TryingMyBest wrote: ↑December 5th, 2018, 12:45 am
If human feelings don't matter then why do they cause pain? Why does it hurt when someone calls someone a bad name? This matters a lot because we store up emotional pain and take it out on others, animals, or nature. We might be small from some cosmic perspective but at least we are significant to each other.
Concerning whether views about ethics are distorted because of self-obsession, I think that ethics/morality are logically solvable. Such that harmony will be natural and a lack of harmony will much much more rare. I think that the quality of the planet reflects on the educated individuals that reside there. I'm a problem-solver looking for solutions of how to achieve harmony and value. If human emotion and false conceptions of reality are not the cause of our lack of harmony with each other and the natural world, then I would simply move on to the next theory. If I had a distorted view, I would want the truth.
I think you are really on to something, and I think the solution(s) you seek are here:
http://classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.html
In case you are not familiar with Epictetus, his main focus is solving the problems you describe in (somewhat) the manner you propose. He tries to provide people with a more accurate and rational method of viewing the world and events, such that the world does not have such severe or so many negative impacts upon us. The critical cornerstone premise is that some things are in our control and others (lots of them!) are not.
"...Some things are in our control and others not. Things in our control are opinion, pursuit, desire, aversion, and, in a word, whatever are our own actions. Things not in our control are body, property, reputation, command, and, in one word, whatever are not our own actions.
The things in our control are by nature free, unrestrained, unhindered; but those not in our control are weak, slavish, restrained, belonging to others. Remember, then, that if you suppose that things which are slavish by nature are also free, and that what belongs to others is your own, then you will be hindered. You will lament, you will be disturbed, and you will find fault both with gods and men. But if you suppose that only to be your own which is your own, and what belongs to others such as it really is, then no one will ever compel you or restrain you. Further, you will find fault with no one or accuse no one. You will do nothing against your will. No one will hurt you, you will have no enemies, and you not be harmed..."
We should reasonably focus our time and attention on those things we can control, and release all the anxiety and anger most of us would normally attach to those things we can not change. If it rains, this is a predictable event outside our control, and we are foolish to let it upset us. Similarly, if someone cuts us off in traffic, we should also withhold emotional reactions.
"...When you are going about any action, remind yourself what nature the action is. If you are going to bathe, picture to yourself the things which usually happen in the bath: some people splash the water, some push, some use abusive language, and others steal. Thus you will more safely go about this action if you say to yourself, "I will now go bathe, and keep my own mind in a state conformable to nature." And in the same manner with regard to every other action. For thus, if any hindrance arises in bathing, you will have it ready to say, "It was not only to bathe that I desired, but to keep my mind in a state conformable to nature; and I will not keep it if I am bothered at things that happen..."
(You probably don't go to the public bath, but similar instructions would apply to going to the gym, or to heading out into traffic)
But, there is where we instead enter the situation with preconceptions, and poor habits and lazy ways of thinking that get us in trouble. When we assume the other person intended to cut us off for their selfish reasons, we sense injustice, which we want to 'put right'. We get in the habit of making sure that person knows our opinion of them and their 'unjust' actions, perhaps giving them a signal that they are number one. If we step back and examine things rationally, without the habits, we see no need or justification for anger. We won't assume the other person's motives, so perhaps they actually did not see us, or maybe they have an emergency on their hands. The more likely situation is that their perspective is way off the mark, and they have made some trivial matter feel like an emergency to them. In this likely event, we should consider that they are damaged and suffering, and more worthy of pity than anger. We can choose not to be dragged into the negative emotions by their inconsiderate actions. They can't make you angry unless you consent.
"...If a person gave your body to any stranger he met on his way, you would certainly be angry. And do you feel no shame in handing over your own mind to be confused and mystified by anyone who happens to verbally attack you?.."
You can probably see already the clear connection between the philosophy of Epictetus and various twelve step programs and anger management courses. Cognitive behavioral therapy also has its roots in "The Enchiridion".
A related note on perspective...Epictetus reminds us to keep death and other seemingly terrible things daily before our eyes (at least figuratively, if you don't want to stop by the morgue before coffee). The idea is not to be sad, but rather to help you put the trivial troubles of life in their proper place. Injustice is genocide, slavery, racism and such; it is not someone cutting you off in traffic.
There is much more to this philosophy, and I encourage you to read the text rather than trying to pick it up from my clumsy summary. Probably the biggest thing I skipped over is working to align one's desires and aversions to nature, which goes right down the path you wish to tread. Read the book a second time, and it will really begin to hit home. It is clear and concise, but also densely packed with good advice on how to find tranquility in your life. When you have found it, you'll not only see little need to be upset by life, but also little need to cause trouble for others.
If everyone read this and took it to heart, you would have your wish. I agree with you that these problems can be solved. But, you will find great resistance. People are like alcoholics with their habits and preconceptions. They think it makes it easier for them to operate on autopilot and avoid thinking about unpleasant things. Ironically, though, it makes the regular, predictable facts of life come as a shock to those who fail to consider reality as it really is. So, back to your original question...
TryingMyBest wrote: ↑December 1st, 2018, 7:57 pm
Which qualities would be required in the message?
What ideas would absolutely need to be included?
Which philosophical truths ring true to all humans?
How would it take root?
What would give it the greatest chance of success of spreading?
Who would be the ideal agent to disseminate the spell?
Is timing important?
Is there any reason not to attempt this challenge?
I will be attempting this exercise after some preliminary feedback.
My advice is (assuming you have not) to read the book and practice some of the philosophy contained in it. One bit you will find is that you should not make much attempt to 'evangelize' the ideas you find there, but rather to work on yourself first and try to be an example. Here you will find folks with some ideas about philosophy, and some eagerness to discuss it and learn. In the 'real' world, not so much.
"...Never call yourself a philosopher, nor talk a great deal among the unlearned about theorems, but act conformably to them. Thus, at an entertainment, don't talk how persons ought to eat, but eat as you ought. For remember that in this manner Socrates also universally avoided all ostentation. And when persons came to him and desired to be recommended by him to philosophers, he took and- recommended them, so well did he bear being overlooked. So that if ever any talk should happen among the unlearned concerning philosophic theorems, be you, for the most part, silent. For there is great danger in immediately throwing out what you have not digested. And, if anyone tells you that you know nothing, and you are not nettled at it, then you may be sure that you have begun your business. For sheep don't throw up the grass to show the shepherds how much they have eaten; but, inwardly digesting their food, they outwardly produce wool and milk. Thus, therefore, do you likewise not show theorems to the unlearned, but the actions produced by them after they have been digested...."
People are not big on unsolicited advice, no matter how well-intended or useful it might be. You solicited, so I've taken the opportunity to preach it a bit. I hope you find as much value there (in the book, I mean) as I did. I truly believe the ideas in this book are those that are needed for the greatest chance of success. He also gives the blueprint for getting the word out, which is to focus inward first, then outward primarily by example, rather than 'spreading the word'. I think he is right on all counts. Good luck in your efforts.
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
- By Bethel Saint Bright
- By Fried Egg