Suffering Is For Utopian Thinkers

Now, after reading two hundred pages mostly regarding suffering, I realize how little I think about it. But I realize that suffering is central to those utopian thinkers, with whom I don’t relate. Suffering is a part of life, but in such a way that I don’t have much to say about it. I am too busy trying to succeed in the small aspects of life that I admire deeply. And the parts of life that I do not admire: I don’t ignore it, but I don’t really consider it all that much.

My philosophies were taught by a leader in suffering-obsession: Nietzsche. But his repetitions on the use of suffering as a method to grow and learn became internalized. Again, internalized to the point that my failures and stumblings are something to consider from a high level, as a way to make my tomorrow even better. Sure, suffering exists but that’s because we live in a life of give and take.

I can only theorize that it’s only the utopian thinkers, who have considered the unreal just as much as the real, who have equated the imaginary to be just as important as the real. I personally have little need to consider the imaginary; it appears to cause unnecessary anger, resentment, and guilt, which are appropriate modes of thought during reflections on real action, not reflections on the unreal.

When one falls short on one’s hopes of the real, there tend to be very rational explanations for such failures. When one falls short on one’s aspirations of the imaginary, there tends to be a mythical adversary that is holding them down. Perhaps this is why narratives of victimization and “underdog”-ness areso prevalent in contemporary culture. Instead of accepting our deficits, we would rather blame something else for keeping us from our best selves.

In the end, I do not think much about utopia and even less about suffering. Am I missing something essential to my future by being too busy looking for good, real things in life?