[ScientiaOmnisEst]

I live 10 minutes away from a state park, and there's nothing quite like terrifying nature to cleanse one's soul. Or at least, to brood about stuff read on the internet. Seriously, though, I drafted this on an observation deck.

I often find myself troubled by the right way to live, and today I'm mainly disturbed by two options: is it better to drift nihilistically, "waiting to vanish" as one person put it, ascribing no value to this temporary world or anything in it? Or to chase whatever nonsense your heart desires, barring harm to others since that benefits no one - otherwise, you want romance, prestige, beauty, drama, go for it! This is all you've got, and really, the future nonexistence of the world is kind of a non issue. So might as well live your story.

Both have their benefits and drawbacks. The nihilistic option seems peaceful (for example, someone explained that, to the nihilist, there's no such thing as failure), but a really boring, empty kind of peace. It also looks/sounds more intellectual, but what kind of life is ultimately waiting to vanish?! However, the other option is certainly more fulfilling and exciting, it honestly sounds more "real" to me, but doesn't it lack depth? It requires, or at least involves, taking the ideas of the world seriously, which nihilism doesn't. But aren't they serious, in a sense? Or am I just too stupid and brainwashed to understand the truth?

Then I thought, these are really two ways of dealing with the same issue, the same emptiness. You can give into nothingness or continually run from and fight it. So then...wouldn't that make nihilism the correct answer, the truly correct way to live? Because you'll never outrun it - you'll constantly be in and out of emptiness until you die. The nihilist experiences none of that. But at the same time, that kind of giving in doesn't sit well with me, it takes away and denies too many things that seem important - things smarter people deem illusions that keep the stupid masses happy. You know, like feelings of meaning and value, or a sense of narrative or authenticity.

Then I thought it's a head vs heart issue: the nihilistic path is all head and the lack of heart disgusts me; the ambitious path is mostly heart and seems to require denying the head to perpetuate itself, which my pride won't allow. If I follow the nihilistic path, I'll be frustrated. If I follow the other path, I'll feel ashamed. And I worry that neither will fulfill me or give me peace.

Asking for thoughts 'cause I'm bad at thinking.

A nihilist doesn't believe in knowledge and truth.

For me, this is life: Love, live, learn and inspire.

[alchemy63]

Suppose you wanted to bake a cake, but, you only had two ingredients. Would you make one of pure salt, or one of pure sugar? Would it be possible to expand your options?

[Webgoji]

There are many middle paths between hedonism and nihilism.

[Gus1234U]

learning to live with uncertainty is one step closer to knowing what cannot be spoken~

"That which is TRUE cannot be SAID." Lao Tsu: The Way (Tao Te Ching)

Lao Tzu - Tao Te Ching - Complete Text and Photos

[ScientiaOmnisEst]

I'm thinking about several troubling things at once right now, so my mind's a bit foggy. Sometimes in regard to this kind of matter I wonder if my saving grace would be a goal. I talked about ambition a little, and I wonder if that's what I need: something in my life to devote myself to so neither meaninglessness nor radical change nor loss of self will matter, it will all be worth it.

I kind of don't count on that happening though.

Originally Posted by alchemy63

Suppose you wanted to bake a cake, but, you only had two ingredients. Would you make one of pure salt, or one of pure sugar? Would it be possible to expand your options?

I could, but to what?

Also, in relation to everything, where does the Self come into play? How valuable, really, is authenticity - because I know I cling to mine, even if it's personally detrimental, even if it makes me less respectable to those whose opinions I value. Feels like it's all I have to live on, however confused it might be, and any "loss" or substantial change could completely obliterate me. Stupid, but it's what I find I'm thinking about, and it's tangentially related.

[alchemy63]

Speaking only for myself, too much of any one thing, gets boring. There's an old monk saying: Everything in moderation. Like most old monk sayings, you can find that there are multiple meanings in simplified statements. Here, let's put the emphasis on the word 'everything'.

I admire you for clinging to your sense of self. It's the one thing no one can take from you, unless you let them. So it is confused right now. I think you may see, in time, that never goes away because every solution leads to new problems and every answer leads to more questions. The 'what' that you referred to is for you to decide. Don't be afraid to make mistakes, let your best health be your guide.

[Katieissweet]

Give up cerebration,if there is any peace it will come from being not knowing.

[ScientiaOmnisEst]

Originally Posted by Katieissweet

Give up cerebration,if there is any peace it will come from being not knowing.

I wish I could agree: thinking often hurts me, but I feel compelled to do it, both by pride and fear.

[ScientiaOmnisEst]

A related topic: the notion thst the world doesn't owe you anything.

When an adult wants something and can't get it, it is despicable, entitled and wrong for them to feel bad about it. They're supposed to work and slave away, do whatever it takes. Or, just give up, accept that you will never be loved, wealthy, happy, sociable, or whatever. Feeling bad is not an option, working harder is.

I don't know what it is exactly about this paradigm that disgusts me so much. Maybe I just see it as futile. Maybe I'm an entitled, whiny little ***** who can't stand reality invalidating her worthless feelings. But for the things I want - is it worth radically altering my appearance to be lovable? Is it worth adopting the right interests at the expense of my real ones to be respectable? Is it worth spending years studying subjects I don't care for and am not good at to be employable, or spending even longer in poverty to try to build marketable skills on my own?

Or maybe it's just easier to not even try. But I'm not allowed to feel frustrated, or lonely, or depressed, because it's my own fault for not modifying myself in accordance to what others want. The world doesn't owe me anything, after all. It feels like I - like any person, could lose either way, unless pure chance delivers a nice thing or two. And we're still not allowed to feel anything about it.

You're supposed to only get what you earn, or so say the articles that come up when I googled "the world doesn't owe you anything". I think we all know that isn't true. Another says "the world owes you nothing; you owe it your everything". Perhaps this is my sense of entitlement speaking, but that's a terrible deal. Plus, it's entirely possible to put in an effort that deserves success, and fail. Really now, why even bother? Also, why are these things supposed to be motivating?

[ScientiaOmnisEst]

The more I read, the more hopeless I become. There's nothing out there. Absolutely nothing. I am not competent, I'm a useless, broken freak. There is no life I can crete for myself, and no reason to try. It seems that the reason you owe the world your everything is because it owes you nothing...but you generally receive much by sheer chance. You basically have to pay for your existence. I have nothing to give and never will. I see no concrete benefit in doing much for anyone but myself. And if I am owed virtually nothing, then I will receive nothing. I'd really simply be better off dead. That's what i actually deserve anyway.

I'm a joke, aren't I? Too pathetic to handle the harsh reality of life. But I've already violated so many moral norms in this regard it doesn't even matter. There's no hope for me. I still have time left, so any replies would be appreciated. But I know I don't deserve them and likely won't get them. No one owes me attention. Those who cannot get everything for themselves are expected to simply die.

[ScientiaOmnisEst]

I wrote the above at 3am and now I'm thinking more.

Perfection is the only option.

I recall a few people I encountered online who had nothing but contempt for weak people who cling to a cause, trait, or group for an identity. This, they said, is a pathetic adolescent problem you should have grown out of as a teenager, and you're a joke who needs to gro the hell up.

Well, I couldn't relate more. Lately I find myself running around trying to validate I have a disorder, anything at all. Why? Because there's nothing else to me.

But feeling sorry for yourself is narcissism, looking for an identity is immature, anything other than efficient self-fixing and asap normalizing is a contemptible plea for attention that you don't deserve because you are most likely inherently worthless and no one owes you anything. Failure is the only option, and only useless people fail.

Assertion is entitlement, but so is surrender. If you want to be loved, secure, and happy, you must be perfect.

It isn't worth it. I can't do it. I know that's contemptible to say so, but there's nothing I can offer this world to justify my existence. There's no life without feeling, either. Honestly, the idea of being perfectly secure and neutral is a little horrifying - how will I stand out or relate to people?? /sarcasm Really, how will i even exist? Life as a mechanical, empty shell seems even more pointless than the one I lead now.

[Onward2wards]

I can relate to a lot of the questions you're asking yourself, ScientiaOmnisEst. Here are my thoughts:

The concept that anyone "owes" anything to anyone else implies a mere contractual relationship. Human beings can interact simply because they choose to do so, without endless obligatory strings attached. Any "strings attached" is by mutual consent, and is not an absolute rule. If the world owes the individual nothing but the individual owes the world everything, that sounds suspiciously like indentured servitude to me. If the individual is owed everything and the world is owed nothing back, that's a demanding bully. Neither extreme sounds palatable to me.

I've seen a lot of comments online which imply (to my mind) that anyone who doesn't want to live like wild dogs fighting over scraps of meat is weak and useless. "Well," I think, "there goes collaboration, discussion, negotiation, empathy, interpersonal responsibility, and thousands of years of civilized human evolution." I see these ideas strewn around the web and other media, and can't help but think "Is sociopathy catching? When did contempt become cool?"

Have you noticed that these doubts you are having concern conditional vs unconditional social value, and that if social value is exclusively conditional, it would be devastating to believe one has no capacity to meet these conditions? It would perhaps lead to perceiving one cannot "compete at life". I'm mentioning this because I find this thread triggering for some reason, so now you have me thinking too.

[ScientiaOmnisEst]

Originally Posted by Onward2wards

I can relate to a lot of the questions you're asking yourself, ScientiaOmnisEst. Here are my thoughts:

The concept that anyone "owes" anything to anyone else implies a mere contractual relationship. Human beings can interact simply because they choose to do so, without endless obligatory strings attached. Any "strings attached" is by mutual consent, and is not an absolute rule. If the world owes the individual nothing but the individual owes the world everything, that sounds suspiciously like indentured servitude to me. If the individual is owed everything and the world is owed nothing back, that's a demanding bully. Neither extreme sounds palatable to me.

I've seen a lot of comments online which imply (to my mind) that anyone who doesn't want to live like wild dogs fighting over scraps of meat is weak and useless. "Well," I think, "there goes collaboration, discussion, negotiation, empathy, interpersonal responsibility, and thousands of years of civilized human evolution." I see these ideas strewn around the web and other media, and can't help but think "Is sociopathy catching? When did contempt become cool?"

Have you noticed that these doubts you are having concern conditional vs unconditional social value, and that if social value is exclusively conditional, it would be devastating to believe one has no capacity to meet these conditions? It would perhaps lead to perceiving one cannot "compete at life". I'm mentioning this because I find this thread triggering for some reason, so now you have me thinking too.

I'm basically a walking disaster lately. I have too much time to think, particularly about myself. Two of those last posts were written at 3am while I was still half-wired on an ill-consumed energy drink while my browser was crashing. The last one was written a couple hours ago. I've been reading about effective altruism and being consumed with guilt for the last 20 minutes (the logic of it is flawless, but my own egoism is more important to me). I'll probably be either numbed out on Youtube, asleep, or otherwise forgotten about all of this by this afternoon.

Nice to know I made someone think, or at leat that I'm not the only freak who feels paralyzed by fear, guilt, and thought.

[alchemy63]

Onward2wards made a very good post. While reading your post Scientia, I couldn't help the feeling that you are painting yourself into a corner.

[avlady]

you can find some peace in nature,even if its only for a little while. i like autumn when the leaves are all colors, spring flowers etc. i have to admit i don't enjoy cold winters but the snow is beautiful.

[ScientiaOmnisEst]

Originally Posted by alchemy63

Onward2wards made a very good post. While reading your post Scientia, I couldn't help the feeling that you are painting yourself into a corner.

How so? I think I've backed myself in even further in the last few hours, so anything uplifting or even just illuminating would be appreciated.

[alchemy63]

Hi Scientia, I want you to know that I'm someone who has struggled with similar questions/searchings, so, this isn't meant to be a judgment of you in any way, it's simply, that in reading your words, thoughts, and emotions, I could identify in you a little of myself, looking for true meaning at one point (many points) in life. I want you to feel no shame for grappling with these ideas, in fact, I think it is admirable that you search for real truth and not some over-used spiritual quotation meant to provide you with instant enlightenment ( although those do work sometimes). My comment that you appear, to me, to be painting yourself into a corner is based on my observation of several statements you have made which at first, pose a deep question, some spark of insight which may lead you down a trail to more insights, but, you then quickly extinguish your own light of hope when you discard whatever idea it is you are working towards with negativity and self doubt. Here are a few examples:

wouldn't that make nihilism the correct answer, the truly correct way to live?

But at the same time, that kind of giving in doesn't sit well with me

If I follow the nihilistic path, I'll be frustrated. If I follow the other path, I'll feel ashamed.
I wonder if my saving grace would be a goal.

I kind of don't count on that happening though.

How valuable, really, is authenticity - because I know I cling to mine, even if it's personally detrimental, even if it makes me less respectable to those whose opinions I value.

Stupid

is it worth radically altering my appearance to be lovable? Is it worth adopting the right interests at the expense of my real ones to be respectable? Is it worth spending years studying subjects I don't care for and am not good at to be employable, or spending even longer in poverty to try to build marketable skills on my own?

Maybe I just see it as futile.

it's entirely possible to put in an effort that deserves success, and fail. Really now, why even bother?

The more I read, the more hopeless I become. There's nothing out there. Absolutely nothing. I am not competent, I'm a useless, broken freak. There is no life I can crete for myself, and no reason to try.

I'd really simply be better off dead. That's what i actually deserve anyway.

I'm a joke, aren't I? Too pathetic to handle the harsh reality of life. But I've already violated so many moral norms in this regard it doesn't even matter. There's no hope for me. I still have time left, so any replies would be appreciated. But I know I don't deserve them and likely won't get them. No one owes me attention. Those who cannot get everything for themselves are expected to simply die.

Maybe don't give up on your thoughts/ideas so quickly? You are starting off on a good course by thinking, you are examining large philosophical/existential ideas. I can't and don't accept that it's all for nothing.

[ScientiaOmnisEst]

To every one:

I'm still frantic. The more I read, the more I realize the only non-morally-horrific life is a completely personally empty one. The things I dream of doing are a waste of time. This actually ties into the thread, since I call myself ambitious, say I want to do something with my life. But since valuing personal fulfilment over the wellbeing of the physically needy is morally wrong (I can link some articles if anyone wants), and the arts provide no significant good in the world...I see no reason to keep going. I have no justification; it's just too damn bad and no one cares. I can't live like that; I don't even care. I don't want that responsibility, I don't understand why I even have it. I just want everything to go away and stop, it's all moving too fast.

Someone talk to me, please. Anyone. I'll give you my number if writing is too slow. I know I'm a hysterical freak, and I'm sorry. Please...

Edit: Adding some links for people's reference. I'm desperate for input. (Not actually triggering):

Possible trigger:

Refuting Criticisms of Utilitarianism and Effective Altruism | The Godless Theist

The points being refuted are basically how I see EA. I have a hard time accepting the idea of a moral evaluation system that doesn't actually label moral vs immoral.

The Ethical Imperative of Effective Altruism | The Godless Theist

Title says it all.

https://aeon.co/essays/art-is-a-wast...ltruism-claims

The most painful, upon rereading, as a wannabe writer and maybe visual artist. That what I'd be doing isn't just useless, it's cruelly useless, possibly entitled and narcissistic (though really, I'm probably something of a narc anyway). I say I want to do something worthwhile with my life, contribute something, leave a little legacy. Goals that are pretty reprehensible under utilitarianism unless they involve establishing hugely beneficial systems or donating loads of money. I want to affect people, but in such a way I can get concrete feedback.

The most horrifying part is that, in the last hour, I can feel my internal world dying. My desire to create disappearing before it ever emerged - because it won't do any REAL good. It might brighten some American's day, but it won't save any needy lives. I can't use it to claim I did a good thing, just a validating one. I put my stupid feelings or thoughts out there and someone liked it, so I feel worthy. But the article points out I'm not, because my ideas and feelings don't matter when there's so much suffering in the world. It's wrong and narcissistic for me to want to do something like that. Even though... I don't care about altruism much. I can't bear the thought of dedicating my life to it, because it just doesn't matter to me. If I could do both, that would be ideal.

I don't want this change, this is the self-clinging I was talking about. Because the altruistic life doesn't sound fulfilling or even interesting to me - it will just protect me from criticism.

There's something very off to me too about the moral baseline for lifetime behavior being so...narrow. Maybe that's my pain, confinement. Every choice being either unpleasant or strict.

God, I'm sorry. I'll retire after this if you guys want. Just how to I get past this dissonance? This is my torture, finding the right way to live. The apparent answer is something I can't submit to, but I want to be moral too...

[Webgoji]

1. I don't think you need to retire it because the thinking patterns you've developed are very self-defeating and negative.
2. The articles you linked to are, at best, angry and judgmental tirades.
3. How we help the world is different for every person.

You can't let someone tell you that making art, in whatever fashion, is a waste because someone is starving in Syria. As we all know, art functions at many different levels and we all give in varying degrees. Art can bring attention to subjects that wouldn't be discussed if we didn't broach the subject (like abuse, rape, genocide and bigotry). Art can uplift souls as well as expose them to the darker side of humanity. Art exists as an expression of life itself. You might not be able to bring food to that person in Syria, but you sure as heck can write or paint or sew or whatever your medium to influence someone here. Maybe they can help that person we're talking about as well?

Morality, in my opinion, can boil down to one simple question; are you providing value for someone else? If you are only contributing to negative states of mind, like the authors of the links you provided, then you are pushing them down, not lifting them up, not being of value to them.

Don't waste energy pushing yourself or someone else down. Engage in whatever artistic pursuits you enjoy. Watch a movie. Go for a bike ride. Because if you made someone smile today, you made a difference. Just ask around these forums, especially these forums, how important getting a chance to smile is and then slap those so-called theists and philosophers with it because you helped someone where they didn't.

[ScientiaOmnisEst]

Originally Posted by Webgoji

1. I don't think you need to retire it because the thinking patterns you've developed are very self-defeating and negative.
2. The articles you linked to are, at best, angry and judgmental tirades.
3. How we help the world is different for every person.

You can't let someone tell you that making art, in whatever fashion, is a waste because someone is starving in Syria. As we all know, art functions at many different levels and we all give in varying degrees. Art can bring attention to subjects that wouldn't be discussed if we didn't broach the subject (like abuse, rape, genocide and bigotry). Art can uplift souls as well as expose them to the darker side of humanity. Art exists as an expression of life itself. You might not be able to bring food to that person in Syria, but you sure as heck can write or paint or sew or whatever your medium to influence someone here. Maybe they can help that person we're talking about as well?

Morality, in my opinion, can boil down to one simple question; are you providing value for someone else? If you are only contributing to negative states of mind, like the authors of the links you provided, then you are pushing them down, not lifting them up, not being of value to them.

Don't waste energy pushing yourself or someone else down. Engage in whatever artistic pursuits you enjoy. Watch a movie. Go for a bike ride. Because if you made someone smile today, you made a difference. Just ask around these forums, especially these forums, how important getting a chance to smile is and then slap those so-called theists and philosophers with it because you helped someone where they didn't.

Actually...you're kind of making the kind of arguments these writers are against.

The entire point is that structuring your life around EA provides more value (in the form of lives saved, and overall wellbeing in the world), and helps significantly more people in a much more significant way than an average person does. Like I mentioned regarding art - which is more "good", making a privileged American smile or saving the lives of 50 Syrian children? Obviously the latter - helping some rich Westerner with their mental issues is less important than providing the basic needs of the severely disadvantaged, because you can't have psych problems if you died of malaria in infancy. How can you call yourself good if yout aren't devoting your resources to those who suffer the most? Our rich, western issues and desires are less important than the survival-threatening poverty of others.

So in a sense, local focus is like shirking a global duty, under this philosophy.

Of course, this provides that your morality hinges on providing for others. I've basically been running around looking for a way out of this being the only valid definition of good, the true way to be a moral person. I take issue with how a "minimally ethical life" requires such a huge commitment. There's inconvenient sacrifice and then there's totally subjugating the self for the sake of others, which no one seems to want to admit is EAs logical extreme. This was how I ended up on the Wikipedia page for ethical egoism. While it's actually too selfish for me, it's closer to what I tend to think is appropriate for any person, anywhere. It's the denial of the individual that bothers me in utilitarianism in general. Basically I need something that justifies acting in the interest of others sometimes, doesn't penalize self-interest, and definitely can't be extrapolated to "living for others". Because screw that. Others matter, but I kind of think one has a duty to oneself, whatever one was born into in life.

The fact alone that I'm writing this means I've gotten better - my mind's doing it's stupid thing and I'm kinda numb. It just sort of happened when I realized what my real objections and anxieties are, and started looking for alternatives for conduct. Surely humans have thought of justifications for doing whatever you want in life. Which is the same damn issue I started with - do I do what I want, or something else? Give up because it's all meaningless? Devote myself to a strict idea of "good"? What? What's the right way to live and be? That's my biggest issue. That and, " how can I harmonize that with what I think/know I want?"

Lastly, because I write too much, I mentioned retiring because I bug people. Every day I seem to have a new crisis over some abstraction, or some comparison, or something stupid. Is there a disorder that involves rapid mood swings like that, over such stupid things? I mean, most people never worry too much...

[Webgoji]

Well first of all, let's start start here:

Originally Posted by ScientiaOmnisEst

- which is more "good", making a privileged American smile or saving the lives of 50 Syrian children?

With this you've already judged that American as unworthy of good. They're "privileged"? We can't judge what someone is going through just because of where they live or what they're doing. You don't know what's happened to them or what they've gone through. That person buying a $500 suit you just passed without a thought while being concerned with a "global focus" might be buying the suit they're going to kill themselves in.

But they were too privileged to make smile? The smile that might get them through the next day?

Pervasive suffering comes in so many forms. No action is inherently good or inherently bad either. So the argument about more or less good means you are judging, based on your own interpretation, if this person is deserving of whatever help you can give.

So yes, I'm arguing against what those writers are talking about because they choose to ignore the value of something as simple as making a neighbor smile. Worse, they are judging the value of others based on some quantity of "good" they think they can put numbers to without ever considering the person standing right next to them.

Originally Posted by ScientiaOmnisEst

Obviously the latter - helping some rich Westerner with their mental issues is less important than providing the basic needs of the severely disadvantaged, because you can't have psych problems if you died of malaria in infancy. How can you call yourself good if you aren't devoting your resources to those who suffer the most?

This is ridiculous. To judge someone else's suffering to be less important is akin to playing God. Every single individual is important to me. Supremely important to me and I refuse to even consider that one person's psych problems are even slightly less important than someone else's food problems.

Doing good isn't about how many check boxes we get to cross off. Then it's just more selfishness. It's about helping others regardless.

Originally Posted by ScientiaOmnisEst

So in a sense, local focus is like shirking a global duty, under this philosophy.

Global and local are identical. To disregard one is to disregard all. The most important person at any moment is that person right in front of you.

Originally Posted by ScientiaOmnisEst

It's the denial of the individual that bothers me in utilitarianism in general. Basically I need something that justifies acting in the interest of others sometimes, doesn't penalize self-interest, and definitely can't be extrapolated to "living for others". Because screw that. Others matter, but I kind of think one has a duty to oneself, whatever one was born into in life.

The fact alone that I'm writing this means I've gotten better - my mind's doing it's stupid thing and I'm kinda numb. It just sort of happened when I realized what my real objections and anxieties are, and started looking for alternatives for conduct. Surely humans have thought of justifications for doing whatever you want in life. Which is the same damn issue I started with - do I do what I want, or something else? Give up because it's all meaningless? Devote myself to a strict idea of "good"? What? What's the right way to live and be? That's my biggest issue. That and, " how can I harmonize that with what I think/know I want?"

This is actually important. You've written several threads that have pointed out extremes, just like the one we're talking about and as has been pointed out, there are many "middle paths".

You are important. In just the same way as the person you pass on the street is important and just in the same way as someone in Libya is important. So in answer to your questions, you don't always do only what you want because you need to support others. But you can't support them if you don't support yourself. So you need to take care of yourself and help others as you can. Pushing to an extreme like punishing yourself for not focusing "globally" can only lead to more suffering as I've pointed about above. Extremes ignore what can be done only leading to further problems.

Originally Posted by ScientiaOmnisEst

Lastly, because I write too much, I mentioned retiring because I bug people. Every day I seem to have a new crisis over some abstraction, or some comparison, or something stupid. Is there a disorder that involves rapid mood swings like that, over such stupid things? I mean, most people never worry too much...

Well, actually it could be a bipolar type of reaction. Many people worry so much it's crippling. So maybe you need to talk to a therapist, maybe you're fighting bipolar or something like that. And the things you're trying to work out aren't stupid. You're not bugging anyone.

Maybe you just need a very local focus and need to take care of yourself a little?

[ScientiaOmnisEst]

Webgoji, I almost succeeded in returning to normalcy last night, then woke up this morning with my mind running with guilt again and this post was exactly what I needed.

The idea is supposed to be that every life is equal in a universal, objective POV (something, it occurred to me, I don't entirely believe, both from a quasi-objective POV, and a personal, individual one). So, it's rational to prioritize someone living with their basic needs met before someone living "happy" and "fulfilled". It seems shallow doesn't it? How awful am I that I care immensely more, am far more interested in my own (privileged) psychodrama than almost anyone else's wellbeing?

So I start feeling guilty about every thought I have. Every daydream, every excitement for beauty or fantasy, every plan for self-improvement, ever dream of egoistic success, every bite of emotional pain or self-hatred - what right do I have to this? What right do I have to say "I want this", when the objectively, rationally, morally correct thing is to do quite the opposite? What right do I have to live the life I want when so many others don't even get to imagine one?

(Assuming it is...I've seen arguments against that.)

Another site I read talked about guilt and this movement: a couple suggesting that guilt and scrupulosity can be great ways to get people involved and start doing good. Or, that people who feel guilty about their "privilege" could absolve their guilt by giving it away. Well, I dropped out of college partially becasue I felt guilty about having a college account instead of having to take out loans and work my way through; I've self-harmed to absolve myself of having never been abused. Shouldn't I also subsume my desires, interest, and personality in the service of the needier. I don't deserve the privilege of daydreaming, pursuing a useless intellectual life, doing artistic things, involving myself in psychology.

Or do I? I have a hard time believing, intellectually, that any one person has such an obligation. To do one's part and contribute carefully and thoughtfully is one thing; to devote one's life to it on pure rational grounds is almost inhuman. And one article mercifully pointed out that those who do devote themselves to this kind of service aren't submerging passions in the name of rational morality - they are passionate about this. Great for them! I am not. Now if I could just convince myself this is okay....

EDIT: Oh, I doubt it's bipolar. I've never been manic in my life, or hypomanic. I'm starting to think it's some kind of anxiety. It wouldn't explain my tendency to extreme thinking though.

[Onward2wards]

Doing good for others is a worthy act. However, if you do good for others at the expense of your own dreams or possibly even your sense of identity, I don't see that as desirable. What if people you were trying to help wanted thing X in their lives, and someone told them it's selfish and they don't deserve it? What if thing X in that person's life was the very thing you were trying to help them obtain?

It seems to me you have a long list of unwritten obligations or rules you are laboring under. Valuing yourself and standing up for your personal choices is apparently not on that list. Why is it bad to value oneself as much as one values anyone else?

[ScientiaOmnisEst]

Originally Posted by Onward2wards

Doing good for others is a worthy act. However, if you do good for others at the expense of your own dreams or possibly even your sense of identity, I don't see that as desirable. What if people you were trying to help wanted thing X in their lives, and someone told them it's selfish and they don't deserve it? What if thing X in that person's life was the very thing you were trying to help them obtain?

It seems to me you have a long list of unwritten obligations or rules you are laboring under. Valuing yourself and standing up for your personal choices is apparently not on that list. Why is it bad to value oneself as much as one values anyone else?

I don't see it as desirable either, for anyone, unless that is your dream and identity. The idea is that all human lives are equal, so we need to save as many disadvantaged lives as possible. Someone having a chance at living is more important than a healthy, privileged person's "fulfilment". You can't even think about self-fulfilment if you're sick, starving, and/or dying.

I'm trying to restore a kind of cognitive normalcy, making myself research old interests, engage old fantasies, watch mindless entertainment. Trying to push the guilt away, or dissolve it. Isn't that pathetic? "The suffering of others and my immense moral duty is too unbearable so I'm just going to drown myself in my privilege so I don't have to think about it." Pure cognitive dissonance. Or am I just trying to cure unnecessary guilt?

It's not even that I care about the issue very much; I just want to be in the right. This is kind of a new "value", though you're right, I do have a list of sorts.

Hell, I even catch myself in guilt over self-improvement, or ideas to do things more in line with my Self, but that aren't "good" in a manner approved by a particular, smarter, better group. I feel like I've heard this before.