Re: False Hope or No Hope.?.
Sorry for the double-post, but I literally couldn't fit everything into a 10000 limit... :p
If you haven't read it, I posted something right before this one.
Being a pessimist doesn't mean you don't have hope. One can have hope and still be a pessimist.
Originally Posted by basilisk888
But choosing to not believing in hope is similar to having no hope on whatever it is you don't choose to believe in. Choosing to be blind is similar to actually being blind.
But in your point of view, you actually have a chance for seeing things for what they are on one end - but refuse that chance maybe because you don't see anything good coming out of it.
So in this sense, it's a sense of balance. Which is very true.
Yes, and no. It is better to not go though life (in the world we live in) naively but it is also true if you go to far without false hope then you'll stop living (depression, ect.). So live with false hope but not to much false hope ^_^ (false to true)
However, there is a sense of contradictory within this theory:
One cannot live life fully when one never believes in the possibility of actual good.
At the same time, one is not safe from the dangers of life if they were to believe everything were good.
But where, perchance, do the bad things come from?
Just circumstance? An actual "evil"? Nature's course? Or perhaps mankind itself?
From my gf's point of view: Even if things get bad, you can always make it better.
From my point of view: Things can get better, but many people refuse it from happening.
In essence: Wouldn't the reason these bad things happen to us and stay as a weight, be because of our own actions? We love to blame other things, but if my gf's words have any merit: Bad things are as bad as we make them to be. And not just individually, but I think as a whole all our beliefs, lack-of-beliefs, restrictions, freedoms, and etc affect each other completely.
We could be working together to make a better tomorrow, but many refuse to work as "there's no hope", many refuse the better tomorrow but decide to work anyway, and many more just work for a better tomorrow but have a lack of faith in it.
In that sense, those who completely believe in no hope could be doing two things: Standing still and never helping others - content with complaining, or helping others but not ever believing it will really achieve the goal that was intended (which, if they died before seeing the completion of the goal, would find themselves empty in death).
Re: False Hope or No Hope.?.
Ah, but one can also say "The person with false hope lived the same fruitful life as the one with no hope". In that sense, both lived and died happily, but one obtained a sense of enlightenment.
Even if it were false, does it matter in the end?
Enlighten: to give the light of fact and knowledge to; free from ignorance, prejudice, or superstition;
Ok, with that being said we can say they both got a sense of enlightenment... One just chose to go in a more shaded path, so to speak, if we say that living with false hope has a path with more light.
Side-tracked, by the belief in false securities... Lets say that hope is something we as humans fabricated within our minds to make everyday living livable... A security blanket, so to speak... Like I heard people say before without hope, then what is the point in living... In which I also believe without hope, it will be a dim future... Our conscience won't let us accept things as they are so we develop a will of hope that goes along with our will of knowledge, will of power....
Side-tracked by what exactly? In a world with no hope at all: There's no such thing as distractions -- as there's nothing to obtain from focus.
While the adventure is fun, the goal is the only thing that needs focus. And without a complete goal, there's no real reason to not be side-tracked.
In a world of no hope, one should find happiness in all that they do - live it up before they die it down. Distractions are key in this sense.
I agree totally!!!
Hope isn't a tool to change things, it is a tool to push one to change things.
Ok, I really didn't want to go down this road... Let us say there is a person who doesn't believe in the whole religion thing, but does believe there is a higher power and a force of evil out there, isn't that kind of believing??? And if you believe or not or just kind of, everyone of them are gaining some peace of mind in their consciousness... No matter how self-centered, vain & bias thinking, ignorant, naive, etc.. it may seem or be... It is their form of peace of mind, right??? In the end I am a person who believes that the truth reveals itself in death.
Nothing is gained from "kind of believing". One doesn't attain anything or dodge anything.
They can die knowing "they kind of knew", but all that will let them do is see the truth at the end without ever attaining it.
A realist may accept things with their knowledge, but they deny their emotional reaction
Ok, I get what you are saying, I think, help me out, if not... For example you are saying a realist believes that a murderer killed the victim cause they are a bad person, but won't believe that their emotions made them commit the crime. It might be a bad example cause I am not fully understanding...
Man I am enjoying this discussion with you cause I love your insight, point of view on this whole ordeal and yea' I know I knit-picked through some of your response, but I agree with much on what you had to say & I really want to get back with the response on the whole watcher, judge, guardian talk... It is just you replied back with great force "Young Skywalker"...lol *j/k* But for real my time is running short, til next time...
*I would aslo like to hear anyone else views on this, if you agree with Soshi or not or if you want to add anything feel free to join on the conversation... ^_^