What do you think is the primary cause of human suffering across the globe?

[just_me]

I was just wondering what everybody thinks is the primary cause of human suffering across the globe. I am trying to make this a poll, but being this is my first try, I will probably blackout the Eastern seaboard instead. So if your lights go out by clicking this, I apologize. lol.

I had some options ready, but I'm sure i haven't thought of them all. i put down OTHER as an option and if you have something other than what I came up with just click other and speak your mind on the subject.

My options are

Hate

Greed

Religion

Politics

Other.

Thank you for adding to this.

 

[DBT]

I voted 'other' because I see it as a combination of factors, some of which are listed on the poll but are not overall single factor causes.

 

[Rhea]

My “other” is for “disinerest and othering”

 

[bilby]

Tribalism and ignorance

Religion, greed, hate, and politics are just variations on these two themes.


Rhea's answer seems to be the same as mine, but using different words.

 

[Bronzeage]

There is no primary cause.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Religion. It seeks first and foremost to destroy any individual’s critical thinking abilities from birth. Iow, to destroy the very notion of independent thought; of the idea of an individual. It is the primary social mind control mechanism; the precursor and facilitator to politics and power mongering; the progenitor of cognitive dissonance.

It is the institutional lie that wedges itself between parents and their children.

I would assert that 90-95% of man’s inhumanity to man follows from it exclusively.

When you destroy the individual by destroying their ability to think critically, you get Trump. ‘Nuff said.

 

[rousseau]

Where I get hung up on the 'religion is the root of all evil' arguments, is how something that's a by-product of human nature, in itself has a primary effect on human nature? Rather wouldn't human nature itself be the primary cause of religious thinking?

Personally, I think you could build an argument that if there is a primary cause of human suffering, it's that we're living things who are competing for limited resources.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Where I get hung up on the 'religion is the root of all evil' arguments, is how something that's a by-product of human nature, in itself has a primary effect on human nature? Rather wouldn't human nature itself be the primary cause of religious thinking?

That’s a mighty broad brush and effectively relegates everything to “human nature.” Thus the primary cause of human suffering is humans. That does not exactly illuminate.

Personally, I think you could build an argument that if there is a primary cause of human suffering, it's that we're living things who are competing for limited resources.

Religion goes deeper than that. It’s a control mechanism that has historically allowed the top 1% to control the other 99% in a way that goes way beyond mere competition for the day’s meals. Look at the opulence of the Catholic Church for an excellent example. They aren’t “competing for limited resources;” they are taking ALL of the resources for their own and giving nothing back in return (other than artificial surcease of the very sorrow they implanted to begin with).

It goes beyond greed/avarice. Certaintly beyond survival and basic competition. It is voracious to the point of genocide, but without any necessity or logical justification. It is cancer; a parasite killing its host and thus itself.

So, “human” nature? Or just nature? Doesn’t really get us very far and doesn’t explain the 10% of us (and growing) that broke free of it and have always been around to provide as much balance as possible.

 

[rousseau]

Where I get hung up on the 'religion is the root of all evil' arguments, is how something that's a by-product of human nature, in itself has a primary effect on human nature? Rather wouldn't human nature itself be the primary cause of religious thinking?

That’s a mighty broad brush and effectively relegates everything to “human nature.” Thus the primary cause of human suffering is humans. That does not exactly illuminate.

Personally, I think you could build an argument that if there is a primary cause of human suffering, it's that we're living things who are competing for limited resources.

Religion goes deeper than that. It’s a control mechanism that has historically allowed the top 1% to control the other 99% in a way that goes way beyond mere competition for the day’s meals. Look at the opulence of the Catholic Church for an excellent example. They aren’t “competing for limited resources;” they are taking ALL of the resources for their own and giving nothing back in return (other than artificial surcease of the very sorrow they implanted to begin with).

It goes beyond greed/avarice. Certaintly beyond survival and basic competition. It is voracious to the point of genocide, but without any necessity or logical justification. It is cancer; a parasite killing its host and thus itself.

So, “human” nature? Or just nature? Doesn’t really get us very far and doesn’t explain the 10% of us (and growing) that broke free of it and have always been around to provide as much balance as possible.

Religion is also ontology with deep roots in our past. It didn't exist for the sole reason to exploit, but the human elements related to it made it exploitative, so we're back to human nature and the nature of reality. Sure, saying that religion is dumb and harmful is useful, but it's certainly not a primary cause of human suffering.

Let me ask you - do you think eliminating human suffering is possible?

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

do you think eliminating human suffering is possible?

That’s the wrong question. The question is whether or not we can eliminate human imposed suffering? And I believe the only way to that end is to finally evolve beyond cults. Stopping the ritualistic shattering of a child’s critical thinking abilities would be the first step toward that end.

 

[ruby sparks]

Where I get hung up on the 'religion is the root of all evil' arguments, is how something that's a by-product of human nature, in itself has a primary effect on human nature? Rather wouldn't human nature itself be the primary cause of religious thinking?

Personally, I think you could build an argument that if there is a primary cause of human suffering, it's that we're living things who are competing for limited resources.

That's certainly a better answer than religion, imo. Though I picked 'greed' from the poll options after not thinking about it enough. I probably should have picked 'other'.

One could add that the world is a difficult, hostile place, and so life is, inevitably, a struggle, followed by death. Which is arguably saying something similar to what you said.

Or, one could say, without much fear of challenge, I hope, (and this is my new, considered answer) is that the de facto primary cause of human suffering is being born.

Unless I'm mistaken, it obviously follows that the solution is for humans not to have any children. Surely this is not even slightly contentious, as an answer to the question of how to end human suffering?

Do you have kids (yet) rousseau? I don't think you do. I hope I have made the possible future decision easier for you now. As for me, I (and my partner) blooped, as a result of not thinking it through adequately beforehand, and had two, starting 23 years ago.

 

[southernhybrid]

I would agree that there isn't one cause of human suffering. Lack or resources, ignorance, incompetent or autocratic government, absolutism, regardless of whether it's secular or religious, and probably some things that I'm not thinking about right now are all causes of human suffering.

 

[rousseau]

do you think eliminating human suffering is possible?

That’s the wrong question. The question is whether or not we can eliminate human imposed suffering? And I believe the only way to that end is to finally evolve beyond cults. Stopping the ritualistic shattering of a child’s critical thinking abilities would be the first step toward that end.

But again, is that not circular reasoning? How can we eliminate suffering imposed by humans, without humans changing themselves? You can cut a few branches from the tree, but the root of the problem still remains: humans, the way they think, and the world they live in.

If not religion, then what? Blind loyalty to political parties and ideologies with no basis in reality? Not believing in the basics of science like vaccination? etc et al

Sure, that's the framework we're working in, and focusing on these things is a way to assuage suffering, but these things aren't primary causes, which is the question posed by the OP.

 

[thebeave]

Why are things like malnutrition, disease, non-potable water, etc not included in the list?

 

[ruby sparks]

Why are things like malnutrition, disease, non-potable water, etc not included in the list?

Because the question is framed to imply that humans cause human suffering?

Which I agree they do, by having children. After that, the hostile non-human world plays a part also.

 

[rousseau]

One could add that the world is a difficult, hostile place, and so life is, inevitably, a struggle, followed by death. Which is arguably saying something similar to what you said.

Depends. Human experience isn't static, it varies from place to place. In Canada our quality of life is (so far) quite high.

 

[ruby sparks]

One could add that the world is a difficult, hostile place, and so life is, inevitably, a struggle, followed by death. Which is arguably saying something similar to what you said.

Depends. Human experience isn't static, it varies from place to place. In Canada our quality of life is (so far) quite high.

Ok but if you're citing instances where there isn't suffering, one can't even ask what it is that causes the suffering in that case.

 

[rousseau]

One could add that the world is a difficult, hostile place, and so life is, inevitably, a struggle, followed by death. Which is arguably saying something similar to what you said.

Depends. Human experience isn't static, it varies from place to place. In Canada our quality of life is (so far) quite high.

Ok but if you're citing instances where there isn't suffering, one can't even ask what it is that causes the suffering in that case.

I didn't say there was no suffering, just in the context of anti-natalism there may be cases where life is worth living, and others where it's not.

 

[ruby sparks]

Ok but if you're citing instances where there isn't suffering, one can't even ask what it is that causes the suffering in that case.

I didn't say there was no suffering, just in the context of anti-natalism there may be cases where life is worth living, and others where it's not.

Sure. You could say that. At this point, I'm by and large enjoying my life, for instance. I've no intention of pressing the eject button, yet.

But that still doesn't take away from the fact (I think it's a fact) that reproducing is the primary cause of all human suffering. Without it, all human suffering would end.

 

[steve_bank]

All of the above, but the underlying cause is our genetic inheritance. We are advanced chimps.

Domesticated cats and dogs when gone feral go back to genetic predisposition.

Feral cats act just like big cats in the wild.