How are humans suppose to live?

How are humans suppose to live? As we can all see humans are advanced creatures from the humble beginning with stones and sticks but know with skyscraper, deadly weapons, and so much knowledge. More then any animal but this raises the question of how were we suppose to live.

My opinion is that we should’ve lived with nature. Just like the philosopher Diogenes he believed we should live simple lives not worrying about things and like like a dog/nature living with nature would cause no problem for all we need is what nature gives for we create problems the more we want.

What do you think, how should humans live?

Humanity should grow up and look after the ecosystem they rely on. That’s the easy bit, the difficult bit is making them do that.

I don’t think that there is a better or worse way to live. I do think that if we want to be happy we need to learn to control our appetites so they dont overwhelm us and to take the long view. The ancient Greeks provide many insights here but Diogenes is only one voice. I think we do have some grounds for greater optimism about life as it is lived by the people on this planet.

1 Like

It is hard to make humans do something when they disagree about what that something is.

The human is “hard” to make easy and “easy” to make hard, not just between people, but within each person.

Merging those two into one often complicates further.

Adding why and offering resolution is human.

Humanity gives the illusion of progress while ever more fools are entering the stream and being manipulated and abused by a minority of intelligent self-obsessed psychopaths who climb over dead bodies to reach the top of the dung heap while the wise quietly fade into the background.

“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society” – Mark Vonnegut, paraphrasing Jiddu Krishnamurti.

“Democracy basically means government by the people, of the people, for the people – but the people are retarded” – Osho

“We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we would be reorganized. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing; and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization” – Charlton Ogburn Jr.

“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure, while the intelligent are full of doubt” – Bertrand Russell paraphrasing Yeats (1920) “The Second Coming:” – “The best lack all conviction, while the worst / Are full of passionate intensity.

“The only winning move is not to play” – War Games

It seems to me that you already killed your own question at the very start. You described humans and nature essentially as objects, which means non-living entities. Humans are just “advanced creatures”, which means something like “advanced computers”. Nature is conceived as “all we need”: “all we need is what nature gives”. This way your question looks like: what should computers do to have a happy existence? The answer, as you wrote, is obvious: computer should live of what they are supposed to live of: electric power, some updates and backups every now and then, and that’s perfect. Is this your idea of life?

There is no real answer to this kind of question. There is a different question adjacent to yours, which involves setting a series of goals for human beings and then asking how these can be achieved. But the goals themselves are going to be largely contingent.

Humankind is divided by culture, religion, ideology, etc. into a vast number of factions. We’re also united, on things like happiness, peace, etc. My hunch is if we pursue the last 3 items mentioned above, the world will be a better place. Imagine it for a moment and you’ll no what I mean.

Can people treat others as they expect to be treated?

I don’t see why not. Do you see an obstacle to this?

If people were even half as preoccupied with what they should do as they are with what they want to do, this question would be a lot more interesting.

2 Likes

We are “supposed to live” like angels but instead, because we’re little more than beasts, too often too many of us live as if we’re less than beasts. :see_no_evil_monkey: :hear_no_evil_monkey: :speak_no_evil_monkey:

(e.g.) baby steps: Laozi’s “wu wei” + Hillel the Elder’s “lesson of Torah” + Epicurean “tetrapharmakon” + Iroquois “seven generations principle” + …

1 Like

Yes. Humans are not made to live by ‘supposed to’.
Its very human to turn observations into prescriptions.

I don’t know about that. I’ve observed humans bullfight but I don’t think that’s something we’re supposed to do.

Yes, indeed. And the idea of “supposed to” is based upon a value system that we can cheerfully brush aside or debate. But if someone says you should not mass murder people, what do we say here? Where is the line between casually dismissing someone else’s perspective and dealing with something that might be viewed by many (or most) as a transgression?

Mass murder makes questioning “supposed to” feel dangerous. Using it to defend “supposed to” makes the problem worse — “supposed to” can only reach people already willing to examine their position.

The line gets drawn by whoever has more power. What it actually protects varies.

If I am free to share my opinion:

I am glad someone asked this question so that I may provide proper guidance. How should humans live you ask?

It was foretold that these forums would be created with my arrival coming down from a holy chariot propelled by pizza sauce. Yes my son the time has come. You are the chosen one. You are to tell the world of all humans of my arrival. Humans should all live as my servant and slave. What a incredible honor this is. To even be in my presence without the proper presence will instantly make them self destruct. Now go and tell the world that I like my pizza with everything on it.

Anyone who claims no fattys will receive divine retribution, you hear me divine retribution. Yes I’m talking about you Lisa from my fifth grade class. Judgement is at hand.

So just to clarify, is morality just down to what the powerful want? Is there nothing intrinsically wrong with mass murder?

How do you want to live?

There is no “supposed to”.

2 Likes

Isn’t personal conviction power? And does it become more powerful when demonstrated externally?

What work is “intrinsically wrong” doing there that real consequences to real people don’t already do more honestly?