I'm about as anti-religion as they come, but Schopenhauer's solution to the "life sucks" problem is quite rational and shares some characteristics with both Christianity and Buddhism. Christianity does provide some good advice. The problem with religion in general is that the method used to declare its justice (just or not) is one that inherently instills ignorance, creedence, and blind obedience which are all extremely dangerous characteristics.Mercutio said:Christianity and Buddhism have wisdom now?
Buddhism teaches moderation and passivity. Chrisitianity is a death cult that promises invisible rewards to adherents who behave themselves. Both seem to be more useful as tools to control a population than rewarding subjects for theological study (actually, I'm not a good judge of that, since I don't think anything is a rewarding subject for theological study).
The line of philosophy that Schopenhauer began (that most people would say Nietzsche founded) is anti-metaphysical i.e. it's designed to deal with the world we can see. Philosophy is an interest few people have, but this branch of thought is far more dirty and hands-on than most.Mercutio said:I personally take no comfort in philosophy. Most are too much built on largely unprovable suppositions.
The problem is that the urge to dominate is inherent instinct in all social-hierarchical animals, and human beings are social-hierarchical... The domination or competitive instinct in most such animals actually trumps all other selected instincts including sex-drive, hunger, and fear of pain, because dominance has become, among social-hierarchical animals, the primary means of satisfying all those subordinate interests. This is evident in higher apes (which are particularly well-known for their viciousness) and in other social hierarchical animals like lions, horses, or wolves.Mercutio said:At any rate, I disagree at least in part with Schopenhauer's thesis that men given means to a world without suffering would quickly end it, seeking conflict. I would say, perhaps too optimistically, that a hypothetical perfect world would be one in which all people are fulfilled. Being so, by definition, there would be no reason for real conflict. Anything less would simply not be perfect enough.
Bozo said:A good day is any day you wake up on the right side of the grass.
If you think you are having a bad day, look around, someone is bound to be having a worse day than you. And that should help you put your 'bad day' in perspective.
I did the math too. I'm not as bad as you are. My credit card is only worth 18.63 weeks of my salary. Now I know that I'm a lucky man ;-)LOST6200 said:I did the math and it seems that I owe as much on my credit cards as about 20 weeks of take-home pay.
Partly because of the very low interest rates these days. You can get more credit and still not bust your payment ratio because the minimal (3%) monthly payment on your card(s) mostly pays capital, not interest on your debts. Since no matter how big your credit gets, due to the low interest rate, it doesn't grow fast even if you don't pay much on it, so banks are willing to give you more because according to their financial formula, you are still supposed to be able to repay it.Mercutio said:...but how do you guys get that much CREDIT?