What the Aztecs can teach us about happiness and the good life (2016)
aeon.co
aeon.co
The world is obviously a very cruel place. People are suffering and being tortured and there's nothing we can do about it. At any moment, any one of us could have a life-changing event which forces us to live in pain and misery until we die.
But if death is peaceful - maybe happy (like we go to heaven), but really as long as it isn't a negative - it makes a lot of the cruelty much less. All the suffering people will die eventually. All the bad people in power will die eventually. If life ever becomes too bad for you, you will just die, and at least if you're a good person it's unlikely you'll go to anything considered hell.
I've never been suicidal: I honestly enjoy life, and even when I don't, I want to try everything else before I die. But it helps my anxiety knowing that if anything really really bad were to happen to me, the worst that can happen is that I die. And as long as that's ok - assuming death is ok (which I admit is a big assumption), than there's less to be scared of. Of course I want to try everything else before
Are you joking? You don't have to be a bad person, sometimes the small mistakes can literally lead to the hell on earth before you ever will be able to die. https://mysteriousfacts.com/hisashi-ouchi/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TxLrfdMKWY
Death is not to be scared of, inability to die when you want is so much more terrifying. Every humane country should legalize euthanasia.
(Source: I linked to that post on another forum, and someone else with an interest in the Aztecs went through it and came to the conclusions above.)
Maybe the more interesting question is why no one putting down there hand when being told facts about how they will be happier without kids is instantly glossed over. Maybe this instant acceptance of equating traditional life milestones as leading a fulfilling life is the real issue. Giving that up is the real key to happiness.
This article puts forth a premise and states it's a fact. This is undoubtedly a bad theory at odds with a number of religions, much less common sense. Oooh, edgy take, you want to be miserable, embrace it!
> This article puts forth a premise and states it's a fact.
The article does overemphasize the point to some degree, but not as you claim. First, the author cites an exercise he regularly gives in class and its result, drawing a legitimate conclusion (based on his description of the class results). He then uses it as a hook for his actual article which is an exploration of an element of Aztec thought, most of which is unknown in the English speaking world.
> Oooh, edgy take, you want to be miserable, embrace it!
I would hardly call this “edgy”. Certainly this is not at all what the author says. Note the quotations “joy-pain” and the like which are experiences well reflected in philosophical work from Ancient to modern Europe, India, Sumeria, or China and undoubtedly others.
> This is undoubtedly a bad theory at odds with a number of religions, much less common sense.
Is there really a religion whose doctrine is “do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law?”
Thinking this doesn’t mean anything about toxicity.
Generally speaking I haven’t heard anyone use that word properly in years. It’s a pretty stupid word, unless dealing with chemicals and lethal doses.
You used both “toxic” and “sjw” incorrectly, I don’t think these words mean what you think they mean
Your misuse of toxic is toxic.
It’s a long term investment that pays dividends when you have nothing else you want to do with your life, but chill with your family.
Regardless, it would be selfish if the parent's sole motivation were to produce caregivers. IME many people deciding to have children aren't thinking only of themselves.
Often consideration is both for their children and themselves. My friends and I certainly thought about it and discussed such things.
Anyway, while children may experience good and bad things they'll also be free to decide if life is something they want to personally continue living or not. Many will also be free to choose whether or not to bring children into the world themselves.
> they'll also be free to decide if life is something they want to personally continue living or not
Really? It's okay to force people into existence because they are free to commit suicide?
It seems like you could justify anything with this line of reasoning. "Why are you mad at me? If you don't like it, just kill yourself."
Until we can communicate with the preborn is there anyone better to decide then the parents?
> Really? It's okay to force people into existence because they are free to commit suicide?
I believe people have the right to create life, to choose not create it, and full rights over their own lives. And if no one is ever justified to bring others into being then all life is the product of injustice.
Anyway, my preference is to council people against suicide because it is such a permanent choice, and circumstances are often temporary. But ultimately to continue living is a choice.
This is the crux of my disagreement with you, and you haven't really presented an argument for your position.
> if no one is ever justified to bring others into being then all life is the product of injustice
This is exactly what I'm saying. I've said why I believe it's unjust, and you agree with the core of my reasoning; that unborn children can't consent to their birth. If you have an argument for why that doesn't make procreation a moral harm then I'm all ears.
For some, being old enough not to have to deal with relatives is a joy.
The Telecom Revolution has been a gift to many expatriates. For many other who left for a reason. It has been a shackle.
I have witnessed it firsthand.
The Spanish did nothing wrong.
I mean, one might ask, “What can the Khmer Rouge teach us about running a country effectively.”
edit: looks like I was beaten
(Further reading: someone at a forum I belong to who is well-read in this area has been doing an excellent series of posts on the Mexica: https://www.verduria.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=712, which if you ignore the long discussions between posts is a really readable introduction to Mexica society.)
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
There's another aspect to this, though, which is that people with strong political views tend to view the site as dominated by their enemies. Meanwhile the people with opposite political views think their enemies dominate it. These perceptions are what happens when passionate feeling meets cognitive bias. See for yourself: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...