Question thats been on my mind for a couple of weeks.

People might not regard this as interesting, but its been weighing on my mind recently.

Question:
Would you prefer to have a mental condition where you were surrounded by beautiful gentle people that loved you dearly but you couldn't realise the good they were doing?

or

Would you prefer to be perfectly normal where you were surrounded by nasty horrible people that tried to put you down and successfully did at every turn that you COULD NOT get away from?

pwd

The bastards being real. My reality would be the same, and I'd be sane, and not hurting people who careda bout me.

uberwolf

maybe the semantics need clarification.

I'd a thought in the second situaition you'd definitely be troubled/plagued by their antics, whereas you haven't made it explicit if in the first scenario if you're just plain simple and not frustrated by what you perceive as peoples indifference.

SkepticOne

Papa Smut wrote:

People might not regard this as interesting, but its been weighing on my mind recently.

Question:
Would you prefer to have a mental condition where you were surrounded by beautiful gentle people that loved you dearly but you couldn't realise the good they were doing?

or

Would you prefer to be perfectly normal where you were surrounded by nasty horrible people that tried to put you down and successfully did at every turn that you COULD NOT get away from?

Both of these are sort of artifically rigged bad situations along the lines of "if you had to die would you want to be boiled in oil or would you want to be skinned alive." You have already lost if you have got to this stage. What is the point of wondering which is better?

I think it is more interesting if you allow the possibility of overcoming the challenge. In the case of the first it would be the possibility of becoming sane and in the second it would be the possibility of overcoming your adversaries.

In this more interesting (imo) scenario, I would go for the second option, since being sane and being surrounded by "beautiful gentle people" would become irritating very quickly.

bus77

You could apply both those scenarios to a socialital level.

Papa Smut wrote:

Would you prefer to have a mental condition where you were surrounded by beautiful gentle people that loved you dearly but you couldn't realise the good they were doing?

Hardcore Conservative.

Papa Smut wrote:

Would you prefer to be perfectly normal where you were surrounded by nasty horrible people that tried to put you down and successfully did at every turn that you COULD NOT get away from?

Hardcore Liberal.



It's a beautiful system.

bagofmostlywate

sounds to me like you are saying, would you like to live in
1) a child like world, where you are not necessarily simply, but you simply know no evil or wrong doing....

or

2) live in the fairly hard ass world that we do live in... although you have said in your example, to live in a world where people always do you wrong whenever they can (although maybe not in those words exactly).

Well the way it is, most of us would fear to loose what we have at the moment. For example, i have a lovely girl, nice family and a mediocore job, so while crap stuff does happen in my life, i have to say that my life is so good that i do not think that it is worth giving up what i have in favor of the first example of living in a dream simple like world...

the thing about your question is, if I were to choose the first or the second life, i would necessarily be giving up my current life. for my current life is in between the both options you give... and if i am going to choose one, i would choose the easy first one, why not...

what do you all think?

bagofmostlywate

that is what i think....

bus77

I think we are both right,

bagofmostlywate wrote:

1) a child like world, where you are not necessarily simply, but you simply know no evil or wrong doing....

People who grow up In happy homes sometimes react badly to social change, or social disorder. Gay Marriage .ect can be seen as a form of attacking force on their childhood and in turn their own childrens future way of life. Roughly speaking this would be a conservative person.

bagofmostlywate wrote:

2) live in the fairly hard ass world that we do live in... although you have said in your example, to live in a world where people always do you wrong whenever they can (although maybe not in those words exactly).

People who feel they grew up the wrong way, for whatever reason. Sometimes see various forms of social change as a form of liberation for themselves and their future. Again roughly speaking, more often than not, this would be a liberal.


Sorry for hijacking your post bagofmostlywater, It was so well written I had too