Posted by Helen on: 04.14.2008 /
Jim got me a ticket to hear the Dalai Lama in Seattle tomorrow. I’m flying there today and will come back first thing Wednesday.
One of my son’s friends asked him why I was going to hear the Dalai Lama since I’m not ‘religious’. I’m going because he’ll be speaking about compassion. I think that’s important whatever religious beliefs the speaker holds (or doesn’t hold).
I’m also going because it’s an opportunity to be with people I’ve met through Off The Map.
Comment by: Jason Horton
1You could explain to your son’s friend that Buddhism is only loosely a “religion”. It doesn’t have a god for instance although it does have a central body of teachings.
That aside, I’m eager to hear what your impression is. I imagine that it would be interesting to hear him speak.
Comment by: Matt
2Why is compassion good? Is there a reason why other people should be compassionate?
Comment by: Eliza
3Matt,
Are your questions rhetorical?
If not, could I ask for clarification on your second question: why do you ask for a reason “why other people should be compassionate,” rather than why people should be compassionate?
Compassion and empathy are the basis upon which humans care for one another, in one on one relationships, in families, in larger groups, and allow us to form human “society”. Would that compassion were more evident in the world today, especially in governmental actions & policies.
As John Donne wrote,
Comment by: Helen
4Thanks Jason. It was fun. I’ll post about it as soon as I have time and my brain is able to produce something coherent. We left the hotel yesterday at 5:30 and got back at midnight so I’m a little tired :)
We’re leaving soon for the airport (Randy is driving three of us there who have morning flights) - I’ll write something later today, or tomorrow if my brain isn’t up to it today.
Matt, I’m not an expert on philosophy. I know from experience that when I show kindness and compassion, it makes other people happy and that makes me happy. So for me, it’s a win-win proposition and that’s all the justification I need. I feel that being human confers a certain responsibility on me towards other humans, but that’s just my opinion. On the other hand lots of other people seem to feel that way too so I’m happy to join them in doing my best to show compassion individually and in encouraging others to show compassion.
Comment by: Matt
5Eliza,
My questions are not rhetorical, sorry if that was antidisambiguous. I’m pretty sure that sticking in other was a mistake on my behalf.
So you are saying that we need to be compassionate to maintain societal structure?
Helen, if not being compassionate makes me happy, is that okay?
Comment by: Helen
6Are you asking me for permission not to be compassionate? :) If so you don’t need my permission - I don’t have any authority over your choices.
Comment by: Matt
7I wasn’t asking permission. It just seemed like you were saying happiness was what made compassion important and gave it value.
Comment by: Jim Henderson
8wow
Comment by: Helen
9Matt I think you’re trying to find some universal declaration or principle in what I’ve said which isn’t there. I don’t have the authority to make universal declarations. I talk about what works for me and what seems right to me. That’s all I know.
Comment by: Elaine
10Matt - I’m curious about your questions and comments regarding compassion.
What does compassion mean to you?
When I looked it up in the dictionary, what I found was:
I found it interesting that the antonyms for compassion are “mercilessness, indifference”.
Without compassion, we would live in a merciless, indifferent world. Showing compassion, mercy, tenderness helps to bring light into the world, to alleviate pain and suffering.
How I feel about compassion varies depending on the situation - it can mean sharing the pain which is not a happy feeling for me - but I would not want to feel happy that another is suffering.
(Helen - I’m not referring to the kind of happy you used above.)
The critical piece for me is when I feel compassion for another - how do I act that out? (I don’t mean this in a dysfunctional co-dependent way)
The fact that there is so much suffering in the world, makes me think we don’t have “enough” compassion.
These are only my perceptions and beliefs. I am not saying they are true for everyone.
So, please tell us more about your experience with compassion.
Comment by: Eliza
11Matt asked
I’ve been mulling this over more. At the risk of overanalyzing, here are some further thoughts on this question:
1) Necessity, as in “should” and “ought”, is not dichotomous. Things aren’t simply necessary or unnecessary; much depends on the desired or inevitable outcome(s) which stem from the completion or absence of the thing being considered…and on how those outcomes, and other considerations, are valued by each person/group/etc considering the question.
For example, “should people drive cars?” will have different answers depending on the context of the question, the value/costs/etc of the alternative situations in which people never drive, people always drive, people drive only when certain benefits outweigh certain drawbacks, etc etc. (If you don’t like the driving analogy, feel free to find one that works for you: Should people carry guns? When should people retire? Should we have the death penalty? etc)
Now, these examples I gave are of actions, not emotional states, which brings me to another observation:
2) As Elaine brings up, “being compassionate” can mean feeling the emotion of compassion oneself, and/or it can mean acting in a manner which seems to be compassionate (mostly to others, though one also judges one’s own actions). I think Helen was referring more to the emotional state and I was referring more to the actions towards others in our posts above. Again, the potential outcome is important in the discussion. Feeling compassion is a positive internal emotional experience for many people (though people may differ widely in that experience & its importance to their sense of well-being). Acting in a compassionate manner does not [i]require[/i] one to feel compassion, or experience a positive emotional effect (though presumably the emotion is commonly associated with the action), but can be limited to an action which benefits the recipient of the compassionate-appearing act. (Noone has to sign an attestation that they felt compassionate while performing a compassionate act.)
3) Going back to necessity, it seems to me (mulling this all over last night & this AM) that necessity (”should”, “ought”, etc) within a biological system like humans implies some force or condition outside the control of one’s conscious self which is is the proximate reason why we feel & act like we ought to & need to do certain things, and also some force or condition suggesting an ultimate “reason” why this might be desirable. This model does not answer the philosophical question of whether or not we “should” do them but rather suggests a biological imperative, which may not be obvious to us. Example follows.
“Is there a reason why humans should breathe?” may sound like a silly question. However, the answer really depends on what outcome one will accept as the “reason why” the action “should” be done. For breathing, the ultimate “reason” is that humans need to breath to stay alive. If staying alive is not clearly of such high and obvious value as to be assumed to be a desirable outcome, the question does not have a clear answer.
Second, as the “reason [we] should” breathe, there is a neurological imperative to breathe, which a human cannot overcome through volition alone. As carbon dioxide builds up, the urge to breathe becomes stronger and stronger, and even if a person could (can?) willfully prevent the taking of a breath for several minutes beyond the onset of this urge, the lack of oxygen would eventually lead to unconsciousness, during which breathing would resume. This is a more proximate “reason” why humans breathe, though it doesn’t answer the “should” part.
So, going back to whether or not there’s a reason that people should be compassionate, I think may depend on whether one is talking about feeling the emotion or performing the acts, and whether one believes* that humans are “hard-wired” to feel emotions and perform actions which serve to allow, encourage, & enhance interpersonal relationships, and whether one believes* that this kind of drive is necessary to form human groups such as families and societies, and whether one believes that forming these groups is something people “should” do, or need to do, and whether one is considering individuals or larger units of people.
*I think there have been some studies trying to look at the biological drive (universality, early development, etc) for these but I’m not sure.
How’s that for long & overly complicated?!