[bitexploder]

Emotions and discontent are programmed in via evolution. The default state of most people is not happiness or sadness. It is discontent. If you are comfortable you aren’t going to keep trying hard. We have vast capacity and have struggled for tens of thousands of years to reach this point. Millions have died in wars for us to have what we have today. To waste that potential and settle into some adtech driven fugue state is unacceptable to me. I will keep learning, and struggling, and growing.

[watwut]

> Millions have died in wars for us to have what we have today.

Some of them fought to prevent us to have what we have today. Many fought for bad causes, many fought essentially for nothing or because things were shit for no gain. There were two sides to every war. Many fought over which autoritarian will controll that village.

There is not reason to struggle unless you really struggle, through learning is good.

[bitexploder]

I am just saying, there has been a ton of conflict and struggle for our species as a whole over its history. A lot of crazy suffering happened to our ancestors to get to this point and I feel driven to work hard, learn, and be better than I was yesterday from that perspective.

[watwut]

And my point is that a lot of that suffering did not happened to get us to thus point, but for entirely different often very wrong reasons. A lot of that suffering and hard work caused and ensured future suffering. Continuing that is not necessary virtue.

Related point is that it matters what one works hard towards and why, not just that one do.

[theoh]

The phrasing you are using:

"Millions have died in wars for us to have what we have today"

is problematic. I think a lot of the replies interpret it as a case of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

Even if that's not what you are thinking: sure, people die fighting for particular causes, but people also die fighting to oppose those causes. The history of war doesn't confer any intrinsic moral value on fighting. What about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is–ought_problem

"There has been a ton of conflict and struggle for our species"

This is more ambiguous. What does the "for" mean? Could it be replaced with "in"? (i.e. it has just been endured) Or do you mean that the conflict and struggle has all been directed towards the furtherance of the species? (e.g. "it's been a tough two millennia for our species")

This is not simple stuff from a philosophical perspective.

[bitexploder]

I meant it from a broad cosmic perspective. Through the chaos and entropy of the universe and evolution we are on the Internet using fantastically complex devices to beam our thoughts across some unknown distance to exchange some ideas. That chaos and entropy includes all the suffering of those that came before us. There is no moral value to humans fighting and dying in the mud, just a waste of potential. My personal view is every human life is a new spark, a new shot to further ourselves as a species a little bit more and that, inherently, progress is the only sensible option for our species. And, being a human who thinks humans have a shot at being pretty alright in the grand scheme of things, I think that struggle is worth undertaking. I know philosophy is complex and this is not a very nuanced view point I am presenting from that perspective, but I don't think my point requires very much nuance.

[theoh]

You actually made pretty bold claims about discontent being the human condition, I'd say they need proper justification if you want them to be taken as universal truths, not just personal opinions.

[bitexploder]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/17/psycho...

[FabHK]

How about this formulation:

a) There has been a lot of progress over the millennia (in many ways, from higher life expectancy to less violence)

b) Many people have sacrificed a lot to bring that progress about

c) We ought to be grateful and c2) struggle on.

I think a), b), and c) are uncontroversial, c2) needs to be argued for.

[bitexploder]

I guess that is fair. I just sit down and think broadly about the last 2000 years of human history. I don't know if I would say we should be grateful. It doesn't come down to gratitude. We are here now as humans as a result of some great cosmic turbulence that involved the suffering of a lot of other humans. So, today, as I sit down, I have the choice, and the opportunity, at least here in America, to decide how I am going to spend my effort. It seems like squandering of a great opportunity to not try to improve the lot of humanity just a tiny, infinitely small fraction, by doing what I can to make the world a little bit better, by making myself better, and by making those around me a little bit better. I respect someone's freedom to not believe that. There is no right or wrong answer here. I just feel a personal, moral, imperative to take the balance of those that came before me and work hard. I would channel Carl Sagan here: http://www.planetary.org/explore/space-topics/earth/pale-blu... and put it into cosmic perspective even.

[Gormisdomai]

Then maybe we should be discontented with our current state of discontent.

[bitexploder]

It's discontent. All the way down. Heh. It is a good point though. There is nothing inherently good or bad about this state of being. It is just the way we are. Maybe we can change it, but it seems like it will happen on a geological time scale so we should learn to live with our basic nature for now.

[Atlantium]

"Millions have died in wars for us to have what we have today."

What we have is going to vary from person to person. I have no thanks to all those people for giving me a life filled with discontent and conflict.

[mantas]

It's privilege to feel discontent and see conflicts. Vast majority of people before us (and some during our lifetime) don't have a chance to feel discontent while they fight for survival nor they're interested about conflicts aside from the conflict that keeps them from surviving.