Comment on If suffering is good because it gives life meaning, wouldn't it follow that hurting people is good?
dysprosium@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days agoThis 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.
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.
You claim that suffering is bad, at the same time you’re insulting other people.
you clearly have mental problems xD I was just trying to view it rationally. A path you never dare to ponder I suppose
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.
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.
dysprosium@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
I never said they’d “cancel” whatever that means.
yeah we agree suffering can be both good and bad.