random meanderings
If we really believed that the universe is benevolent and provides everyone with exactly what their soul needs, then we should do nothing but celebrate all that is going on around us.
War
Hunger
Pestilence
George Bush Jr
80s hair metal
Which brings up an interesting idea or set of ideas through which I may contextualize this idea of universal benevolence:
I always hear people talking about how lucky we are or talking about how sad they feel for those who are less fortunate. And while I'm tempted to agree (and appreciate this surface-level attempt at empathy), I realize that it's more complicated. Who is to say that suffering is hierarchical? Who is to say that one person's suffering is more or less than another's? It may be that one's suffering is more apparent or visceral (a starving child suffering in a war zone), but that doesn't mean his/her suffering is more or less than someone who is tortured by his/her existential angst or self-loathing. In some ways, the former has it easier because his suffering appears to have an external root cause and thus can, in theory, be allieviated whereas the person who "has it all" and still hates himself is just as trapped but without the benefit of "externalized" explanations.
Further, I would argue that viewing suffering as more or less serves only to divide--as if that OTHER person's pain is not our own and OUR pain is felt only by us and those like us. So rather than bringing us closer by acknowledging our own luck and lamenting that OTHER's pain, it serves as a reminder that we are not that person, that his pain can be felt from a distance but is meant to be pitied.
To me, this is part of a larger concept dividing us and inflicting further suffering. It's only when we draw lines, when we create "others" that we are able to inflict pain on others. If we truly understood that bombing another is in reality bombing ourselves, would any rational person be in favor of the war in Iraq? in Afghanistan?
If we really got that another's hunger is our hunger, if we really got that their sadness our sadness, if we really understood the universal consciousness of humanity that unites us, do you really think that society would continue to exist as if we live in our own little hives and are not responsible for our brothers and sisters?
Maybe. But I don't see how.
posted by savagefredd @ 10:27 PM
3 Comments:
Savagefredd,
Are we on similar wavelengths or what? I posted my latest (very related to yours) AFTER I received your e-mail.
Yes, I SO agree with you. It seems as if there is this value-judged rank order of suffering. Or, perhaps, an in-group and out-of-group suffering. I'm still working on this....
Woops! I meant BEFORE.
My Dear Savage Fredd,
Ah....sigh...Deja vu for me on this posting...
Is suffering a "relative" condition seems to be the question and your answer is - no. Suffering is suffering?
I suffer. I am torn up inside by personal relationships, identity dilemmas, etc. But I am not worried about a bomb dropping on my head, nor young men in combat fatiques bursting through my door because some "insurgent" has run through my back gate on his way to the alley. My physical existence is not at risk, so I have the time, the luxury to worry about existenial dillemas...and create my own angst and suffering. My suffering is certainly just as "real" as any woman's in Afghanistan or Iraq, but I can't possibly believe it carries as much weight - or risk.
Yet at the same time, I can argue against the death penalty because of the damage it does to those who must enforce it - so we are killing ourselves when we kill others....that's your line of argument on the suffering scale, eh? Perhaps I'm hypocritical - or opportunist.
But the reality is, I am not dead, I have not been killed. Nor bombed. And my suffering is, if not the result of, very much related to my privileged circumstance.
Post a Comment
<< Home