Jump to content

Ask the next person a Yes/No question


Daniel Blackworth

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 407
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'd disagree with your answer to my earlier question. To quote Harlan Ellison, you're not entitled to your opinion; you're entitled to your educated opinion. Nobody's entitled to ignorance. Also, the burden of proof should lie on the person making the (outrageous) claim, not on other people to dispute them, to use Bertrand Russel's logic. Google about the cosmic teapot. 

 

So yes, in continuation, people have the right to judge. But people also have the right to not care a damn about unsubstantiated claims or accusations.

 

Do you believe the doing of nothing to be a negative idea in general?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our time on Earth is limited, and therefore we have to make a conscious choice in regards to what we spend said time on. If one decides to spend their precious time doing nothing, that is their choice but personally, I find it an abominable idea. 

Continually improving yourself, and contributing to the well-being of others is both a worthwhile and fulfilling endeavour. And no matter how tempting it may be to do nothing, it only provides short term happiness and doesn't help you achieve your goals or be productive in any way. It is difficult to ceaselessly challenge and improve yourself but in the end, it is something we should all strive towards. So yes, squandering ones own potential and succumbing to laziness is indeed a bad idea. 

 

Naturally strategically doing nothing for short burst of time, like when sleeping, is important to help you focus. But doing nothing with no purpose in mind is indeed a worthless action.

 

 

In Scandinavia there is a collective idea that is widely considered a sort of national philosophy, that one shouldn't talk about personal success, achievement or claim to be better than someone else, even if this is the case. As someone with an outside perspective, do you believe such a pattern of group behaviour is healthy to a society? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd not pass judgement upon something I don't have any knowledge of just by a glance at a Wikipedia article. But on surface, it seems to me to be an outdated notion that certainly would not be appreciated in the global world today, where the individual and not the collective is evaluated on his own merit for almost everything in life.

 

Also, I must point out here that the concept of doing nothing is poisonously regarded as a wasteful or negative thing by several people, and this stems from the Western attitude towards it: nothing or emptiness is seen as a lack, a discontent and an idle avoidance of responsibility or choice. The compulsion of society is on the 'doing', which is a constant addiction that pushes people into hectic, swarming ants in a life they make for themselves to be an inherent race. This addiction is as toxic as any other in society, but is largely ignored because society praises it.

Doing nothing is synonymous with feeling alive in the 'now' if the moment, since social notions of 'activity' emphasise on 'effort' which is 'useful'; such usefulness is always future oriented and takes away from the now, not to mention that 'effort' is not the same as 'efficiency'. Too often we toil ceaselessly and mindlessly towards a thing we do not enjoy or understand, like a hamster on a wheel, sacrificing the pleasure of living in the moment.

 

I'm not saying action is bad or ambition undesirable. Far from it. But the man who takes time to sharpen his saw is more adept at chopping wood than one who merely rains blows upon it relentlessly and mindlessly. The concept of nothing in Indic culture (remember, we were the chaps who came up with Zero, and how important is that concept!) is known as Sūnnyata, and refers to a state of emptiness as one of clarity, unbiased interaction and introspection with the true nature of things in the present. Doing nothing, then, is a mental discipline and practice which revolves around the concept of 'just doing' something [like observing one's breath, sitting and meditating, performing Yoga, or observing nature, or even a seemingly mundane experience like eating food or bathing, which is transformed into a mentally quieting and almost spiritual experience] without distraction, without any thoughts or worries about anything else, past or future.

 

The mind and body need to do nothing, from time to time, not just because we aren't a machine that can continue endlessly [mere sleep is not enough of a rest as is, we cannot continually keep at anything. It is neither healthy nor desirable] but to actively perform tasks that only happen in a stimulated period of rest: building neural networks, processing and updating memories, understanding logics and invigorating the psyche. It has been proven that periods of inactivity, even boredom, is healthy for the brain, as it stimulates the subconscious via an 'incubation' effect, to widen the pool of creative ideas. Lotuses bloom in stagnant water, not in ever-churning rapids.

 

It is not easy to properly and productively do nothing. It is not merely a strategic break from work, such as with a sleep or rest; it's an art of mental discipline which is key to the health and calmness of spirit of mind and body. Why do you think there is a profound importance given to mental discipline and focus in the science and art of practices such as Yoga or Zen meditation? They are not just a series of aerobic exercises, but a spiritual practice deeply ingrained with the idea of doing nothing, nothing but focusing on nothing. It is not a waste of time, it is a very profound application of it that is deeply beneficial. It is not a lack; it is contentment; not an avoidance of choice but a conscious, potent choice. It is unfortunate that modern society is heavily inspired by, even hell-bent on, the Industrial Revolution philosophy of the West: "Work hard so you can earn more and buy things."

 

 

Given this context, I ask again: Do you still think doing nothing is a negative idea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems obvious that we have quite different views on what doing nothing means.

 

If I were at the precipice to a waterfall or at the top of the mountain and spent and hour just gazing into the world, I wouldn't consider that doing nothing, since I'd be gaining a valuable experience in the process, therefore by definition having done something. To me, doing nothing is synonymous with doing nothing of value, and if you gain something of value through inaction or relaxation, I don't see it one having done nothing. 

 

So if I were to tweak my definition of doing nothing to include things such a meditation, relaxation with the purpose of regaining one's focus and being able to perform better in the future, then those activities have suddenly gained a beneficial component and become worthwhile doing.

 

But doing nothing purposefully is difficult, and I admire Indian culture where it's become both an art form and norm through Buddhist/Hindu practices. Working with one's mind and honing one's focus is certainly an admirable thing. 

But perhaps due to a lack of education in this regards or the values of Western society, I know of very few people who can use meditation and relaxation as the productivity enhancer you describe them to be. To many relaxations is an end instead of the means. People work to be able to relax, rather than relax to be able to work better. And all too often relaxing can be an escape from stress and responsibility, at which point relaxation has becomes an exercise of sloth and laziness.  

 

As with every other action, doing nothing can be both good and bad depending on how you do it, and for which purposes. It is certainly a more complex matter than I initially believed. 

 

 

Are the ideals of conscious relaxation through meditation and yoga in India as ubiquitous as you seem to be making them out to be? (and how are such ideals put into practice?)

(In case Divergent gets the questions, does any of this resonate with you, and how are such practices used in Philippine culture?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. Yoga and meditation are only practices done by people who either want to get exercise, are interested in the practice, or want to perform the poses. People tend to relax using other forms such as talking with friends or simply being silent.

 

Do you believe that love conquers all?

Edited by Mr. Divergent
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. One can't light a candle in a storm and beseech the Gods to protect it. Mere love, or dedication, or passion of any kind, is by itself insufficient to solve many problems, though they can fuel actions in meaningful directions to achieve wonders. This question is rather melodramatic and thus its interpretation will decide its objective truth; much as poetic or motivational language may argue, metaphors can't be extended to such great absolute power in practice. However I do agree that compassion is a potent tool to disarm conflict, and is indeed a necessary precondition to approach to many an issue. 

 

Wonders can be done by people who can selflessly love, and who are determined to a commitment. But such idealism must be juxtaposed with the bitter cynicism of reality, in that most people are too selfish, lazy, crooked or slipshod to rise above mediocrity, even in love.

 

Are you an adaptable character, able to assume a different face, different codes and different nature in different company? Or are you fundamentally the same person to all, and let others adapt to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. I can act differently when in different company and in different situations. I can be a cheerful, merry, and comedic person in the presence of my close friends while I can be reserved and quiet in the presence of unfamiliar people. I can be kind and polite in the presence of authority while I can be rude in the presence of annoying people. I can adapt to different kinds of people as I believe that good relationships are made from being flexible and adjusting and adapting is required in order to be accepted in society.

 

Are you a person who keeps his/her word?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No person can claim to have never lied or broken a promise; but that said, people all learn from their earlier experiments with truth and develop a code of personal conduct as per their own natures and circumstances.

 

My upbringing has reinforced to me the uncomplicated power of being frank. My exposure to the world has shown me how lies are used and abused. My career in accountancy and finance has shown me both the value of truth, fairness and objectivity and the difference in how they can be interpreted in various grey areas. 

 

My nature, then, is a product of all these factors. I keep my word, but I am careful in giving it; promises are made to few, unqualified or unplanned promises made to even fewer, and promises without contingency made almost to none. Thus,  by both explicit arrangement and the confidence I inspire with my own code of conduct, I make the contingency of my breaking a promise very remote, and minimize the risk and impact of even that event. I think that planning considering, and limiting increase the value of one's word, not decrease it.

 

TL;DR: Am I man of my word? Yes. That's more so because I don't give my word easily.

 

 

I also notice that the number and frequency of participants in this thread have decreased considerably as the seriousness or quality of questions intensified and crystallized into their present nature. So, I ask you: do you prefer these kinds of questions to be asked here or do we go back to asking material or everyday kind of short questions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's more preferable to go back to having those short and sweet questions as those questions allow more people to join in and also will allow people to learn tiny tidbits about other people in the forums.

 

@Ironbound So, if you'd like to talk about serious topics, you can PM me and I'll try to answer in the best way that I can.

 

Are you a fan or avid player of Fire Emblem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, no idea about that franchise.

 

Actually, I asked because there exists a thread (in fact, I had made it, a long while ago) where these kinds of more in-depth discussions are welcome. It has been gathering dust for a while, in my absence, but it used to be a nice, relatively quiet place that was yet active in its own way. I'd be happy if it saw some frequency again. (That said, I won't much show up here since I have little to contribute in the nature of everyday questions.)

 

Shameless link to the aforementioned thread is here: 

 

 

Do you like rain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...