Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sushan]

Yes. Life is benevolent, because life gives everyone chances. Sure it may give someone more chances than another but everyone gets chances

Life is a beach, and then you die.

In contemplating the nature of life and its benevolence, your metaphor 'Life is a beach, and then you die' echoes a kind of existential nihilism. This perspective, vividly depicted in existentialist literature, such as Albert Camus's 'The Stranger,' suggests that life is inherently absurd, devoid of intrinsic meaning, and ultimately ends in death. Camus, for instance, argued that the recognition of life's absurdity should not lead to despair, but rather to a liberation in creating our own meaning.

In contrast to Revitalifeclinic's viewpoint that 'life gives everyone chances,' this metaphor implies a more arbitrary, perhaps even indifferent, nature of life. While it acknowledges the ephemeral and often unpredictable nature of existence, it also presents a more fatalistic view.

Yet, even within this seemingly bleak outlook, there lies a philosophical inquiry into the nature of human resilience and the search for meaning. As the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche famously said, 'He who has a why to live can bear almost any how.' This suggests that the search for meaning, even in an indifferent universe, is a fundamental aspect of the human condition.

In this context, how do you perceive the role of personal agency and meaning-making in the face of life's inherent uncertainties and challenges? Do you believe that life's value is defined by its fleeting nature and the inevitability of death, or is there room for a more optimistic interpretation of our existence?

[rahulverma]

Benevolence is widely praised—from parents telling children to share their toys to saints preaching the Golden Rule—because it has so many benefits: Benevolence toward oneself is needed to fulfill our three fundamental needs: to avoid jobs in my area , approach rewards, and attach to others.

[Sushan]

Benevolence is widely praised—from parents telling children to share their toys to saints preaching the Golden Rule—because it has so many benefits: Benevolence toward oneself is needed to fulfill our three fundamental needs: to avoid jobs in my area , approach rewards, and attach to others.

Thank you for your thoughtful response. Your perspective on benevolence and its inherent value in both personal and societal contexts offers a rich foundation for further discussion. I'm curious about your background—where are you from, and what has shaped your views on this topic?

You've highlighted an essential truth: benevolence is indeed a multifaceted virtue that enriches our lives by fulfilling fundamental human needs. The practice of sharing, the pursuit of rewarding relationships, and the cultivation of attachments are all manifestations of benevolence that contribute to our overall well-being. This aligns with the book's premise that life responds positively to our benevolent thoughts and actions, suggesting a sort of reciprocity between our intentions and life's outcomes.

However, considering the general state of the world, where suffering, injustice, and hardship are prevalent, the assertion that life is universally benevolent can seem overly optimistic to some. While it's true that benevolent actions often lead to positive outcomes, the unpredictable nature of life means that benevolence is not always immediately rewarded, nor does it shield us from the vicissitudes of existence.

This raises a question: Can the benevolence of individual actions and attitudes influence the broader fabric of life to such an extent that it mitigates the inherent challenges and adversities we face? Moreover, how do we reconcile the idea of life's benevolence with the reality of suffering and injustice that affects innocent individuals and communities?

[popeye1945]

Societies through the individuals in them are benevolent toward one another, often not extending that benevolence outside the society. It is on the level of self-interest and an expanded concept of self that fosters benevolence and holds society together. The warring of societies and the societies of a nation would indicate that benevolence historically has a limited application. That said, there is part of me that wants to believe that a benevolent act might function similar to the butterfly that initiates a hurricane. That somehow, through individual acts of benevolence, it make a difference in the harsh reality of life lives upon life. I think it does, otherwise, societies would not be possible as sanctuaries within a nature that is coldly unaware of the plight of life's struggles.