That's provided that you find woods that are not private or that the owner allows you to settle on them for free. This is what I mean, to renounce the system that we're born into without a choice is to put our very existence at risk. Hence why people feel trapped within it because by the time they realise they're in a trap they also realise that they're not equipped to deal with a survival or self-sufficiency type lifestyle.You could just run off into the woods and see what happens at any point.
Not true. Don't you think that by running away but continuing to obey the rules of society, you haven't run away from society? See the article that OftenBen linked. Read about Grizzly Man (Timothy Treadwell). Read that article that was just posted the other day about the guy that "Into The Wild" is based on. Why continue to follow the laws of society if you are trying to escape it? Why would breaking rules such as -living in 'public' forests (which effectively don't exist; you have to pay to officially camp in like, every state/national forest I'm aware of) and -obtaining the permission of people who 'own' land matter to someone who doesn't want to be a part of, and in fact is attempting to escape, the society that created those rules? It's like...Hmmm. Maybe that system is there to ensure our existence and that's why defying it risks itto renounce the system that we're born into without a choice is to put our very existence at risk
You should. It's of primary importance within the study of political science and government. Your social contract answer may be the right one -- with modifications, I agree with you -- but it's not so certainly right that you can afford to be dismissive.
I'm dismissive because I find it impossible to relate to the impetus behind the question. It doesn't bother me that I am "forced to pay for" the world I "didn't ask to be born into." No one asks to be born and it is impossible to ask someone if they want to be born. So basically I feel like a big hullabaloo is being made over a matter whose significance is lost on me and some of it feels very petty indeed; by which I mean the part about "not asking to be born," really. If you really didn't want to be born I agree with bb and the others in this thread. There's a solution for that. If your problem is just society, there are also solutions for that. They may not be comfortable but that is what you get in return for deciding to eschew the structures that are established in part to provide us comfort, at the cost of demanding some conformity - more depending on where you live. Also it doesn't seem to me like OP is listening to the discussion with both ears open - but that may be because i can't emotionally relate and therefore empathize with his position.
It's harder than you think. Likely he's heard a lot of these arguments (Or similar) before, and has found them lacking. I know that feeling, I bet most of us do. To give a personal example, I know a lot of well educated people who find relief from existential anguish from a very literal interpretation of heaven or some other sort of pleasant afterlife. I can intellectually appreciate why they feel that way, but deep down it's not a satisfactory answer for me. I can't understand how they derive satisfaction from such answers, but they do.Also it doesn't seem to me like OP is listening to the discussion with both ears open
You can't be serious that you would honestly tell to someone who feels disillusioned with the system to go and die. To have 3 people in this thread suggesting this it's not just further depressing it's down right outrageous. Perhaps, just perhaps these people are a symptom that something is radically wrong with the direction we're going and that we should stop for a while and give it a thought. It's great to hear that your life is heading in a direction that makes you happy. The point of this thread is to address those who sadly for some reason just don't share your view, that all is great and fair. Do you have any constructive advice to offer to those, other than just telling them to go kill themselves? Care to share those solutions? It's disappointing that you can't conceive of an improved order that would cater for everyone's needs instead demanding conformity as a need. Keep thinking like that and you would make a great dictator.If you really didn't want to be born I agree with bb and the others in this thread.
It doesn't bother me that I am "forced to pay for" the world I "didn't ask to be born into."
If your problem is just society, there are also solutions for that.
They may not be comfortable but that is what you get in return for deciding to eschew the structures that are established in part to provide us comfort, at the cost of demanding some conformity - more depending on where you live.
You clearly aren't interested in actually listening to dissenting points. You're flying off the handle - "great dictator" really? I think is have to express some desire to rule for that to qualify - and no. I don't have to agree to post. I can post my opinion which is what you're going to get when you ask hubski something. My constructive criticism is that you should try appreciating the gift of life instead of resenting it. In other words grow up and get over yourself. It's funny for all your dislike of the system I don't see you considering how to change it once in this thread.
I'm sorry but to even suggest, to someone who's depressed or disillusioned, to commit suicide is insensitive, disturbing, very upsetting and not helpful. I hope that you never have to deal with any close ones in that situation... for their own sake. If I knew how, there would be no need for this thread in the first place.It's funny for all your dislike of the system I don't see you considering how to change it once in this thread.
I only do because I recognize the place he's at. Psychedelics and meditation got me out of it. There's a very important idea in lay-Buddhism that highlights the problem well I think. A decent phrasing would be 'When someone is offensive to you (This counts), remember that something terrible must have happened that would make them into a person that would do the offensive thing.'
This makes it sound like we are prisoners to a system (and yeah, we are) but that opting out would be a one-time choice. This is too narrow a view. Let's say you develop enough skill to opt out -- you move to unclaimed territory and feed yourself based on the local flora and fauna. You get your pound of nutrients and gallon of water that you need. You are out. ...but we're social animals. We don't deal well with "out". You'll get to discover this after a while -- or if you have a medical condition, rather dang quickly. We have easily pierced skin, no carapace, crap for hair (which is only helpful if you live along the shore and swim to get food), burn easily, get horny all the time, and really only thrive when we can cook our food and use the waste to make soap. Humans are pack animals. To stay in the pack and not be eaten by malaria, we contribute back. We may have lost track of the scale for giving back, but we'd go nuts without it. I have tinnitus. I can't even deal with a single minute without noise or I'll hear those high pitched whines. I have to turn on a fan in winter or I can't sleep. You weren't born a slave -- you were born into a society. Your natural state had to be invented, but it involves concrete and a dental plan. I mentioned before that this isn't a one-time choice. It's a lot like AA and what aerowid said: each morning you wake up and choose not to flee. Should you flee, you are 99.5% genetically likely to come back -- even if it's just to avoid roaming charges. If you don't come back, you're out of the gene pool and more of us suckers will be born.
Semi social actually, which is important. Edit: Also, most people who crave solitude probably don't get much of it. They may not want to interact with as many people as they do, but they have to regardless, and grudging interaction is still interaction.Humans are pack animals.
Look at a herd, of pretty much anything that comes in a herd. Or a school of fish. The entire life cycle of these animals occurs in the group. That's full social. A fish doesn't need 'alone time.' Neither does a cow. Contrasted with solitary animals, such as bears, or certain species of sharks. These animals come together pretty much only to mate, though they may tolerate adults of their species in 'their space,' depending on species. Humans are somewhere in the middle, depending on your temperament. We need a certain amount of social interaction to stay healthy and happy, but that doesn't mean huge groups. This is where we diverge from biology and get into psychology quite a bit. Biologically speaking, humans are semi-social because reproduction primarily, as well as other important stuff, takes place in private, or relative private, and if you keep a big group of us penned up with food, water, sanitation, but nowhere to be alone, we get crazy also. Both perfect solitude and full herd behavior are anathema to the human animal. Psychologically speaking we could go for years (And have been) On the actual difference between introversion, extroversion, and related topics. All that we've been able to clearly establish is that some people love periodically (Periodicity also being a variable) being in massive groups with other people, and others prefer occasional interaction with a few people (Again with number and periodicity being variable). All of that falling on a spectrum with extremes and outliers at both ends, but with most people falling under the meat of the bell curve. A cool idea in this area of study is Dunbar's Number which is basically the idea that you can only have meaningful (different degrees of meaningful here too) relationships with a set number of people. The proposed range is somewhere between 100-250 individuals.