Only narrow-mindedness can ever afford us the view that things are actually better than mediocre (for the optimist) or worse than mediocre (for the pessimist). For if we take an extensive, wholly unbiased account of all perspectives simultaneously, it becomes patently clear the bad perfectly neutralizes the good.
It is only by espousing a particular perspective that one can ever find good in bad or bad in good, for example. But any single perspective implies limitation which means it can not point to an “absolute” truth.
The “absolute” truth, if you will, would be the entire collection of perspectives on any and every given matter represented on a continuum. This would entail seeing good in bad, seeing bad in bad, seeing perhaps even worse in something merely bad, seeing bad in good, seeing good in good, seeing perhaps even better in something merely good, etc. If all views are accounted for equally, bad cancels out good and as a result, there is nothing but mediocrity, rendering the totality of reality merely lukewarm.
Many aspire to choose, more than likely unconsciously, only those perspectives which see good in bad or see even better in something merely good. We call these fellow human beings optimists.
On the other hand, many identify with negativity, once again more than likely unconsciously, and as such conclude the opposite. They see bad in good or see even worse in something merely bad. We call these people pessimists.
And of those who see things stoically (those that see all perspectives), we call them philosophers.
The road to peace and happiness in this life is “choosing” the perspective(s) that best fit(s) one's ability to find solace in life's mundane and tragic necessities. On the other hand, philosophers see things stoically for the purpose of humbling those who arrogantly assume they possess the "absolute" truth, be it good or bad.
It is only by espousing a particular perspective that one can ever find good in bad or bad in good, for example. But any single perspective implies limitation which means it can not point to an “absolute” truth.
The “absolute” truth, if you will, would be the entire collection of perspectives on any and every given matter represented on a continuum. This would entail seeing good in bad, seeing bad in bad, seeing perhaps even worse in something merely bad, seeing bad in good, seeing good in good, seeing perhaps even better in something merely good, etc. If all views are accounted for equally, bad cancels out good and as a result, there is nothing but mediocrity, rendering the totality of reality merely lukewarm.
Many aspire to choose, more than likely unconsciously, only those perspectives which see good in bad or see even better in something merely good. We call these fellow human beings optimists.
On the other hand, many identify with negativity, once again more than likely unconsciously, and as such conclude the opposite. They see bad in good or see even worse in something merely bad. We call these people pessimists.
And of those who see things stoically (those that see all perspectives), we call them philosophers.
The road to peace and happiness in this life is “choosing” the perspective(s) that best fit(s) one's ability to find solace in life's mundane and tragic necessities. On the other hand, philosophers see things stoically for the purpose of humbling those who arrogantly assume they possess the "absolute" truth, be it good or bad.
No comments:
Post a Comment