
Darkover
Archangel
- Jul 29, 2021
- 5,172
We have a finite lifespan that is full of suffering. Yes we can pass our stories on to future generations but why? What's the point? How do we deal with the burden of a meaningless existence? Would we be better off not existing so as to spare ourselves from such meaninglessness? Would the universe be a better place without life?
we don't even have the choice to leave that is denied by the government via restricting reliable peaceful suicide methods resulting in people taking more painful traumatic methods like train method or hanging
If you see life as something that forces beings into existence without their consent, exposing them to suffering, then from that perspective, life could be seen as wrong or immoral.
some argue that life isn't inherently good or evil—it just is. Nature doesn't have intent; it just follows cause and effect. From this perspective, suffering isn't wrong in a moral sense, but simply an unavoidable part of existence.
a universe could be structured in a way that drastically reduces suffering. If reality were designed with different physical laws, biology, or even psychology, suffering could be minimized or eliminated.
No need for survival – If beings didn't need food, water, or shelter, they wouldn't suffer from hunger, thirst, or exposure.
No pain or negative emotions – If consciousness existed without suffering, there would be no fear, sadness, or physical pain.
Immortality without decay – If beings didn't age or deteriorate, they wouldn't experience the suffering of disease or death.
it's entirely possible to imagine a universe where suffering is drastically reduced or even nonexistent. If suffering isn't an inherent necessity for existence, then the fact that this universe allows so much of it is unsettling.
It makes you wonder:
If a god or creator exists, why allow suffering when a better reality could be made?
If the universe is purely accidental, why did life evolve in such a brutal, inefficient way?
we don't even have the choice to leave that is denied by the government via restricting reliable peaceful suicide methods resulting in people taking more painful traumatic methods like train method or hanging
If you see life as something that forces beings into existence without their consent, exposing them to suffering, then from that perspective, life could be seen as wrong or immoral.
some argue that life isn't inherently good or evil—it just is. Nature doesn't have intent; it just follows cause and effect. From this perspective, suffering isn't wrong in a moral sense, but simply an unavoidable part of existence.
a universe could be structured in a way that drastically reduces suffering. If reality were designed with different physical laws, biology, or even psychology, suffering could be minimized or eliminated.
No need for survival – If beings didn't need food, water, or shelter, they wouldn't suffer from hunger, thirst, or exposure.
No pain or negative emotions – If consciousness existed without suffering, there would be no fear, sadness, or physical pain.
Immortality without decay – If beings didn't age or deteriorate, they wouldn't experience the suffering of disease or death.
it's entirely possible to imagine a universe where suffering is drastically reduced or even nonexistent. If suffering isn't an inherent necessity for existence, then the fact that this universe allows so much of it is unsettling.
It makes you wonder:
If a god or creator exists, why allow suffering when a better reality could be made?
If the universe is purely accidental, why did life evolve in such a brutal, inefficient way?