supernova1 wrote:But you need loads of money to do that and most people just don't have it.
You just can't go and do everything you want, there are many barriers (like bad physiclal/mental health, no time, financial problems etc.).
Don't mix an ideal world(where everything goes the way you want it) with the real world (where almost nothing goes the way you want it).
Have I got news for you! You choose the problems you have now.
Most people do. They don't pick an easy life as there's no challenge in an easy life. Life is a challenge you have to embrace it. There's no escape. If you take your own life you will find yourself back here facing the same problem again till you crack it.
Millionaires such as Pete Waterman often start out with poor backgrounds. In his case he was caught nicking nameplates of Railway Locomotives. Now he owns Railway companies!
Adam Ant has bipolar. It gave him the ability to write great music in the 1980's.
Did Stephen Hawkins let his health problem stop him?
The world will present opportunities for you and will take them away. You have to make these rise and falls work for you.
Srr but I think that most of what you are saying is Bullsh*t.
First of all your examples are accurate. Well to a certain extent. You're summing up the good practices, but they are probably only 1 percent of the whole story. You're missing out on 99 percent of people who tried, but failed. Those are the stories you don't know ofcourse. So if I follow your mindset those are the no - lifers and the failers? They don't take their 'opportunities'? They didn't fight for it? Your approach is very hit & miss, individualistic & liberal (and psychological). Sounds like the american dream mindset to me. Or maybe you're gonna say they fought and died happy? Because they 'Tried'. Very encouraging.
Most people don't make their own problems. Yes I agree it happens every single second of the day, especially in alot of Western countries, You forget that opportunities/resources are inequally divided over the whole world. I'm not going to get all Marx on you but you get what I'm saying.
Do you even know where ideas of 'American dream', 'seize your day' & what you're saying come from? Think about it.
The whole discours of 'Being happy' & 'Grab your opportunities' is very recent and very Western. But it's a very unfair model at the end of the day, well at least for the unlucky ones. And I agree that you can critique it how much that you want, but it won't change. Why? Because 'Point of life' is something that changes from time to time and from territory to territory. You don't have to be a philosopher to know that the never ending question of point of life is answered differently in Africa than it will be answered in Western Europe. And even that is a huge generalization. And with time I mean that the 'Point of life' question has changed alot even through the last 100 years. I don't know what the point of life is, but I'm sure that it is Time & Territory
bounded. And with territory I also point out the constitution of a state. These differences are even more blatant.
So yeah your opinion is very correct if you put it in the context of liberal approaches in the current post modern western countries. But it would most definitely be not my answer to the question what's 'the point of life'. For me it is what it is: A never ending question.
I will give you one thing, if you wanna survive in the current age in the western countries that's the best state of mind you can wear. It's an approach that points all his arrows to individualistic responsibility. The issues with an approach like that are nourishment for researchers. And answers are wide spread already. The gap between rich and poor for example that's growing and growing is one of these things you can't help but link with such an approach. Because it blames the individual civilian, everything is his own fault.
You can't do what you want to do, that's a Western lie. And sure there are good/bad practices that mirror themselves with this western 'Truth'. But saying that's 'the truth' is just lying. Because it's a truth that will prob changes from time to time. Then there's no truth in it at all, well at least if we follow the classical objective & scientific definition of truth. Which is not the only defition ofcourse, but that's the one we all know.