Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

a_pope_on_a_rope t1_je1jr96 wrote

Hope is always under assault, though. If someone were to self-actualize with hope, it would be another yet another new struggle to maintain it.

52

MentalNomad13 t1_je20ow6 wrote

So true. Even positivity come under attack from negativity. Hope requires much energy to create, maintain and gove it to others. Negativity that kills it only requires a destructive mind, of which there are many loud variants.

26

cybicle t1_je2nza7 wrote

Plenty of people lean on hope and positivity as ways to absolve themselves from putting effort into resolving the problems they face.

15

Pharap t1_je3k9x7 wrote

Precisely why I prefer Stoicism.

'Abandon hope and learn to cope'.

6

Background_Dog_2534 t1_je2ktnt wrote

Hope implies desire which implies suffering.

21

[deleted] t1_je3g4cq wrote

Well, yeah. Suffering is a prerequisite to hope.

3

cybicle t1_je3ubut wrote

Buddhism, as I understand it, considers suffering to be the inevitable result of desire. However, the Buddhist definition of desire may be more restrictive than the more broad or fundamental concepts of desire (thirst, hunger, warmth, etc), and refer to desires for things which exceed a person's basic needs.

Meanwhile, I think a person can have hope based on a desire that preceded their suffering (like a climber in your summit fever analogy), or they might just be trying to meet their basic needs for survival, which is suffering that has preceded their desire.

I'm not sure how hope relates to Buddhism, but in my mind, hope is tangential to desire and suffering, rather than the result or cause of them.

At the end of the day, it may boil down to semantics, because hope, suffering, and desire, can all be interpreted and connected in so many different ways.

2

[deleted] t1_je5wz9f wrote

[deleted]

1

cybicle t1_je6br95 wrote

Thank you for the clarification, u/Melodic_Meringue_506. You obviously understand Buddhism better than I do.

My assumption was that Buddhist desire didn't apply to biologically reflexive wants, such as thirst caused by dehydration -- so hope for a drink of water was a desire resulting from suffering, not vice versa.

I think your introduction of the concept of connection is what had been missing, since the first post in this subthread of the main thread. It clarifies the semantics of the of Buddhist concepts regarding hope, and seems better than using desire, in this context.

Obviously, my gut level understand isn't very good. I take Buddhism lightly, because, like Maslow's Hierarchy (the subject of this post), it seems like the goal is not relative to most people's life.

At less aspirational levels, I think both ideologies offer good advice, as long as you don't focus on the basically unattainable pinnacle. Many other philosophies offer similar advice without beating you over the head with such a big carrot.

Is there something similar to hope, which people who are able to practice Buddhism (at the gut level) can use to bolster their resilience, without fostering attachment?

1

[deleted] t1_je6dlyo wrote

[deleted]

1

cybicle t1_je7t1zh wrote

I think the point of the original article was that Maslow's goal of self actualization wasn't was something which almost nobody could reasonably be expected to achieve.

It went on to support the idea that something akin to a person's resilience may be a better measure for how successful their life has been.

Buddhism's goal of transcendence (or whatever the correct term is) is also something out of the question for most people, even if they haven't "been taught from birth and socially conditioned into limbic capitalism to be a worker and to desire and consume".

Like Malsow's Hierarchy, Buddhism has some valuable insights into the human condition. However (following the same logic which the article applied to Maslow's Hierarchy), many people may be better served by a different way of measuring their success.

Edit: wrong word in first sentence

1

[deleted] t1_je81xbj wrote

[deleted]

1

cybicle t1_je8o6x8 wrote

I made a typo, and I just corrected it. The sentence you quoted should have said: >Maslow's goal of self actualization wasn't was something which almost nobody could reasonably be expected to achieve.

I don't see how believing you are already self actualized is a prerequisite for becoming self actualized.

If you flow like water, you'll just be a puddle. People are complex, both internally and in their relationships with each other and the world around them.

All water always follows the same simple rules, and has no control over the rules it follows. It is passive, and it requires energy from an external source to move from a resting state.

People follow complex behaviors (which they seemingly are able to control) and interact with the world in a myriad of ways. They can harvest potential energy, and use it to change their circumstances.

It's bad to be too preoccupied with the past or future, or with things you can't control. But a Buddhist who stayed living entirely in the moment would starve to death; they most definitely are attached to their traditions, amongst other things; and if transcendence was attainable by the masses, then no other religion would exist.

1

elderrage t1_je39o9d wrote

I always feel hope implies a lack of faith.

2

[deleted] t1_je3eltd wrote

Hope is faith in the belief that things will get better.

3

cybicle t1_je2mm1p wrote

Just as the crises which Bollnow refers to can't be fabricated, hope isn't something which can be faked. Meanwhile, grace, by its very nature, results from behaving intentionally.

I think grace is a better frame of mind for people who are in a crisis to aim for.

13

[deleted] t1_je3gml2 wrote

Yeah, this is what came to my mind, too. "Grace" is a good word for that proactive adjacent to hope.

"Being hopeful" is definitely more passive than "being graceful". Having hope is like a prerequisite for taking the next steps (in grace).

Acting to change your current situation, in my opinion, implies someone has hope—hope that a more favorable circumstance could happen, if they dare to act.

Hope alone is definitely not enough to see it to fruition.

6

cybicle t1_je3nwpu wrote

Really, the important concept is that a person's triumphs over adversity is a valid way to measure their success.

What problems they faced, and the ways they overcame them, are all wrapped up together. There are too many variables to claim that a single quality is always the most important one.

2

Shakeandbake529 t1_je3tccn wrote

I think if hope in the way the psychologist Snyder defined hope, as either a state or trait quality of looking favorably toward future goals. It is more active and operational than the conventional optimism normally attributed to hope. Being hopeful in this sense can be measured in a person in or out of crises. In fact it can be a way of reducing feelings of despair even in the face of hardship. If someone has hope, they can believe things may get better even in current gloomy circumstances.

I think a very important link in the chain of hope is self-efficacy, defined by the psychologist Bandura. Someone can have a hopeful outlook that their future may improve, but self-efficacy is a sense of competence and confidence that you can take the steps to achieve your goals. It’s a sense of agency associated I think with levels of esteem and self-assuredness that are in the same family of concepts we associate with human thriving, and mechanisms for people to move forward through and out of crises.

2

mrclang t1_je224rh wrote

Hope is easy to maintain what is difficult is shedding away pessimism

7

cybicle t1_je2ohax wrote

I think it is more that hope can be used by people to avoid having to accept something.

5

[deleted] t1_je3fxst wrote

Sometimes, yeah. It can stem from that denial. Similarly, it can also be used to avoid taking action toward a goal. "Hoping" is a verb but not a particularly active one.

3

cybicle t1_je3mflg wrote

Sometimes is the key, regarding this.

There's healthy hope and unhealthy hope.

1

[deleted] t1_je3fo0n wrote

Hope is a blessing and a curse. It's saved my life, and in the same respect it's kept me alive and therefore suffering.

It's done a ton for humanity, and has also blinded us in times where we probably should have called it quits.

Like during instances of "summit fever," both literally and figuratively, which in the literal sense is where mountain climbers near their goal and begin making more rash and risky choices in the rest of their ascent, and sometimes doing so becomes their demise.

I've cursed hope and hated that I still am hopeful, but mostly I'm in awe of it. Even the tiniest bit is incredibly powerful, at least for one's individual circumstances.

3

cybicle t1_je3qlfj wrote

Either way, blessing and/or curse, hope itself doesn't deliver the victory or the final blow. It only affects us and how we see our plight, the circumstances we face aren't directly modified by our hope.

e.g. The mountain doesn't say to itself "These climbers are genuinely hopeful. I'll hold off on the next storm, so they can summit."

1

cybicle t1_je3rchs wrote

Without knowing what you've been through, I can only speculate that you also have a strong sense of perseverance.

I think perseverance overlaps with hope, with hope focusing on achieving a desired outcome, and perseverance focusing on avoiding an unwanted outcome.

They aren't mutually exclusive, they just allow you to view your challenges from different perspectives.

1

Emotional_Penalty t1_je4aiut wrote

Ok, but there must be some rational basis for this hope, otherwise, it just becomes religion. Honestly, this article just feels like a bit of abstract concepts, saying that we should have hope just 'because'.

3

froop t1_je5k2m4 wrote

'just because' really is the only reason though. It's the only reason for everything, ultimately. There is no rational basis for anything.

2

Emotional_Penalty t1_je5kwht wrote

Not really, you can provide a basis for most claims, or grounds on which you form a judgment. I feel like baseless hope ultimately collapses into some form of religious thinking, where you expect things to go well because you just believe it will happen, with no good reason.

2

froop t1_je5ofd1 wrote

You can provide a rational basis for less than ultimate claims. Rationality taken to its ultimate logical conclusion is nihilism, and the only escape is irrational hope.

2

Emotional_Penalty t1_je5udej wrote

>Rationality taken to its ultimate logical conclusion is nihilism, and the only escape is irrational hope.

I disagree. Consider this example:

If I see clouds gathering and droplets on the ground, I can rationally claim that "It is going to rain" (putting probability calculus and wild cards aside for a moment). If I would say "It is absolutely not going to rain and it will be sunny" you can see that one of these claims is more rational than the other.

If I see governments taking action against climate change, trying to prevent nuclear proliferation and working towards a stable world I could rationally claim that "We can have hope things will improve in the future".

However, if there is really no basis for such hope, than saying that "We can have hope things will turn out okay" is honestly just a baseless claim and a similar type of religious thinking, as handing your life over to the lord because he has a plan that will always turn out alright (which is a perfect example of a baseless claim, however edgy it might sound).

2

warthog0869 t1_je2v9xm wrote

"And if you feel that you can't go on

And your will's sinkin' low

Just believe, and you can't go wrong

In the light you will find the road

You will find the road"-Robert Plant's Philosophy of Hope, from "In The Light"

2

[deleted] t1_je2w7a4 wrote

[removed]

2

BernardJOrtcutt t1_je31r0v wrote

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Read the Post Before You Reply

>Read/watch/listen the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. If you have unrelated thoughts or don't wish to read the content, please post your own thread or simply refrain from commenting. Comments which are clearly not in direct response to the posted content may be removed.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

1

Background_Dog_2534 t1_je63270 wrote

There is no hope for the satisfied man. Frederick G Bonfils, 1861~1933.

1

guitargoddess3 t1_je8yhcx wrote

It seems like the gist of what is being said is “everything happens for a reason” and I believe that is true. Hope definitely gets us through the tough times and it’s a really important mental skill to be able to tell yourself to have hope and will yourself to believe it even during the toughest moments. But I don’t agree that only Lincoln and Jefferson have self-actualized. There’s a lot of other people that are at their peak of existence.

0