It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why be happy when you could be interesting?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 04:15 AM

Why be happy when you could be interesting?

Happiness is a quality we want to see in those around us, with everyone all smiles in a row as if they were in an infomercial selling, no doubt, “happiness”. Such a vision is often good for our sentimental hearts—especially your sentimental heart, dear reader, who is no doubt prepared to defend it from any assailant. It is pleasant to be witness to a natural child-like gayety in those around us, which, but for a moment, isn’t always dependent on the constant syphoning of happiness from anyone other than themselves.

The rest of the story needs no running commentary. Happiness is our largest commodity; and every corporation, every brand, every service exists to fulfill their marketing promises so as to make our lives a little easier, a little happier, supplying our demand for happiness, further enabling our servility to satiation and the apathy it all entails, that we willingly open our wallet and give whatever little coin we have to find it.

But, thankfully for us, not everyone on God’s blue and brown earth directs their core purpose into a base desire for comfort and convenience as those who quest for happiness do. Out there, beyond the mediocrity, beyond the spirit of the lazy age, there are some who possess a more discriminating taste, who while they no less find themselves happy every now and again, never place happiness at the forefront of their goals, seeking less common, less mediocre and less plebeian forms of entertainment to bide their time.

In the more “civilized” cultures, the ideal of achieving happiness has become an insipid truism, which works well on a populous who finds no need to inquire any further than what they’re told. For the present, the notion of happiness is a paradoxically homogenous ideal, as if a dusty old marketing committee took every laugh, smile, and pleasurable feeling they could find, regardless of where they came from, and blended them up into a sort of foamy, smooth, and light substance of which there is little deviation, only to present it to a mob of underpaid product testers as they just were about to leave for lunch. “Here,” they are wont to say, “ is happiness”—devouring it as pigs to a trough.

How colorful, how soft, how eternal “happiness” seems to be as they sell it in every commercial. But anyone with an elementary education might understand that the term “happy” is an advective, which, if we can still remember our grammar, is a word used to describe or otherwise modify a noun. In the case of this particular adjective’s usage, “happy” almost cheerfully describes or otherwise rhetorically modifies physical beings that appear to us in a certain way. For some reason, this description, as opposed to any other description, became something of a virtue in the hearts of extremely pious individuals, and has come to see this state of being as not a being in a state, but as some sort of divine spiritual reward available to everyone, albeit with a somewhat hefty price-tag.

Because of a limited vocabulary, and since we find difficulty articulating the world into our words, it has become linguistically convenient to add the suffix “ness” to this and other adjectives of the same sort, for the sole purpose of building out of the bricks of our subjective solipsism an “essence” of the thing we perceive, in order so that we can project them onto others. By shoehorning what little we can perceive of the being into our idealism, we, in a sense, make some sense of it. This subtle linguistic trick crystallizes a mere description of a thing into a thing itself, magically making the appearance of something into no longer an appearance, but something other than an appearance, a full-fledged abstract noun formed out of a subjective interpretation of a concrete thing—namely, a “quality” or “state”—two terms that have always seemed to sneak under the philosophical radar unassumingly.

Many qualities and states of the same make and cast, i.e. consciousness, healthiness, awareness, greatness, redness and so on (note the over-abundant use of the suffix “ness”—their “ness-ness” we might call it), were obviously once words describing things. But as they stand in our paltry minds now, they are spoken about as if they had a substantive nature, and worse, are even postulated to exist beyond the noun they were once used to describe. It’s beautiful! But dear reader—and I know you are an inquisitive reader who is interested in paradoxes—it is no wonder that when we attempt to articulate these supposedly existent somethings, that nothing at all ever ends up being described at all. Never has a quality existed apart from that which displays it, but nonetheless, people still search longingly for the quality of happiness, imagining it to be something attainable, when in reality, no such something besides that which displayed the quality in the first place exists to be attained.

It seems quite apparent to me happiness is not a thing to seek, find, sell, nor strive for, as it is not a thing at all, and people might stop pretending to dole it out when they really have nothing better to offer. It is, even with its idealists dress, the descriptive word we all know and love, lacking all “nounal-ness” (if I am allowed to coin a word), despite whatever suffix we add to it. This can be confirmed with simple intuition. Any noun can be described by an adjective, but can happiness be happy? Can consciousness be conscious? Can redness be red? …and other stupid questions.

Beyond the over-simplifying of happiness, it is further purported that everyone—yes, even us seemingly incapable of it—wants this ideal so deeply that we knowingly or unknowingly go after it. But as we can witness simply by opening our eyes and ears (sometimes even closing them), the all-too-common idea that everyone wants happiness is so much piffle and poppycock. People do not even know what happiness is, let alone that they want it. Of course, this is due to the undeniable fact that every “happiness” is different, because, quite simply, every being displaying happiness is different, no two of them occupying the same place at the same time, equipped with different bodies, different hormones, different experiences, memories and tastes. And no spiritual alchemist can simply bottle happiness and sell it through some mean and crude formula as many propose to be able to do. Happiness for one is not happiness for another—any masochist will tell you this. Further, an entire breed of people forgo happiness altogether for more refined aims, for instance the struggling artist or the tortured novelist. We have even witnessed self-immolation, with all chances of happiness disappearing as soon as that match is lit.

Besides, what happens when everyone attains this homogenous happiness? Pure unadulterated boredom, that’s what—the loss of more refined tastes to a more ordinary, middle-of-the-road type of rabble rousing, that seeks to pave us all down into something smooth and similar and same—“greatest happiness for the greatest number”. We can see through the fruits of pop-culture that this might not be in our best interests.

edit on 16-8-2014 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 04:15 AM
We might agree that the so-called “Happy People” are pleasant to have around for a little while, and because they love to associate themselves (the Happy People) with any sort of “happy” or positive metaphor, it would be quite apt of me to say that these benign folk brighten up any gathering as if they were made of light. This light, however bright, often times dazzles us who have more sensitive eyes, that the very comfort of being within this bright, all-too-blinding light for too long, grows exceedingly dim with every passing moment. If these bright ones happen to exhaust their lambent essence in our eyes, we find that the source of this light, this “happiness”, has always been exactly what they happen to find most important in the world: themselves—and sure enough, this same burning core from which their happiness radiates from, is the same unstable source from which all their emotions begin, and the same exact spring and provenance from which their narcissism, vanity, and selfish tendencies often arise.

We are addicted to happiness. Might as well serve it straight to the vein intravenously with a well earned full-frontal lobotomy—there’s your happiness. Aaaah! If not, and there is no happiness available, no fix to deal with the pain, life becomes nothing but a struggle with withdrawls.

In short (or maybe, in long), hedonistic “happiness”—that is, the being who strives for base pleasure and satisfaction—is boring. Happiness is the Justin Bieber of spiritual values and the Al Gore of ideals. If we come across one who is on the constant quest for happiness, we do best to get out of their way, like we might any addict on a hellish path to their next fix. And if for some reason you wish happiness on me, no thank you, keep it. As a matter of fact, take all of it.

“Well, as long as it makes you happy,” they will concede. What a tired and hackneyed concession. Can we not come up with less boring reasons to live? “No; as long as it makes you interesting,” I say back to them. That man playing video games in the dark twelve hours a day does so because it makes him happy. That lady with the seven or eight high-fashion shopping bags shops because it makes her happy. The man buried under Doritos power-watching a Dexter marathon does so because it makes him happy. And of course—all power to them. But assuming that whatever we are doing at any given moment, we are getting progressively better at, I could only further assume that these happy people are not getting any better at being interesting. The greatest test of strength is sitting next to a happy person on a fourteen-hour flight.

Who cares what makes you happy? You do of course, and perhaps you should. But why be happy when you can be interesting? What story of your life can you hope to tell yourself in your final hours as you face your own judgement? If you sought only happiness, none that we haven’t heard before. But instead, for the people around you, for the sake of everything refined, artistic, deep and of higher-quality; for everyone who has sacrificed their happiness to make the world beautiful, to make the world a better place for those living in it; for those who risk certain death and suffering to learn about the world, to live in it, to explore their mortality, to confront oppression, to stand up to power, and in the process, throw out their happiness like refuse—be more interesting. Create memories of daring, adventure, thrill and a lust for life; put yourself in places you thought you’d never be; make yourself vulnerable to situations, even just to feel what it is like to be vulnerable; experience pain and loss and hardship; in fact, run from happiness towards the greatest happiness, which is found when you can rightfully exclaim to yourself and others—“I have lived!”

Thank you for reading,


posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 05:41 AM
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
'Happiness', like you have stated, is nothing but a concept - an idea that is chased. 'Being interesting' is also just a concept - an idea for you to be a 'something'. At least 'I am an interesting something/someone'.

Seeking 'happiness' is driven by dis ease - the uneasiness of life.
Life is not easy when it is felt and believed that it is happening to you and that you have to do it right. There is an idea that one must be 'something' or 'someone' in order to feel better - if one has more then one might feel better. The feeling of not having enough - not being enough is what drives one to 'want more' and 'be more'. This might be viewed as 'looking for happiness'.
Now because there is a belief in 'things' one looks to the 'things' to make one happy - if I get certain things it will make me happy (a belief which may not have been realized to be happening). The 'me' will never be happy - because 'me' is the seeking mentality - the mentality only knows of things which are not here. The seeking mentality seeks. It cannot have what it seeks because if it did it would no longer seek.

It is only when it is realized that there is nothing but 'what there actually is' that the seeking stops.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with 'the seeking mentality' - it happens but if the seeking mentality is happening then there is discomfort, there appears to be lack and 'wanting happiness' is what it appears as.

Look at it this way - if you were already whole and fulfilled would you be unhappy? Would there be a seeking of more or better if it were found that there was nothing other that what there is?

'Unhappiness' (or discomfort) is caused by wanting to be some 'thing' or be 'somewhere else'.
'Happiness' (comfort) is uncaused - it is just 'being' what is.
edit on 16-8-2014 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 05:49 AM
In my opinion it is all about psychology.

Personally, I enjoy being happy and consider when all my financial and other necessary requirements are met, doing things that I enjoy, going places I like, relaxing, having fun, laughing, being with people that make me feel happy, feeling loved and feeling safe and secure is absolutely fabulous and possibly the most joyous of emotions, happiness is a form of joy.

Perhaps your perception of ''happiness'' should really be seen as the pursuit of joy if grammar is an issue to you and ''happiness'' a descriptive of feeling joyous.

It appears you might be confusing grammar with concept.

Additionally, being happy isn't an opposite of being interesting. I am interesting, and happiness is an emotion that I enjoy.

The 'pursuit' of joy is perhaps a modern way of filling a void created by the need for survival and the evolutionary facets of humanity that are ingrained in the psychology, the very DNA of every being.

Happiness could be described as the feeling that can occur when there isn't fear and there is joy.

When our ancestors were living in daily survival mode, aware of the elements, the seasons, the search for food, reliance on subsistence farming, keeping their families with the essentials of warmth, water, food, keeping disease and illness away and ensuring safety from others and animals, the term 'happi-ness' didn't exist at least as it does today.

When all the conditions were met and during moments of joy, such as getting together with family at the end of a difficult few days, in the safe warmth, enjoying the food that was caught or grown, would have brought moments of happiness in that the feeling of the group could be termed 'happy'.

Because this was the way of humanity since it's inception until relatively recently, the psychology of humanity is still tied in evolutionary terms to the past, to the sums of human experiences. The natural 'happy' has been misconstrued as the natural way of life of humanity has been misplaced.

How it was: living in tight communities, family being the cohesive unit and everything revolving round ensuring essential requirements are met and families, groups and communities being together as a cohesive unit, all working towards the same goal. Harmonious interactions in cohesive communities.

As capitalism and employment (ie working for another group instead of as part of own community) became the focus of society, the focus shifted from harmony and common goal to 'defense mode', personal survival (rat race, promotions, keeping employment etc) and suspicion. All others are threats in competitive environments. The harmony isn't there as it should be, this has resulted in families and groups being 'defensive' and in 'survival mode' instead of the content harmonious state of belonging to a secure community.

Added to that the now obvious distrust of commercialism, governments, police, politics, religions and all the 'employers' ie the group 'secure tribe' 'overseers' have become the threat to security, that to which people are being defensive.

Also consider the psychological impact of schooling children too early. Research suggests that children should be with their mothers until at least age 7, as these are formative years, it matters. That psychological 'void' could be part of the need for the search for 'happiness' which could otherwise be described as group harmony and the absence of threat.

Seeing as there are now threats everywhere in society from the safety of food, safety of water, criminals, colleagues and bosses in the commercial rat race threatening security etc the almost constant 'fear' state tends to override the 'happy' emotion, because humanity is wired for survival, that is a natural way, survival first.

People searching for 'happiness' in ways other than the way that is evolutionary 'true' to human psychology, such as in food, alcohol, material pleasures etc is really a search for harmonious group and community security, the need for trust in each other and in ensuring that threats are kept away and fear diminished as much as possible for daily and long term confidence of survival.

Capitalist commercialism has 'capitalised' on human fear and insecurity, advertising 'true happiness' substitutes as a short term 'fix', which in turn has increased the 'threat' and fear' as it has given power to the money making machine self serving organisations and those seeking power and control through greed instead of the greater good. It has only functioned in undermining group security and brought competitiveness and more 'self serving' than group harmony.

The current state of most of humanity is that of self serving self reliant competitive individualism rather than that of harmonious communities.

Harmonious communities are essential for civilized societies and the current system has been destroying that for a long time.

Society has to realise that instead of running around like chickens in a coop surrounded by foxes, control, has to be regained. Common goal of stability and harmony has to be realised for true happiness to be realised.
edit on 16-8-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 06:23 AM
Interesting thread, but already being interesting to some.. I won't be interesting today, I'll be content with going out for a pizza and enjoy it as it makes me happy for a while.

Though I don't often agree with your views on well, almost anything, I'm always impressed with your writing, when I'm older than in my 20's as I assume a lot of people on here are in their 30's, 40's, 50's and 60's I would like to write half as good as you do, some day your writing will have me off somewhere intensely studying English grammar, consider it a compliment.

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 07:52 AM
In addition, I also believe in all truth that my happiness is essential.

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 08:03 AM
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
Wow! that was a whole lot of words to justify you discontentment with yourself to yourself and the rest of us.

You make for an interesting study of my man.

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 08:18 AM
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Happy people require a limited mindset in order to maintain their delusions. Firstly, the glaring elephant in the room is that we will all perish someday. That fact alone should maintain a base level of angst within the heart of the intelligent person. From that point forward, you look around you and you realize that because of the fear generated by that fact most happy people turn to religious slavery in order to absolve themselves of worry.

If you want to see the true nature of a happy person, just start talking to them about the state of the world, philosophy, politics, religion, sexuality, or any of the push button issues that humans tend to avoid in polite company. You will see avoidance, frustration and contempt before you see any attempt to confront those issues head on. That is the happy person in totality, a piece of flotsam drifting along the currents of the world, never exercising their own authority, always sacrificing their thinking mind for the feel good moment, and not even in a hedonistic way, which I might respect, or at least understand, but in a very 1940s Disney, American Plastic kind of way.

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 08:42 AM
a reply to: Nechash

I wouldn't describe such people as 'happy' people, more as simple minded folks that are easily pleased and shallow.

Deluded perhaps and oblivious that their delusion is part of the problem facing the survival of humanity. So perhaps more selfish than constructive members of society. They don't want to think about it as they are all about denial.

Do they care that Eastenders is destructive to human nature, that the coca cola they drink is bad for them and drinking it is fueling unethical commercial practices that affects many, that the footballers they are watching are paid stupid money while their wives are WAGS and destructive to the morals and ethics of the impressionable, such as wanting fake tans, wearing too short skirts, having plastic surgery, being vacuous and unethically financially motivated etc.

Such people are fueling the conveyor belts that are fast running humanity into moral and ethical oblivion, and now it appears that moral void has known no bounds (Ukraine, Western propaganda, IS etc) fueling the potential destruction of humanity by itself. They are the fuel for the self destruction of humanity.

True happiness is deep contentment and joy. Often the more intelligent aren't satisfied with being thrown garbage such as most of mainstream TV, getting drunk, being chemically affected from eating additives and sugar, watching sport etc and actually need a higher level of satisfaction.

For example, if offered tickets to the superbowl / world cup football or to visit the Louvre and view fabulous artwork or the Temple at Thebes I would prefer the latter two as these are more satisfying to me.

People should be educated to think again as that is the key to the truth and that is the thing that society needs to heal and repair.

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 09:59 AM
Good thread. There are many foods out there that make you happy, overindulgence will lead to future problems. But people want to be happy and dope themselves constantly with this food and drink chemistry. After a while, the mind declines and you can't remember things, so have some more of this chemistry and you won't care about it.

You never awake if you keep consuming this stuff and you trust people you shouldn't trust. Our society is built on this misaligned trust, putting our hard earned cash into ventures that are not secure. It is promoted today, remember the saying, don't invest more in the stock market than you can afford to lose. It can all disappear within a month. So can the insurance companies that guarantee your money. So just keep doping yourself up and you will be happy. Remember, if you lose everything, you will need reserves of this doping chemistry so you can stay happy.

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 10:56 AM
Some people like myself just don't let things bring them down. I have what I need all of which I've earned with my own hard work and that makes me happy. I have my own little apartment, food to eat, good friends and beer for the weekends. Sometimes I can get angry in certain situations but it fades away rather quickly. I've faced very hard times but I'm still here and for that I'm happy.
edit on 16-8-2014 by Fargoth because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 09:05 PM
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The answer to your threads title, imo, is; Because, the consistency of human life is built of, is, and for, monotony. Food, clothing, water, shelter. The majority of jobs are jobs where the person doing them, has a skill set, and then performs their task, all day, day in day out, until they retire. And the majority of civilization/people, interesting and not, depend on those people, to do such a thing. People who work 7 days a week 14 hours a day in a mine for 3 months at a time, or out on an oil rig, or constructing a sky scraper, and then another when they are done. That is their life, everything else is extra curricular, everything else is entertainment, or down time. Maybe they are tired, maybe they want to relax, and rest, maybe they want some entertainment, maybe instead of spending their free time thinking and pondering and debating and wondering, they just want to chill, and experience something closer to enjoyment, happiness, then despair and dread, or confusion, or frustration.

Humanity, imo, is analogous to a body. Individuals are the cells, and they make up organs that serve different functions. With no individuals who are interested in interesting things, there would be no progression, we would have settled with our first inventions, no reason to improve, why would we, noone is interested in improving, everyone has a job, lets just do our job and that will be that. But yes, civilization has given some reward to those who take the risk of being creative (though there might be a lot of help from school systems, and r + d like programs, who coddle such minds), to not taking the jobs that exist now and spending the life doing them, but looking at the jobs that exist now, and figuring out how to make them more efficient, figure out what else can be created with them, figure out how to entertain the masses, etc.

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 09:12 PM
So why be interesting, if not without the ultimate goal of achieving happiness through it?

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 09:18 PM

originally posted by: ImaFungi
Humanity, imo, is analogous to a body.

If you follow that thought to its logical conclusion then existence is analogous to a body.

So what right does any human have to tell another human what part/function it plays in the body? That's like a skin cell telling a blood cell to be something different.

Yet here we are... with those most fervently believing we are a body... betraying that very body by believing they are in charge of the body despite having no capacity to claim to be in charge of existence.

Cancerous whether you buy into existence as a body or existence as a jungle.
edit on 16-8-2014 by GetOutOfMyLight because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 09:25 PM

originally posted by: twfau
So why be interesting, if not without the ultimate goal of achieving happiness through it?

In my left hand I have a wax fruit that looks perfect.
In my right hand I have a real fruit that is bruised.
I choose which one has the seeds I want to plant.
edit on 16-8-2014 by GetOutOfMyLight because: NOM!

posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 11:50 PM
It is, in my opinion, rather narrow-minded to believe that someone that is happy can't also be interesting. I am happy, I may be interesting. There is no worldly topic that is off limits. I wouldn't discount, avoid or become discontent while being asked questions about any given topic.

Perhaps happy is 'content'. Whether or not I am interesting is really not my concern.

posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 12:49 AM
a reply to: zenjewel

It is, in my opinion, rather narrow-minded to believe that someone that is happy can't also be interesting. I am happy, I may be interesting. There is no worldly topic that is off limits. I wouldn't discount, avoid or become discontent while being asked questions about any given topic.

Perhaps happy is 'content'. Whether or not I am interesting is really not my concern.

I stated quite clearly that those who seek to be interesting—which I had hoped would come across as living a live of adventure, exploration, learning, and the gathering of precious memories, no mater whether there is peril or fortune or risk of limb and life—come across happiness every now and again; but that they don’t put it at the forefront of their needs and goals. People risk even happiness itself for greater pleasures. Yes, being happy is quite welcome, but it is never a goal, nor a requirement of living a fulfilling life.

Yes, whether you are interesting to others is of no concern to you. What concerns you is that you are happy, and what others think of you concerns you not. However, others do care whether you are interesting or not, regardless of whether you care what they think. If you do not care what other’s think, then simply do not share your opinion, because why would it matter otherwise?

posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 01:20 AM
I don't know.....the wording strikes false cords for me, which was perhaps the intent, to stimulate thought and response. I had the same reaction as some others- I don't give a crap whether others find me interesting or not.

But my second thought was- people find you interesting if you are interested. If you have curiosity, a desire to learn and have new experiences (pleasurable or not). I guess being happy is as much my motivation as anyone else, though you seem to focus upon the state of happiness is that is found through short term efforts- eating something you particularly enjoy, playing a video game, shopping for clothes.... when the materials and possibilities to do so are right at hand and easily accessible.

The long term efforts are what I focus on more often, which often entail a hard and bumpy road along the way to get there. That state of happiness seems to me to be more long lasting and personal, and I have a preference for that state.

Last weekend my husband and I went to a weekend long birthday party, in which lots of drinking and eating went on for one day, then we slept in my car, only to tumble out and rush to get to the next activity- meeting at an ancient train station with the other invitees. Unable to wash myself, brush my teeth, or have a cup of coffee first, I was grouchy as heck. We loaded unto an old steam locamotive, for a ride through landscapes of great beauty.... which should have been very happiness-inspiring, but just didn't break through my mood.

Finally it reached a small isolated village, in which it was to fill up on water and then turn back the other way. With some others, we stepped off to look for a café. By the time we found it, the train left without us.

Next I found myself trying to run along the train tracks with some others, for hours, to catch up with that train somewhere along the line of villages. Wearing shoes that were not ideal, on gravel that hurt, in the hot sun, with a slight hangover (still unwashed, brushed and with an empty stomach)... and 10 miles ahead to get back to our destination, I was exhilerated!!! I was suddenly feeling happy! The challenge excited me, the constant mental and physical challenge to manouver my feet, make my movements as efficient as possible, the mental discipline to not give into whining and complaining (like some indulged in the whole way), was all experienced by me as the kinds of processes that lead to that type of long lasting personal happiness.

My favorite part fo that weekend was that "fiasco" (we never caught up with the train, we missed a planned surprise "hold up" by a group of men on horseback, and we ran and tripped all the way back, 12 miles) that created memories for me that inspire a sense of adventure and happiness I can reflect on and smile whenever I want.

My body and my mind working together, using all their different capabilities to overcome challenges.... that is what makes me smile.

What I hear in your post is just the expression of distaste for the modern life which lacks challenges. It sometimes seems to me that challenging our body and mind to step out of the familiar is an acquired taste. Some don't realize the value of it because they haven't been exposed to it, or lack confidence in their abilities to cope effectively with it. I knew I'd make that crazy trec because I have experience going off into the wilderness (on horse or foot), purposely without knowing my way, so I could get lost and discover new places, and experience my capabilities to to get out of that. I had memories of pretty incredible feats on those trecs, which allowed me to feel confident the whole time.

I don't know... I've done some pretty interesting things in my life, but for the first part of my life, they were often not consciously chosen paths, and I wondered- why is this crap happening to me?? But the taste was acquired.
It also made me more interested in others- I love to meet new people and study them and be introduced to new ways of thought and vision, even when it goes contrary to my current view, values, or thoughts. But that too, is because I have learned I can keep those, even when taking a trip through those mental landscapes. I can always get back.

I guess my last thought is- don't worry about telling others to be interesting, just learn to be interested in others.

posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 02:45 AM
a reply to: Bluesma

That is a very interesting story and it made me happy to read it.

posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 02:58 AM
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I think what you speak of may stem from the idea of 'pain and pleasure', 'punishment and reward', 'bad and good'. Happy is the word that is used to define the state of being not sad or mad or bad.

But I suppose there are exceptions, as it is possible for people to like pain, for pain to make a person happy, some people can even be happy only when they are miserable, or maybe some people may only be able to find happiness in their quest to be interesting.

Of course the idea of feeling good, is related to our physiology, and psychology, and surroundings which would affect/effect both.

Should a child on their death bed in extreme pain feel happy? How about a child how is waking up early to spend the weekend hanging out with his dad? Should that child feel happy when he catches a fish, or if he doesnt, should he not feel happy about that? Should he feel happy about getting a piece of candy? What does that feeling of happiness matter if he later regrets eating it? Is the concept of interesting completely subjective? Can a buddhist monk be interesting and happy and physically do very little in their existence? What about an author that does physically little in their existence but writes 5 fantasy novels? What about the buddhist monk that thinks of 5 fantasy novels but does not write them? what about the dreamer of interesting dreams, and the dreamer of boring dreams, and what if 1 of each of them is happy that they dream and not happy that they dream? What about a matrix like society that hooks people up to machine that keeps them fed, and constantly feeds them a 'happy pill', that constantly triggers their feel good receptors to experience pleasure (I believe these cheap kinds of pleasures were what you were arguing against)? What about a matrix like world that lets the person experience any 'interesting' experiences they want to (i.e. virtual reality/videogames)? What about a combination of both? What would you say to and of a person that dedicates their life to being interesting, but then regrets those decisions, and wished they spent a little more time just relaxing and 'being content and happy' with some simple pleasures? What would you say to the people living in 3rd world countries or even 1st, that do back breaking work daily just to scrape by?

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in