Happiness not truth is a pathless land.
In one of my old threads, I mentioned a quote from Krishnamurti that 'truth is a pathless land'.
I have come to realize that this quote would reverberate more within an individual reading it had K said, "Happiness is a pathless land."
Now, many people come to see psychologists and psychiatrists and are never told this message. I mean, how cruel a message that (ought to) be conceived to any suffering individual that it's for them to decide what ought to give them meaning. Perhaps, logotherapy is really the only therapy that one ought to offer to any individual.
Looking at the issue from the sidelines, it is in our very nature to listen to authority. From upbringing to adulthood we are taught by others how we ought to behave or even (gasp) think about the world. This echo the saying by Krishnamurti or perhaps even Nietzsche that there needs to be a radical revolution in thought (or individualization or socialization) to apply such a message.
What do you think?
I have come to realize that this quote would reverberate more within an individual reading it had K said, "Happiness is a pathless land."
Now, many people come to see psychologists and psychiatrists and are never told this message. I mean, how cruel a message that (ought to) be conceived to any suffering individual that it's for them to decide what ought to give them meaning. Perhaps, logotherapy is really the only therapy that one ought to offer to any individual.
Looking at the issue from the sidelines, it is in our very nature to listen to authority. From upbringing to adulthood we are taught by others how we ought to behave or even (gasp) think about the world. This echo the saying by Krishnamurti or perhaps even Nietzsche that there needs to be a radical revolution in thought (or individualization or socialization) to apply such a message.
What do you think?
Comments (30)
People who don't have a sense of community are statistically shown to be more depressed than people who right wrong or indifferent are more individualistic.
“Happiness” is a term to me that is as empty as saying I “like” something. It’s a social signal, a surface analogy of experience once it’s passed by.
Slowly but surely medicine is starting to work toward treating people on an individual basis. With technologies today it is slowly becoming a more viable approach to treatment. Within the realms of psychologists the personal connection with a therapist has always been an import one. If you feel the need for that kind of support, or you’re just curious, then taste the different flavours before settling on one - some will be detrimental to your health if you judge one trying to help you as the only option you have.
I've taken logotherapy, Stoicism, and CBT as my claw and wrench towards personal and interpersonal issues.
Truth is a pathless land makes sense to me because if you’re truely interested in the truth you’ll follow it wherever it leads, and it tends to be disillusioning, which tends to be nihilistic.
Happiness is not a pathless land. The path is so well worn most don’t need a guide.
What do you mean by that? Is this just stating the same truth that we are acquainted with? If so why are there so many unhappy people?
Presumably, philosophers do; but, the Hoi polloi think they ought to be ignored because of their idealism.
Quoting praxis
What do you mean?
Being materialistic is not conducive to happiness, essentially.
This doesn't really help. I mean, as a juxtaposition think about the fine line between the Stoic school of thought and Cynicism.
Is the confusion clear now?
Well, you might like this aphorism from Thich Naht Hanh - ‘There is no way to happiness. Happiness is the way’.
Do you know the way?
Actually, one point that ought to be mentioned in respect of the Krishnamurti quote. Straight after he dismisses ‘paths’ he introduces another analogy. So there might not be ‘a path’ but there’s certainly ‘a climb’. Important thing to get.
But I prefer to go through the mountain rather than over it contrary to what K says about climbing it. It's the shortest pathway to overcome.
Yeah, I'm just digging away. Why do you need a remote?
All good. I'm slow with jokes anyway.
Wallow wallow.
Don't know much about krishnamurti. Was he a non-dualist 'thinker' ?
Now I’m confused.
With an understanding that materialistic values tend to be shallow when it comes to meaning, and meaning is an essential facet of happiness, there should be no confusion. But this is not news for you, clearly, having read Victor Frankel and studied the stoics.
Well, the Cynics proposed that we do away with ALL wealth and comfort and expose ourselves to voluntary discomfort. Do you think they were actually happy people? Seems like the cool-headed Stoic is at an advantage here.
Herd warmth certainly feels good in some ways. But should our lives be about staying comfortable?
Ironic that you say happiness is a pathless land and then suggest that logotherapy is maybe the one true path to happiness! :razz:
Ah, but the point is to be on top of the mountain, with the big world-transcending view, isn't it? To tunnel through the mountain leaves you still at its base, a position pretty much like the one you started with!
And as for shortest paths, if you want to get to the other side of the mountain, a path through the mountain rather than over it is certainly shorter in terms of distance. But is it shorter in terms of time? Effort?
How could someone say that, and at the same time have a high regard for human culture? (Since it seems to me that when you say truth is pathless you throw all culture, all transmission of knowledge, away).
Ignoring the misanthropic option, we are left with a saying that is at odds with, for instance, the teaching of mathematics. What would be a class in geometry but a guided tour around the land of truth?
So when K. talks about pathlessness, he is not talking about (lacking) transmission of knowledge. Perhaps he is referencing a qualitative difference between learning and truth-seeking: learning happens, while truth simply is. Man changes, truth is static.
Yes, it is a paradox. One I don't know how to surmount.
But, I might find something interesting? Like gold instead of a dead corpse on the death zone or littered bottles of oxygen. Hehe.
I don't know anything about the Cynics besides a quick synopsis, but I would agree that regularly getting outside of our comfort zone may be an essential part of happiness, in that it's necessary for growth or development. Stagnation tends to be meaningless and leading to degeneration.
Something about that stinks of male chauvinism. Don't you think?