You can love others, or help others without a feeling of "oneness". Religion and spirituality do not hold some sort of monopoly on thinking of others or being kind to others.
It can help, but it is not necessary.
This is water.
- Thread starter Beantown
- Start date
You can love others, or help others without a feeling of "oneness". Religion and spirituality do not hold some sort of monopoly on thinking of others or being kind to others.
It can help, but it is not necessary.
People do nice things for others when there is no direct benefit to them. It happens quite a lot, actually. Anonymously even, sometimes.
Don't be so cynical. We already have too many "humans being human" on this board.
Certainly it does happen. But in a greater scheme of thing I still think it is few and far between. You can love you wife, your girlfriend, or mother, or family. But that's really the "default setting" IMO because there is an immediate impact to yourself if you do not treat them well.
What I'm talking about is much wider. If we are truly "one with others", there would be less hunger, starvation and suffering in Africa, as an example. There is more resources in a given city in the US to feed the whole of Africa, but the fact that it doesn't happen, tells me that we're more concern with "ourselves" than "others".
When we buy things that are Made in China - do we really care what kind of working conditions the workers there are put into? When we bought a pair of Nike shoes, do we really care how many hours a day the Vietnamese workers are working? Do we put pressure on these companies to enforce proper employment ethics?
This video is a good first step, but there is still a long long long... way to go.
I agree, to an extent. The big problem is, we forget that everything has start small-scale. When you look at the big picture, it just appears daunting. Some folks will just pack it in right there. If we can't change the world immediately, what's the point? I believe that good begets good, and that even simple kindness can be far reaching. But it has to start somewhere.
The problem I think is it never gets anywhere. And that's my argument. If you're just being "Nice" to the people who you have immediate contact with, that to me is just a selfish decision to be "comfortable". You'd be nice to your work mates, your family, etc, because you know you have to live with them, work with them.
To me that's not being one with others, you're just doing it for your own self interest.
It's not difficult to make a call to sponsor a child, $1 a day is all it takes, yet we don't do it. We buy $100 presents for our family, our boss. Why?
I'm not talking about niceties to people you know. I'm talking about kindness to random people.
I follow you, totally. We could use our resources in different ways to make life better on a worldwide scale. All I'm saying is, you can't expect sweeping changes. Cultural evolution is a gradual process. If nobody gets the ball rolling, it stays right where it is. It takes people who are willing to make a difference no matter how insignificant or unappreciated it may seem.
Being happy can certainly be a byproduct of helping someone, but it shouldn't be the motivation to do something. Why? Because if you feel like helping a particular person won't bring you happiness - you just won't do it. (i.e., may be you don't like the Chinese, so you just won't care how many hours they spend in a factory).
To be selfless - the self itself no longer exists.
To be selfless is to be "one" with other beings.
It is to truly feel their pain in your heart, and realize that, their pain is inherently your pain as well, and that should be the basis for everything that you do.
This is what true love is.
The Starfish story.
That's all.
That's all.
I would disagree.
1) I'm a social animal, as are most humans. How I see my relationships among my fellow humans has a direct impact on my happiness.
2) To overlook the plights, or potential plights, of my fellow humans is to lack empathy.
3) I have a common heritage with every tree, mushroom, and mosquito, but most closely with my fellow humans. I always feel closest with family.
It always perturbs me a little when people indicate they need religion/spirituality to act like people.
But what do "people" normally act?
I'd assert it is not good enough to live our lives only to fulfill our own happiness when there are under-privileged people out there in the world. As I've said before, to help someone in order to fulfill your own "happiness", or to feel good that you've somehow got "empathy" in your heart is insufficient because you are be doing it ultimately to further your own self interests.
When you're able to help someone 100% with all your heart, simply because they need help, that is what true love is.
We act as social animals.
Every acts in their own interests, self or otherwise. I don't need to prove I have empathy to feel good about myself, I just have empathy, whether I feel goood about it or not.
Yes, we do praise people whose interest is helping others.
Is it your belief we are just one of the 'animals' ?
How do you explain people who risked their lives to save a stranger? To me that goes beyond animal instincts. It also doesn't explain having happiness as your self interest, as you won't get to live to enjoy it.
I believe I'm not a plant or a rock, if that's what you mean.
Because we're social animals, and culturally conditioned to help those in need. What sort of explanation are you looking for?
Most vertebrates go beyond instinct.
Why do you assume happiness is everyone's #1 interest? Is it yours?
A system that is based on self-defeating acts is ultimately destined to ruin.
A system based on acts that never benefit the actor and always benefit a non-actor is destined to have very few acts.
A system based on acting in your own self-interest is sustainable, productive, satisfying and in tune with human nature.
A system based on acts that never benefit the actor and always benefit a non-actor is destined to have very few acts.
A system based on acting in your own self-interest is sustainable, productive, satisfying and in tune with human nature.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
We are talking dedication levels here. While One Brow appears to be very dedicated to a few ideals, equality being one, others have many more ideals and are less dedicated to them overall. While a Mormon will focus on their ideals over 2 years of their mission, One Brow is on a life time mission for his ideals.
I've noticed I received the best treatment on this board by ideal-dedicated people, whether they are God believers or not...they seem equally dispersed. A few very dedicated God believers who use their love of God as a motivating factor, and few very dedicated God deniers who use their love of concrete things (family for instance) as a motivating factor. I ain't saying God believers don't use concrete things as motivation, just that their relationship with God is an additional motivator. Some God believers seem to use forgiveness/grace/mercy as an excuse to be lax in their ideals they espouse or should espouse. Some God-deniers simply refuse to espouse any ideals and just rag on the religious, without acknowledging that a belief in a loving personal creator/savior God is very beneficial to our society as a whole.