/lit/ - Literature

>>9783838
>In what way?
ressentiment. the neetch was one of the most interesting humans who ever put his thoughts down on paper. guilt is a thing. makes people do crazy things for beauty. always has. always will. for better or for worse. these are things worth paying attention to.

>Should we care about everyone in the world?
now here is the 64m question. *so.*

the great wisdom traditions are what they are because they work. confucius fits this category. so does the buddha. so do many others. including, i would say, latecomers like heidegger. truly canon-level thought is totalizing. it works, it explains everything. and, most of the time, anyways, great advances in philosophy are made not by proving anyone wrong, but by proving everyone right. sometimes, of course, there has to be Teh Great Refutation. but usually the big guys all have something to say that stands the test of time.

that's one thing. now, *should* we care about everyone in the world? i mean, this is a pretty serious question. if you have an interest in perceiving yourself - for *whatever* reason - as moral, ethical, &c, then yes, because *consistency matters.*

i didn't use to feel this way. i used to be okay with a topsy-turvy, This Now This universe. but the bloom came off that rose after a while, for many different reasons. i just didn't like the idea of a Universe of Tricksies. b/c what happens if you want to be serious? or if you just want to be able to sleep a little better at night? or Smite Evil? or...anything?

so i found it necessary to begin to work out some kind of stance that was okay for me, but i really did have to dig pretty deep in looking into it. b/c you're right: *should* we care? okay, let's say we don't. then what? how do we go on justifying ourselves? what makes *our* situation any different from anyone else's? why *shouldn't* i Have It My Way? lots of people do.
>and some of those people are inveterate dickbags

one interesting word in that is *care.* this is actually why i had such a good response to heidegger: for him being *is* care. i really liked that, b/c it actually explained *moods* really well, which was something i didn't think anyone else had done or even could do. so caring about others was also caring about myself.
>and really, i was still the only one i wanted to care about anyways

but, little by little, you wind up thinking about your *context,* both in space *and* in time, and then...and then.

so really it's up to you how wide or deep you want to throw the net. i tend to throw mine pretty wide, if only because i'm curious to see what i'll find.
>which is usually much weirder & stranger than i was expecting
>but also more interesting

care management mos def a thing. but sometimes bigger is better. true, sometimes bigger is also more unmanageable. but the thing is, it all connects. so why not think big?
>b/c you'll go insane, that's why
>well there is that