ANTI-NATALISM: WHY EXISTENCE IS PAINFUL

Diposkan pada oleh Skeptical Inquirer

So there’s a great essay written by Sigmund Freud called

“On Transience.”. And in it, he cites a conversation that he had with the poet, Rilke, as they were walking along this beautiful garden. And at one point, Rilke looked like he was about to tear up.

And Freud said, what’s wrong? It’s a beautiful day. There’s beautiful plants around us. This is magnificent.

And then Rilke says, well, I can’t get over the fact that one day all of this is going to die. All these trees, all these plants, all this life is going to decay. Everything dissolves in meaninglessness when you think about the fact that impermanence is a really real thing. Perhaps the greatest existential bummer of all is entropy.

And I was really struck by this, because perhaps that’s why, when we’re in love, we’re also kind of sad. There’s a sadness to the ecstasy. Beautiful things sometimes can make us a little sad. And it’s because what they hint at is the exception, a vision of something more, a vision of a hidden door, a rabbit hole to fall through, but a temporary one.

And I think, ultimately, that is the tragedy. That is why love simultaneously fills us with melancholy. That’s why sometimes I feel nostalgic over something I haven’t lost yet, because I see its transience. And so how does one respond to this?

Do we love harder?

Do we squeeze tighter?

Or do we embrace the Buddhist creed of no attachment?

Do we pretend not to care that everything and everyone we know is going to be taken away from us?

And I don’t know if I can accept that. I think I more side with the Dylan Thomas quote that says, I will not go quietly into that good night, but instead rage against the dying of the light. I think that we defy entropy and impermanence with our films and our poems. I think we hold onto each other a little harder and say,

I will not let go. I do not accept the ephemeral nature of this moment. I’m going to extend it forever. Or at least I’m going to try.

Existence is suffering is the common translation of the First Noble Truth of Buddhism. As an avid reader of Zen Buddhism, I’ve often argued that this Noble Truth isn’t true at all, or that it is simply a precursor to the other Noble Truths which teach one how to alleviate suffering. But recently I’ve changed my stance.

As a therapist I am privy to the pain of many people. Many promising students have told me they won’t become therapists because they don’t feel they can handle listening to others’ pain. No one is in therapy because his life is amazing and he’s pain free. So it is expected that a therapist hears, and sometimes dwells, in others suffering.

What may be surprising, however, is how much pain people that aren’t my clients are in. Perhaps because I am a therapist, friends, colleagues, and students share their pain with me. Interestingly, their pain is often no less intense than those seeking relief in my therapy office; they struggle with it just as much. The point is the vast majority of the population is dealing with something painful.

Many religions expect people to accept life as hard and painful, and there will be rewards in the afterlife. People are expected to deal with the harshness of life, be good, and wait for their rewards. This is further evidence of the pain inherent in life.

Though much of Buddhism doesn’t claim an afterlife, the typical translation of the First Noble Truth denotes that even in pleasure there is suffering, because we know pleasure ends (Warner, pg. 22). Jason Silva, in his video, “Existential Bummer”, purports that even in the throes of love there is pain in the knowledge the moment will pass.

Freud famously said, “The best we could hope for would be insights that left us feeling common, ordinary, everyday unhappiness.” (Green & Piel) (Italics in original). Freud isn’t the only one with a pessimistic view. Many believe that grappling with the existential issues inherent in life (that you’ll die, personal responsibility, isolation, freedom, purpose, meaninglessness) lends itself to sadness. When I lecture about existential issues many students challenge that it is a depressing philosophy, and they’d rather not consider it. An argument can be made that underneath everything (as Louie CK so eloquently puts in this video) there is an emptiness and isolation that cannot be denied. The awareness of this can be painful. In fact, many simply accept that life is hard (and “hard” could be argued to be synonymous with painful). 

Hopefully, the argument has been sufficiently made that there is a great deal of pain in life. I would like to take a liberty and assume Louis CK, and existentialists, are correct in believing that underneath everything there is emptiness, and this equates with pain. Brad Warner says about Buddhism and the void everyone feels and seeks to fill: “the lack of fulfillment we feel is natural and normal. That’s true enlightenment. It’s when we feel fulfilled that we are deluded” (pg. 87).  Most of what we are doing is distracting ourselves. We distract ourselves from the emptiness and meaningless of it all by working, creating a purpose, believing religious tenets, buying things, addictions, compulsions, and just about any activity we get ourselves involved in. Some argue that the majority of what we do is compulsive behavior to ignore the fact we are dying and alone. This isn’t even accounting for the way people attempt to avoid the situational pain they are experiencing.

By now you might be wondering why I am trying to depress you with all of this existential angst. Actually, I am not. I am trying to get you in touch with what is already there, but for beneficial reasons. The first is to help those who are interested to engage in things they enjoy, rather than what they compulsively gravitate toward, to alleviate some of their suffering. For example, instead of mindlessly watching television, mindfully enjoy your cup of coffee, or tea, or craft beer, or whatever lights up your taste buds. Or perhaps instead of engaging in the compulsive behavior you later regret, really converse with someone you care about. In other words, mindfully engage in your life, and in the distractions that make life enjoyable.

A second reason I raise this issue is to demonstrate those that suffer are not alone. So many of my clients believe they are one of few who experience the thoughts they do, the feelings they do, or the pain inherent in life. They believe they have to put on a show to be perceived as normal. What they don’t know is that it is normal to put on a show, (normal does not equal healthy) and most of the people they view as “normal” are doing the same.

A third reason I was inspired to write this is so that everyone takes a little more care with those they come in contact with. As I wrote in “A verbose argument for silence”, we often aren’t aware of how what we do and say is affecting another. People are in a hurry to get through the daily activities of life, and the pain others may be in is not considered. Everyone would benefit from showing a little more love and compassion and being cognizant of their pain, and thereby the pain of others. As Ram Dass said, “We’re all just walking each other home”.

Copyright William Berry, 2016

References:

CK., Louis; 2013; Appearance on Conan; (Existential content edited for YouTube by Antonis Grr); Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhtI-_NNXy8(link is external) on September 17th, 2016.

Green, M.G; Piel, J.A; 2010; Theories of Human Development: A Comparative Approach; 2E; Routledge Publishing, New York, N.Y.; Page 43.

Silva, J; 2013; Existential Bummer; Shots of Awe; Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb-OYmHVchQ(link is external) on September 17th, 2016.

Warner, B; 2010; Sex, Sin, and Zen; New World Library, Novato, CA.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-second-noble-truth/201609/existence-is-suffering

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzCmF_UHWxZJMWRiNzE2N2UtY2YzZS00OWZhLWEzM2YtYTU4MzU2ZmViMDk4/view

https://shaunmiller.blog/2011/06/06/benatar-why-coming-into-existence-is-always-a-harm/

https://shaunmiller.blog/2011/07/05/benatar-part-three-his-anti-natalist-position/

https://shaunmiller.blog/2011/06/20/benatar-part-two-how-bad-is-coming-into-existence/

https://shaunmiller.blog/2011/07/26/benatar-part-six-concluding-remarks/

Tinggalkan komentar

Diterbitkan oleh Skeptical Inquirer

• Central For Inquiry (CFI) • Skeptical Inquirer • Free Inquiry • Point of Inquiry ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. Yang nyata ialah manusia itu sendiri bukan tuhan, bukan manusia pikiran tuhan, tetapi tuhan adalah pikiran manusia, agama tidak merubah kenyataan dan mengukir sejarah, tetapi manusia itu sendiri yang merubah dan mengukirnya. Bukan tuhan yang menciptakan manusia tetapi tuhan adalah angan-angan manusia. Agama tidak merubah kenyataan tetapi menusia bisa merubah kenyataan. 2. Agama ialah proyeksi manusia : tuhan, neraka, surga, malaikat. Kenapa? Karena manusia butuh tempat untuk mencurahkan keluhan karena dunia tanpa hati, jadi penderitaan tempat lahirnya tuhan. Dengan demikian agama disebut keterasingan manusia dari kehidupan karena struktur masyarakat tidak mengizinkan secara penuh perealisasian diri sendiri, sehingga manusia membangun kerajaan angan-angan (agama). Dalam kenyataan manusia menderita lalu ia mengharapkan surga 3. kenapa agama khayalan, karena agama tidak inderawi, sedangkan manusia inderawi, manusia penuh dengan kepastian sedangkan agama berbau unsur spekulatif, unsur yang tidak bisa diterima secara ilmiah 4. Jadi agama dan tuhan ialah ciptaan manusia itu sendiri, tetapi manusia itu sendiri lupa dengan ciptaanya (seperti pada zaman jahiliyah dahulu sebelum nabi muhamad dating : orang-orang kafir zaman dahulu mengukir tuhan dari kayu dan batu, yang kemudian disembahnya, sama seperti kita kini yang memproyeksikan tuhan lalu menyembahnya). Agama penyembahan tuhan terhadap dirinya sendiri. Agama penyembahan manusia terhadap ciptaanya sendiri 5. Sehingga khayalan atau angan-angan itu mempunyai eksistensi realitas yang membuat manusia takut dan harus menyembahnya dan tuhan mempunyai hakikat lain yang manusia harus sembah. Sifat-sifat itu yang membuat manusia egois. 6. Penderitaan manusia ialah tempat lahirnya tuhan, penderitaan yang memaksa manusia mengasingkan diri ke dalam agama, itulah dasar yang menyebabkan manusia merasa butuh agama dan tuhan 7. Teologi harus diganti menjadi antropologi dan agama ialah candu rakyat. 8. Kritik agama hanya meruska bunga khayalan pada rantai, bukan bunganya yang harus dipatahkan tetapi rantai itu sendiri. Rantai (factor yang menyebabkan manusia mengasingkan diri ke dalam agama) 9. Kita seperti wayang dengan penuh kesadaran dan kemauan tetapi kita tidak bisa lepas dari tangan sang dalang. 10. Kalau semua ini benar, maka manusia bukan merealisasikan keinginanya tetapi mengharapkan berkah dariNYA (proyeksi manusia itu sendiri/perubahan pasif) 11. agama ialah keterbatasan: agama melarang kita bergaul dengan duniawi, sehingga kita hanya memikirkan surgawi Tanpa agama kita bisa hidup lebih baik, tanpa mengaharapkan hibah/welas asih dariNYA, hanya mengandalkan kenyataan dan diri sendiri. 12. Kepasrahan adalah kelemahan agama 13. Tuhan seperti halnya dengan setan, bila ia terus diyakini dengan adanya exsistensinya maka semakin berkuasalah ia, kita seperti member roh kepadanya dengan keyakinan kita. GROUP : https://www.facebook.com/groups/scientistsecularist