Words Of Philosophy... What do they mean?

What is the difference between these words?

Compassion
Empathy
Sympathy
Kindness
Love
Care
Affection
Pleasure


Since the definitions of Compassion and Care are all negative - it's about sharing another's pain and doing something about it, is it possible for these to exist in a perfect world? How can you have compassion or care for another's opinion when things are already perfect? If the world is perfect then there is nothing to make a person feel better about, right?

com·pas·sion   [kuhm-pash-uhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
a feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by astrong desire to alleviate the suffering.

care   [kair] Show IPA noun, verb, cared, car·ing.
noun
1.
a state of mind in which one is troubled; worry, anxiety, or concern: He was never free from care.
2.
a cause or object of worry, anxiety, concern, etc.: Their son has always been a great care to them.
3.
serious attention; solicitude; heed; caution: She devotes great care to her work.
4.
protection; charge: He is under the care of a doctor.
5.
temporary keeping, as for the benefit of or until claimed by the owner: He left his valuables in the care of friends. Address my mail in care of the American Embassy.

When "I" say "care' what I mean is "understanding a person's emotions and thoughts and helping them toward happiness".

What do you think about this?

reply to post by arpgme

Since the definitions of Compassion and Care are all negative - it's about sharing another's pain and doing something about it, is it possible for these to exist in a perfect world? How can you have compassion or care for another's opinion when things are already perfect? If the world is perfect then there is nothing to make a person feel better about, right?

Maybe a requirement for perfection is a compassionate society?

reply to post by OccamAssassin


Interesting thought. I did think of this before.

Maybe heaven is a perfect place, not because it was designed to be any type of way, but because the people there care for each other and don't allow others to suffer.

Maybe every single place is heaven, and it is us who is lacking, and once we learn to care for each other this Earth can be like heaven...

The etymologies are different with those words and the definition you have crafted, is really just an alteration of the etymological roots to suit a positive phraseology. Inherently, the definition you crafted is part of the whole duality of negative/positive, thus still contained in the imperfect world.

Even the concept of a perfect world lies within the realm of duality and arguably, cannot even exist. The only thing I could conceive of that would represent a perfect world - departing from my diatribe above - is to not even exist in any sense. That is, for nothing to exist at all. But even then, isn't that something?

Crazy circles. Good, thought provoking question.

reply to post by alyoshablue


But if duality is true, if a world like Earth exists - with wars, famine, and hate, shouldn't an opposite world exist with peace, abundance, and love?

Help others while you are here. After this place, you can't. They won't be sick or suffering there in heaven.

reply to post by Jim Scott


You are saying that we should care for others while we are here because there will be no suffering in heaven. Did you think, maybe there is no suffering in heaven BECAUSE there is care there? What if it is the CARE that makes heaven 'heaven'?

Do not ''mind' and you will enter the kingdom of heaven.
The mind is like walls around you, those walls separate you from oneness. Take down the walls and you will enter the kingdom. The kingdom of heaven is here right now but most cannot see it or experience it because they only see the walls of the mind.
It is the mind that cares because it is the mind that imagines suffering. The mind sees suffering everywhere it goes because it is the mind that is suffering.
Because humans have a conditioned/programmed mind they will suffer, they will suffer until they have had enough suffering. When enough suffering has been endured the mind will break and what is behind it will shine forth. Compassion will be the state of being that sees that suffering is the human condition.

I do not mind~Satsang with Mooji:youtu.be...

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by alyoshablue

 

But if duality is true, if a world like Earth exists - with wars, famine, and hate, shouldn't an opposite world exist with peace, abundance, and love?

On each end of the spectrum you have a different world. Together... these worlds exist in the perfect world. Such is the Taiji symbol:


The outer ring, or the circle as a whole is the perfect (un-describable), free of duality world. Inside this perfect reality exists the two spectrums. White and Black. When analyzed they are different. One is all pigment, the other is none. When they spin together and "synergize" they both turn grey, showing their perfection.

reply to post by ErroneousDylan


Arpgme:

I think at some point, we will hit the boundary of language in our conversation and it's imperfect ability to convey absolutely. I like ErroneousDylan's response, especially the reference to the Taiji symbol, but I would argue that the interpretation presented is slightly off, in that the Yin and Yang always exist in a condition of the other. Here is a perspective:

Yin & Yang are Co-Arising and Interdependent:

The curves and circles of the Yin-Yang symbol imply a kaleidoscope-like movement. This implied movement represents the ways in which Yin and Yang are mutually-arising, interdependent, and continuously transforming, one into the other. One could not exist without the other, for each contains the essence of the other. Night becomes day, and day becomes night. Birth becomes death, and death becomes birth (think: composting). Friends become enemies, and enemies become friends. Such is the nature - Taoism teaches - of everything in the relative world. Source

Further from this article, which by the way, is not the end all be on the Taiji or on Taoist beliefs in general, we have the understanding of the nature of the outer circle itself:

Existence & Non-Existence In The Yin-Yang Symbol:

"Existence" and "non-existence" is a polarity which we can understand, also, in the way suggested by the Yin-Yang symbol: as mutually-arising and interdependent “opposites" which are in constant motion, transforming one into the other. The things of the world are appearing and dissolving continuously, as the elements of which they are composed go through their birth-and-death cycles. In Taoism, the appearance of “things" is considered to be Yin, and their resolution back into their more subtle ("no-thing") components, Yang. To understand the transit from "thing" to "no-thing" is to access a profound level of wisdom.

Unfortunately, the outer circle itself really isn't a material thing, rather notion that unity is composed of these two interrelated forces at work. Nonetheless, I am digressing from Arpgme's original question of opposite earths.

Again, I think we are going to hit a boundary of semantics here. For that reason, we would have to look at earlier philosophers here and I can think of several that touched on the concept of Perfection: Freud (if you want to consider him a philosopher), Kant, and Derrida.

Perfect essential means 'free from flaw.' So, I don't think this world meets that criteria is either degree of perfectly good or perfectly evil. But, one could say, perfectly present or perfectly is. Neither of my later cases moves us toward clarity on the subject, but rather leads us further into the fray of ambiguity. Again, Arpgme, I think you have presented a good question, good thoughts, but ultimately, we are all speculating and we will not discover our answers easily, perhaps only our attribution of meaning to them - more easily.

Anything I, you or ErroneousDylan write, is merely for conversation and to further provoke thought.

my point was, if there is a world where war, famine and hate is dominant there has to be a world dominant of peace, abundance, and love is dominant if duality exist.

According to this "duality" philosophy, if there is light , there is dark, so if there is war dominance, there has to be peace dominance.

If there is life planets, there has to be dead planets...

I really don't believe in this "duality" anymore, I think it is false but I don't want to get too far off topic.

Originally posted by arpgme
But if duality is true, if a world like Earth exists - with wars, famine, and hate, shouldn't an opposite world exist with peace, abundance, and love?

Earth could not exist with wars, famine, and hate if it did not also exist with peace, abundance, and love. The two worlds you speak of are one and the same.

While it seems like the world is full of evil, it is only so because we see the blatant effects of those who choose to hurt other people. Yet, the people who choose to help other people do just as much - just silently.

If you look at the world you live in - the world actually around you, not the world as presented by the television or newspaper or internet - you will see this world of good.

Heaven could not exist without Hell, and these two domains are halves one whole: religion's version of a human afterlife.

Humans are creatures of contradiction. "Good" and "Bad" only exist because laws and religions tell us that they do. Early humans, who had no laws or religions, did what they had to for the survival of their genetic groups. In essence, they had to do "bad" (kill other clans, steal their stuff) to do "good" (protect and feed children). It was life because this is our nature as humans. We exist, we survive.

We are still these same creatures, except now with our "minds", we think that we are better than we used to be. All you have to do is look at the world at large to see that we, as a species, are exactly the same as we always have been.

Times have changed, though, so we do not need to do all of the same things to survive anymore. We do not all have to kill others to help our loved ones in normal conditions. So, we do not all do this.

If you want to accept the world of love and peace, you must also accept that it is a world of hate and war.

If you, Arpgme, choose to be the love and peace, you are doing your part to keep the world balanced.

reply to post by arpgme


I understand. The argument is being made from the perspective of humankind. Naturally, let's accept the history as given, such that the earth is 4.5 Billion years old. Man has been dominant for - let's say - 15,000 years. So, the earth has been a haven for peace in the ratio of 300,000:1 (assuming that mankind has been evil all those years). Or said differently, we can expect 1 evil year between every 300,000 years. Is that so bad?

I think the challenge is that we are applying human attributes to systems that aren't necessarily dualistic, perhaps more cyclical in nature and really only from a human perspective. Anyway.

reply to post by ottobot


It is disgusting that people are saying that it is OK for children to be killed (war) because it is part of the balance.

This is a philosophy of cowardice, but I will make a new topic explaining this because I don't want to talk about duality on this topic of

Compassion (Care) turns the world into heaven... subject

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by ottobot

 

It is disgusting that people are saying that it is OK for children to be killed (war) because it is part of the balance.

This is a philosophy of cowardice, but I will make a new topic explaining this because I don't want to talk about duality on this topic of

Compassion (Care) turns the world into heaven... subject

That's not what I said.

It's not "OK", but there is nothing you can do about it other than save your children (and loved ones) from being killed. So, do it.

You are not going to turn the entire world of earth into heaven, but you can turn your microcosm of the world into heaven.

Also, you are contradicting yourself by displaying "hate" because I do not subscribe to your unrealistic attitude that care and compassion will erase everything negative. It doesn't work that way.

Originally posted by ottobot
It's not "OK", but there is nothing you can do about it other than save your children (and loved ones) from being killed. So, do it.

Not true, you can speak out against it, you can actually do something to stop it. You can educate people.

Originally posted by ottobot

You are not going to turn the entire world of earth into heaven, but you can turn your microcosm of the world into heaven.

I can't alone, but we can together. You say that what I do affect the microcosm, but the microcosm is a part of the macrocosm. If enough people do it , we can change the macrocosm into a lovely place to live. The Earth is our home after all, we should care for here.

Originally posted by ottobot

Also, you are contradicting yourself by displaying "hate"

No I'm not. I said the most important thing is care (compassion), not love. If people showed hate towards war, they are CARING.

Allowing the evil to exist and not speaking out about it , is apathy.

CARING is hating the evil and loving the good.

If there is no evil, then you can still love the good, so I guess I answered my own question, care can exist in a perfect world.

Originally posted by arpgme
my point was, if there is a world where war, famine and hate is dominant there has to be a world dominant of peace, abundance, and love is dominant if duality exist.

According to this "duality" philosophy, if there is light , there is dark, so if there is war dominance, there has to be peace dominance.

If there is life planets, there has to be dead planets...

I really don't believe in this "duality" anymore, I think it is false but I don't want to get too far off topic.

Duality is not necessarily a 'physical' thing, although it may seem to exist. The world-that-we-live-in's natural state is that one of perfection. As alyoshablue has mention, words will fail me. Perfection does not mean flawless but rather exist in an 'unlabeled' state, an un-judged state.

Imagine the 'perfect' world as some what of a blank canvas for the artist that is your mind (coincidentally, the Toltec refer to spiritual people on the Path as Artists). According to how you perceive the world, you color it with paint from one end of the spectrum. This is not to say that you control the fact that there is either war or peace (although who knows), but how you view the world. In the canvas state nothing is perceive as good or bad. Just as simply existing; part of the cycle of Man and Life. In the world of Duality, things no longer just 'exist'. They exist but now somebody has applied a personal description to them. "This is good, that is bad."

I suppose there is nothing wrong with being 'dualistic'. However, it is a little impractical as the descriptions are subjective and vary from individual to individual. Unless you are using a religious text you do not really have a concrete example of what is good and bad.

The other problem with the dualistic world, is that: people buy into it so much that their Egos get empowered by all the personality. The more personalize things, the more individual you become (as opposed to being one with everything, part of the collective whole).

The Taiji postulates that everything in life revolves in a spinning cycle. What goes up, must come down, so to speak. If we exist in a state of war for a long time, chances are soon we will exist in a state of peace. But those are just descriptions. We already exist in a state of 'perfection'. The Tao.

Originally posted by arpgme
Not true, you can speak out against it, you can actually do something to stop it. You can educate people.

Yes, you can educate the people around you. The people around you, though, are likely not warring. So, then, unless you find a way to go up to some warring humans and educate them without them first gunning you down, there is nothing you can do about it on the macro level.

I can't alone, but we can together. You say that what I do affect the microcosm, but the microcosm is a part of the macrocosm. If enough people do it , we can change the macrocosm into a lovely place to live. The Earth is our home after all, we should care for here.

Yes, I agree with you. But, unfortunately, there are many people in the macrocosm who do not share these views. A large percentage of humans are fueled by fear, lust, greed, conquest, and so on - these people care little for the effect of their actions unless it benefits them. So, this is what I mean by saying you can make your microcosm heavenly - because it is possible that your microcosm will overlap someone else' and change the macrocosm for the better, even if it is only a little bit.

Originally posted by ottobot
No I'm not. I said the most important thing is care (compassion), not love. If people showed hate towards war, they are CARING.

War is intangible. Humans make war, it does not otherwise exist. War is fueled by hate. If you show hate towards war, it makes no difference. But, if you show care and compassion toward those who would make war, you might be able to persuade them not to cause war.

Allowing the evil to exist and not speaking out about it , is apathy.

That's true. This is why I suggest you do what you can to make the world better.

CARING is hating the evil and loving the good.

See, this is where we differ in opinion. For me, caring and compassion come from seeing and knowing the evil, but using love and good to combat it. So, if I see people doing evil, I feel compassion (not hate) for them. I will do what I can to show love in their presence, but I will not allow them to do evil to me.

If there is no evil, then you can still love the good, so I guess I answered my own question, care can exist in a perfect world.

Well, this would only work if the world evolved from one of existing evil to one where all was good. So, you could only care because you knew how to care already. In a world that started with no evil and exists with no evil, there is no care because care is not necessary - everything is already "good" - and nobody is suffering.

Originally posted by arpgme
CARING is hating the evil and loving the good.

That is a contradiction. Hating and caring are two opposite things. They do not exist at the same time.

Originally posted by ottobot

See, this is where we differ in opinion. For me, caring and compassion come from seeing and knowing the evil, but using love and good to combat it. So, if I see people doing evil, I feel compassion (not hate) for them. I will do what I can to show love in their presence, but I will not allow them to do evil to me.

This is a suicide philosophy, can you imagine what would happen if your body learned to "love" the intruding viruses? You can not combat evil with love, someone punches you in the face and you turn the other cheek, they'll just punch you on the other.

Originally posted by ErroneousDylan
That is a contradiction. Hating and caring are two opposite things. They do not exist at the same time.

Wow. Are you serious?

If you know something is destructive, it is OK to HATE that thing to show your CARE for the others around you. What are you gonna do, love it and letting keep destroying people's lives?