This is basically saying too much suffering is bad (succumbing to hunger). But a little (harsh breakup) can be good.
So this doesn’t suggest suffering is bad after all. If good can come from suffering, then suffering cannot be necessary bad.
Comment on If suffering is good because it gives life meaning, wouldn't it follow that hurting people is good?
TheFogan@programming.dev 2 days ago
Suffering isn’t good, but good can come from suffering, but certainly doesn’t always.
A harsh breakup can lead to personal growth.
A loss of a job could lead to a better job and possibly better money management strategies.
But a kid born into abject poverty in an undeveloped villiage, spends his whole life scraping by in suffering always hungry until succumbing to a slow painful death – no good, no meaning.
Mostly the idea that suffering is good is more common in religious ideologies that need an excuse to explain why their powerful god doesn’t step in and fix things.
dysprosium@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
naught101@lemmy.world 2 days ago
No, it’s not. It’s saying that any amount of suffering is bad, but a tolerable amount of suffering can have good secondary effects (but this is not guaranteed, it’s circumstantial). The secondary good doesn’t mean that the bad part didn’t happen.
dysprosium@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
So we agree. Suffering has both good and bad parts.
So you can’t say suffering is (always) bad, because it can have good (secondary) effects.naught101@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Goodness in one aspect doesn’t cancel badness in another…
It can be always bad AND sometimes good.
DreamAccountant@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Fuck you. Suffering is objectively bad, even if you 'make something good out of it".
What the fuck is wrong with you to defend suffering? YOU suffer. Enjoy your own suffering. YOU learn from it. Don’t sit here and pretend suffering is good in any way, you fucking psychopath.
zeropointone@lemmy.world 2 days ago
You claim that suffering is bad, at the same time you’re insulting other people.
dysprosium@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
you clearly have mental problems xD I was just trying to view it rationally. A path you never dare to ponder I suppose
TheFogan@programming.dev 1 day ago
This is basically saying too much suffering is bad (succumbing to hunger). But a little (harsh breakup) can be good.
Not quite, first off scale isn’t quite as relevant there, beyond a certain point can leave no room for revocation.
Hypothetically a brain tumor can cause suffering, but the removal might rewire your brain so you feel better.
Stepping on a lego may hurt… and most likely nothing of worth is gained from it.
Suffering is always bad… the events afterwards can go either way. Even say the harsh breakup, might lead to personal growth, might lead to a long depression spiral that ends in murder or suicide.
Also more important to point out, suffering isn’t required for personal growth. Maybe someone becomes a better person by going to therapy, or just watching someone be kind to someone else and being inspired, or falling in love with someone that loves them back.
Suffering is one of many potential change agents per say. That change can be positive or negative, and again there are millions of change agents in the world. Suffering by definition is an unpleasant agent of change.
Venator@lemmy.nz 1 day ago
But a kid born into abject poverty in an undeveloped villiage, spends his whole life scraping by in suffering always hungry until succumbing to a slow painful death – no good, no meaning.
But what about if they grow up to become a mob boss or billionaire or supervillian as a result? 😅
TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
Throwing money on lottery can make you rich. Or it might not. Honestly, the odds are stacked against you.
What doesn’t kill you, may make you stronger… unless it maims you for life. People who have survived wars aren’t necessarily stronger. Quite the contrary actually.