An Argument Against The Delusionary Perception Of Perpetual Positivity

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by -Martyr, Jul 6, 2014.

  1. #1 -Martyr, Jul 6, 2014
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2014
    I've seen it time and time again- overly-optimistic sentiments that border on suspicion of brainwashing by some kind of tyrannical rainbow, from some pseudo-spiritual stoner chick who is trying too hard, or some backwards hipster attempting to emulate Lennon. Being somewhat tolerant and a genuine believer in the "to each his own" mentality, I let this slide for years, writing it off instead as cannabis culture taken to the nth degree. In the wake of this generation's spiritual and psychedelic awakening, it was too easy to look at it from a more positive perspective. However, upon thinking on it further, I think there's a lot of detrimental effects that transpire from the spreading of this kind of absolute devotion to perpetuating positivity 24/7, which in my opinion is entirely fabricated anyway.
     
    Psychologically speaking, I wouldn't assume that it wasn't a safe endeavor to refuse yourself access or indulgence in the entirety of your emotional repertoire. These are innate aspects of your design, not check-boxes on some website sign up form that are optional. If happiness is indeed the result of balance, there's a logical disconnect there for someone who is essentially aspiring to living one-sided. The trickle-down effect to this, is people shifting their very realistic goals and expectations of themselves, to something entirely abstract and unrealistic- something they cannot necessarily achieve even 5% as often as they'd like. Success, praise, opportunity, even orgasms, are stimuli that are only acquired through circumstance and proper utilization of those circumstances to one's benefit to help determine a favorable outcome. From there the adulation is temporary, and we must pursue it once again. This is how humans progress- these little existential and spiritual games of cat and mouse with objectives and individuals. When the game is shifted to a setting that is so beyond your ability to keep up with, things like actually learning, experiencing, and first hand knowledge, are immediately made impervious to acquisition.
     
    We don't need people to essentially attempt to discard the human condition; we need people to allow for human growth in every sense of the word without favoritism or bias. We need people who encourage traversing the darker aspects of the mind, as well as the light. We don't need hippies teaching that "love is the way", when hate's got drones. There should be an obligation we all feel to inspire a level of genuineness, and the means for easier resonance with one another as brothers of the same species. I feel like this delusion of constant positivity and optimism is doing nothing but causing unnecessary divergence in the path we all walk together inherently. We get bitter, we conceive anger and spite the likes of which can breed horrible outcomes, we become depressed by the raw visceral nature of it all. That's the nature of being human, and it's a nature that can be refined and made into something more positive, but not by attempting to hack behavioral inevitability by only focusing on one abstract, temporary, intangible concept like an emotion. In a world with endlessly varying circumstances, a tremendous amount of poverty, and endless bloody conflicts, it seems quite dim to think that anyone feels a "the sun will come out tomorrow" attitude to everything, will bring us all closer together. If anything, it'd probably lengthen the divide. Imagine living in a war-torn region your entire life and then meeting someone who is essentially just a hippie saying "peace and positivity bro, let's change the world." Your fucking optimism and positivity didn't do shit for that kid or anyone else. It's some kind of mental placebo that makes you feel like you are doing more by contributing the absolute minimum in the nicest way possible.

    Does anyone else feel like they are tired of having to be associated with people like this who are spreading false enlightenment and regurgitated sentiments that don't really mean anything, just because they embrace a counterculture?
     
  2. You can never ever fully appreciate the good in life without appreciating the bad in life.. yet people hate or hide from the negatives, which is really counterproductive in advancing. So they hold on to positives of the past, failing to make positives in the present.. It's disappointing, but it's human nature learned from nature. Just have to ride it out.
     
  3. Couldn't be more spot on. Excellent post
     
  4. #4 clevername, Jul 7, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 7, 2014
    I only need to read the title to know this is probably a valid argument.
     
    I've been anti-hyperpositive since... well, i suppose ever since i saw someone do it the first time, which was at some point during early childhood.
     
    edit: yep.
     
  5. What's good without evil. Positivity without negativity. Happiness without sadness. Heaven without hell. ?

    You seem on the negativity side but the same time preaching what is good without evil. Maybe try to find a more balanced approach to positivity and negativity. Yin and yang is your friend. Like someone said there isn't pleasure without pain. Maybe I am a dreamer but I somewhat agree with the hippies but at the same type know there's no such thing as utopia. Peace.
     
  6. I'm realistic, not negative. The entire undertone of the OP was literally, "cut out the romanticism and be balanced."
     
  7. I prefer to be 80% apathetic and 20% positive. For some reason when bad things happen to me I feel like I had them coming anyway so it's whatever.
     
  8. I think positivity is great as long as its not self serving...I think people should be nice because thats who they are and not because they expect something in return...I see what you're saying though and i agree being positive just to be positive doesnt really have a physical impact if that person doesnt do something with it...but whos to say the person they're positive to doesnt do something to affect the world from that other person paying it forward
     
    As for me Im just generally neutral with a bit of positivity...I do notice i tend to dislike people on both ends of the spectrum though and will tell them if they're being a dick or annoyingly too nice...I take the good with the bad and adjust my emotions accordingly but im more analytical than most..people who hide from negativity seem to be the ones acting more on emotion than logic
     
  9. #9 -Martyr, Jul 8, 2014
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2014
     
    I was at work before when I liked this and didn't have the time to type out a response, but this is dead accurate. Second paragraph is essentially how I tend to behave. I would say that the only difference is, is that I would describe myself as maybe apathetic more often than positive, but it's not like I'm depressed. Analytical minds, and people who open themselves to the world, are subject to a much heavier burden existing in said world. I sometimes feel people overlook how much desensitization plays a factor in your ability to even be positive. It's very easy to be positive and optimistic, when you're not viewing pictures of children killed overseas as part of media-silent war crimes, when you're not an activist/journalist who has to worry about privacy just to do their job, or the implications of doing that same job, or when you're not constantly seeing bills churned out left and right to censor the internet- the only safe haven on earth for freedom of speech and intellectual pursuit. People just sit there in their sedated state, plucking dandelions from the ground and go "this could change the world." Yea, change it into a fucking shit show of inefficiency, maybe.
     
  10. You make a very good point and all, but doesn't it all really just depend on a person's present mood and how certain situations presented onto the person influence their mood? You could take the most optimistic head in the clouds hippy and put him in prison or into the military or something and that whole attitude will most likely change
     
  11. not really, i usually let it bounce off me and chalk it up to someone with a different mindset and approach. that mindset might be detrimental, but who am i to challenge their ideas if they havent invited the discussion. there is always a yin and yang, an ebb and flow, a push and pull. to focus on one and deny the other is foolish, but that is the world we live in. generic associations fall short of developing an understanding.
     
  12. #12 -Martyr, Jul 9, 2014
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2014
     
    My point is that a person's mood should change. Your emotional state should never be fixated; it should be in a constant state of flux. Which is why I'm heavily opposed, and heavily annoyed by these airhead stoners who go around preaching about always being happy and positive, and whatever. That's horribly unrealistic for a lot of us, and horribly unhealthy for all of us. As I said before, in my opinion a healthy individual traverses the entirety of their emotional repertoire. Someone's mood is selective as the environment or situation dicatates (as you correctly stated), but the choice to only indulge in a particular emotion or philosophy is always a conscious decision.


    A human being, who doesn't need permission to question anything or anyone. Invitation unnecessary.
     
  13. I think it's always more beneficial to push for an emphasis on growth as opposed to happiness. 
     
    Growth maximizes the positive potential of who you are as an individual. This means many things (better understanding of oneself, others, situations, etc), none of which necessarily conclude happiness. 
     
    I'm with ya, though man. I'm a rather analytical in nature and that has not made for a very fantastic ride until here recently (even then, it hasn't helped the situation much). It allows me to better help people, but it does little for myself. Understanding does an individual only so much good. It comes to a point where understanding is great and all, but when everyone else is meandering around like fucking neanderthals you still wanna shit on the illusion. 
     
    But generally I let it go.
     
    I will say I do try and perpetuate positivity in moments of otherwise childish behavior. I'm nearly 19 and find myself in that type of surrounding far too often and I find that not indulging in the idiotic/petty bantering serves me well. And it's always a good piece of perspective to note that I, at some point, was where these folks are now. It's all a part of a journey, man. 
     
  14.  
    sure, i dont need an invitation, but where do you draw the line? ill let it go most of the time, to challenge everyone isnt possible.
     
  15. To me it's great to be positive, as long as people aren't using it as a means to ignore reality. Honestly, I try to take everything positively, and I positive I mean that I'm happy regardless of the situation. Contrary to some of your guys, I have to deal with too much unnecessary negativity. That shit is beyond annoying. I love talking, but I don't want to hear your every complaint in the world...
     
  16. what's good and what's bad? what's positive and what's negative? these things in reality dont exist, everything is subjective.
     
  17. The subjectivity of something, in itself, validates its existence, does it not? Otherwise what are you refuting the existence of? And could you refute the existence of something if it didn't exist to begin with?
     
  18.  
    Do hallucinations exist?
     
  19. #19 -Martyr, Jul 10, 2014
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2014
    Why not? Do they not reap very tangible results, or affect us in ways that inspire a change in overall character? If you perceive yourself to be "real", why would anything you conceive be fake?
     
  20.  
    Well i suppose my point was: if a thing is "real" to only a single person, can that still be legitimately called "real?" Because i'm pretty sure it wouldn't be qualified as "real" in a court.
     
    I think "real" has to be agreed upon by some minimum amount of people... which also does not necessarily make a thing "real." Plenty of people (far too many) in this world, agree upon certain things being "real," when they are most likely not real at all.
     
    So i suppose "real" is less subjective, and more about how many people you can get to agree with you.
     

Share This Page