles of pain.
So now my question to myself is, can I die happy without promoting the happiness of others (perhaps the path of least resistance for my society?) and just live for myself? Is my happiness dependant on the happiness of my environment?
I'll have to think about that.
But now that I've cleared that up, what is important in life? what is it that we are underrating? I momentarily wondered about careers, life goals, interests and glory, is that more important than love?
We'd say no, but so many times people say that love is more important but still do otherwise. Practically, would you give up your entire future for love? And if you do, does the love last? would it be worth it? would it be worth it anyways, if it didn't last?
One thing I've used a lot is looking at the end to determine how to start. (kinda like that puzzle game u showed me, kevin. yes the one, brynn got addicted too) So, I've been using this to define morality, with my egoist views. One of my justifications for being a nice guy is that, when I'm lying on my death bed, I'd feel bad if I lived large, but was a jerk. But if I died a nice guy, that did things the way i have done it, and I died loved, I'd be happy. And we know that moment now dominately represents how we feel, so the last moment is essentially the eternal moment.
So, using this "purpose of life is to die happy" theory, we can also use it to try to sort out what our priorities in life is. If it was the last day of the world, and I knew that the earth was gonna explode and there was nothing I could do...what would i do? I wouldn't be making money. I might be looting... but most likely, I'd wish that I was next to friends, people that I could die with.
Of course, this opens up a lot of bias. I was conditioned to be this way. By my society, to be happy, with loved ones.
So, is Hannibal Lector wrong then? Maybe not. He knows what he wants, he can do bad things and not suffer the consequences, he does what he wants to make himself happy. He can die happy knowing that he's killed people, in fact, he'd die happier on his death bed, while looking back at his killing ventures. He gets away with it, so to him, there are no negative effects.
So, he's not any different from me.
Of course, Hannibal is a fictional character. Chances for such a perfect arrangement for an inconsequential murderous are slim. The way to live, is to fit as well as possible with yourself and your surroundings, so as to find the least painful path. If one is conditioned, like hannibal, to be a killer by his world, then, it is the world's fault that he kills it's citizens. Admittingly, that is not fair, to those who had nothing to do with it. But I guess, in a way it's all a cycle. So, to promote happiness of more people, if that's what floats your boat, you should work to stop cycles of pain.
So now my question to myself is, can I die happy without promoting the happiness of others (perhaps the path of least resistance for my society?) and just live for myself? Is my happiness dependant on the happiness of my environment?
I'll have to think about that.
