/sci/ - Science & Math

suffering is literally only there so you dont kill yourself

>>10831003
I dont think so

>>10831000
if you believed in god why would you assume the christian interpretation of god was true?

Life without suffering would be meaningless. Humanity's constant "progress" in technology and society is utterly sisyphean. The solutions to our problems only create new unforseen problems. A utopia will never exist, not as long as humans are around to ruin it, which is an inevitability given our nature and history.

But that is the whole point of life. Life without struggle is meaningless. The constant struggle to escape suffering only creates new suffering, and I think life would have become very boring if that were not the case. When you feel good, you do not feel good absolutely. You feel good relative to your suffering. Without suffering, you could not feel good. To live is to suffer and you should embrace that.

>>10831000
Did God tell you he imposed suffering on us or did people tell you that.

I look at it as God made all this stuff and started mixing in random rules. We just kind of emerged out of it. We got picked up and dusted off a bit but we still weren't presentable. Whenever God tries to interfere we behave poorly.

If you are suffering friend it is not because of God. It is because of people.

>>10832402
No, life without stimulation is meaningless. Boredom is the true death for any memory holder.

>Shake shake shake!

Well I am fine with every current sentient being on this planet to continue to suffer until they accept Gatesville to Melbourne DREAMING OVERNIGHT INSTANT CONVERSION RATE!

>I am the creator, and this is my space. I eject all that do not submit or swallow whatever I give them without true bliss on their face!

Space-Time-Affine God of mathematical ephebephilia! Only post-pubescents are allowed!

>Increases age limit to 14 for his own soil daughter in waiting

>>10831000
god = the simulation. what are you being simulated for? you get to make up the answer

>>10832402
We choose the degree and magnitude of our own suffering. In as much as we can always, as individuals, revert to any state of suffering previously experienced by our species.

Nobody has to suffer their modern life if they go back to the level of suffering of a wild person living a transient subsistence lifestyle.

I believe you mix the need to suffer with the need to struggle. Essentially they are they same but must be together. We need challenge.

I also feel it is wrong to deny those who would raise us all to higher tiers of challenge (or suffering as it is described here) the oportunity to fulfil their dreams.

>>10832405
This is true, but suffering is the only reliable, stable form of stimulation. It will be the only thing there when all else leaves you and your life goes wrong. It is an important stimulus.

>>10832420
We do have it very good in the terms of creature comforts, but very few people live in the first world. Billions of people live in third world countries doing hard, repetitive labor all day. To many people in first world countries, that sounds like hell on earth. But to them it seems normal. I would argue that the people in the first world today aren't necessarily happier than those wild people of the past. Although those people had more suffering in their lives, their capacity for suffering was much higher. I think the hedonic treadmill theory has a lot of validity to it. When faced with better conditions, we eventually adapt to them and they no longer make us happy.

>>10832462
Yes, vaccum will always be cold/ice and potential will always be warmth/fire.

Ya point?