Prethodni tekst o Lucy dao je bar donekle odgovor na pitanje zašto je čitava jedna generacija nesretna, a sada je vrijeme je da se bacimo na potragu za odgovorom gdje je ta sreća za kojom toliko žudimo...Hunter S. Thompson dao je svojevremeno dobar savjet na tu temu. "Nije potrebno prihvatiti izbore koji vam život kakvim ga poznajete nudi" napisao je dvadesetogodišnji otac gonzo novinarstva, veliki učenjak i filozof, u pismu svom prijatelju Humeu Loganu 1958. Ovo pismo daje divnu refleksiju na smisao i svrhu života. Oprezan, s obzirom na činjenicu da svaki savjet može biti samo produkt čovjeka koji ga daje, Thompson započinje potrebnim objašnjenjem samog čina davanja savjeta te kaže: "Dati savjet čovjeku koji pita što učiniti sa svojim životom, implicira nešto što je vrlo blizu egomaniji. Pretpostaviti da možeš uputiti čovjeka na pravi i konačan cilj, uputiti prstom u PRAVOM smjeru je nešto čega bi se samo budala primila." Kako bi ipak odgovorio prijatelju, Thompson se okreće Shakespeareu kao izvoru nadahnuća za svoj odgovor:
Biti ili ne biti- to je pitanje.
Je l` dičnije za ljudski um sve praćke
I strjelice silovite sudbine
Podnositi il zgrabit oružje,
Oduprijet se i moru jada kraj
Učinit? Umrijet- usnut, ništa više!
I zaista, pitanje jest da li je bolje plutati zajedno s plimom ili plivati do cilja, odnosno prepustiti se očaju ili boriti se. Thompson smatra kako je to izbor koji svi moramo učiniti u nekom trenutku života, svjesno ili nesvjesno. "Sjeti se svake odluke koju si donio, a koja je bila u nekoj korelaciji s tvojom budućnosti. Možda je to krivo, ali ne vidim kako te odluke nisu bile ništa drugo nego indirektan izbor između ove dvije stvari koje sam spomenuo- plutanje s plimom ili plivanje do cilja.", objašnjava Thompson te dodaje:
"Odgovor, a u nekom pogledu i tragedija života, jest da se trudimo razumjeti cilj, a ne čovjeka. Postavimo cilj koji od nas zahtijeva određene stvari i trudimo učiniti sve kako bi došli do tog cilja. Prilagođavamo se zahtjevima koncepta koji ne može biti važeći. Kad si bio mlađi, recimo da si htio postati vatrogasac. Mislim da sa sigurnošću mogu reći da sada više ne želiš biti vatrogasac. Zašto? Zato jer se tvoja perspektiva promijenila. Nije vatrogasac taj koji se promijenio, to si ti." U duhu pisca Austina Kleona koji je rekao da smo kombinacija onog što puštamo u svoj život, Thompson kaže: "Svaki čovjek je konačan zbroj vlastitih reakcija na iskustvo. Kako se tvoje iskustvo mijenja i uvećava, postaješ drugačiji čovjek i stoga se tvoja perspektiva mijenja. Ovo traje i traje. Svaka reakcija je proces učenja, svako značajno iskustvo mijenja tvoju perspektivu. U tom pogledu bilo bi glupo, zar ne, da se prilagođavamo zahtjevima cilja koji svaki dan vidimo iz različitog kuta? Kako se onda možemo nadati da ćemo postići išta drugo nego galopirajuću neurozu? Stoga se odgovor na to što je smisao života, ne bi trebao baviti ciljevima. Tona papira bila bi potrebna da se ova ideja u potpunosti razvije. Samo Bog zna koliko je knjiga napisano na temu "smisao čovjeka" i koliko je čovjek razmišljao na tu temu. (frazu "samo Bog zna" koristim samo kao izraz).
Malo je smisla u mom pokušaju da ti sve objasnim u kratkoj poslovici jer prvi ću priznati vlastiti nedostatak kvalifikacija da reduciram značenje života na samo dva pasusa...Vjerovati u opipljive ciljeve bilo bi u najmanju ruku glupo. Ne bi trebali težiti tome da budemo vatrogasci, bankari, policajci ili doktori. TREBALI BI TEŽITI TOME DA BUDEMO SVOJI. Ali nemoj me krivo shvatiti. Ne mislim da ne možemo biti vatrogasci, bankari ili doktori, ali moramo prilagoditi cilj individui, a ne da se individua mora prilagođavati cilju. U svakom čovjeku nasljeđe i okolina zajedno proizvode biće određenih sposobnosti i želja. Uključujući duboko usađenu potrebu da funkcionira na način prema kojem bi njegov život imao smisla, čovjek mora biti nešto, mora značiti nešto i nekome. Prema tome, formula bi trebala funkcionirati odprlike ovako: čovjek mora izabrati put koji će njegovim sposobnostima omogućiti funkcioniranje na najvećoj mogućoj razini učinkovitosti prema ispunjenju njegovih želja. Čineći ovo čovjek ispunjava potrebu i stvara sebi identitet. Identitet dobiva tako što funkcionira prema određenom uzorku koji prati određeni cilj. Izabiranjem puta koji nema nikakvih ograničenja na njegov razvoj, on izbjegava užas koji nastaje gledanjem cilja kako vene ili gubi svoj šarm dok mu se približava. Umjesto da se pokorava zahtjevima onog što traži, on postavlja svoj cilj prema vlastitim sposobnostima i željama. Ukratko, on ne posvećuje život dosezanju prethodno definiranog cilja, nego radije bira način života za koji zna da će uživati. Cilj je apsolutno sekundaran. Funkcioniranje prema cilju je ono što je važno. I čini se gotovo smiješnim reći da čovjek mora funkcionirati u određenom uzorku koji sam izabere, ali pustiti drugog da definira tvoj vlastiti čin znači odustati od najznačajnijeg aspekta života- definirajući čin volje koja čovjeka čini individuom. Čovjeku koji odgađa definiranje svog cilja, neizbježno će se dogoditi da okolnosti u kojima će se naći to naprave umjesto njega. Stoga ako zapadneš među razočarane, nećeš imati drugog izbora nego da prihvatiš stvari onakve kakvima jesu ili da potražiš nešto drugo. Ali prilikom potrage za svojim ciljevima pazi na to da tražiš način života. Odluči kako želiš živjeti i onda vidi kako to možeš ostvariti unutar načina života. Međutim, ti kažeš: "Ne znam gdje tražiti, ne znam što tražiti!" E pa tu je srž! Je li vrijedi odreći se onog što imam kako bi potražio nešto bolje? Tko može donijeti tu odluku nego ti. I samo odlukom da tražiš svoj cilj, već si napravio dalek put prema donošenju svog vlastitog izbora. Ne nastojim te poslati na put u potrazi za svetim gralom, samo ti ukazujem da nije nužno prihvatiti izbore koji ti se nude od strane života kakvog poznaješ. Tu je puno više od toga- nitko ne mora činiti nešto što ne želi do kraja života. "
izvor:
------------------------
where is happiness -part 2
Previous article about Lucy gave at least partly an answer to the question of why is an entire generation of youth so unhappy, and now it 's time to throw ourselves in the quest for an answer where lies the happiness which so many crave .. Hunter S. Thompson once gave good advice on the subject. " “It is not necessary to accept the choices handed down to you by life as you know it.”" wrote twenty something year old father of gonzo journalism, a great scholar and philosopher, in a letter to his friend Hume Logan in 1958. This letter gives a wonderful reflection on the meaning and purpose of life . Cautious , given the fact that each advice can only be the product of a man who gives it, Thompson begins with the necessary explanation of the act of giving advice and says : " To give advice to a man who asks what to do with his life implies something very close to egomania. To presume to point a man to the right and ultimate goal — to point with a trembling finger in the RIGHT direction is something only a fool would take upon himself." In order to nevertheless respond to his friend , Thompson turns to Shakespeare as a source of inspiration for the answer:
"To be, or not to be: that is the question: Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles…”
Indeed, the question is whether it is better to float along with the tide or to swim to the finish, to give up to despair or to fight. Thompson believes that this is a choice that we all must make at some point in our lives, consciously or unconsciously. " Think of any decision you’ve ever made which had a bearing on your future: I may be wrong, but I don’t see how it could have been anything but a choice however indirect — between the two things I’ve mentioned: the floating or the swimming. "says Thompson, adding:
The answer — and, in a sense, the tragedy of life — is that we seek to understand the goal and not the man. We set up a goal which demands of us certain things: and we do these things. We adjust to the demands of a concept which CANNOT be valid. When you were young, let us say that you wanted to be a fireman. I feel reasonably safe in saying that you no longer want to be a fireman. Why? Because your perspective has changed. It’s not the fireman who has changed, but you.Touching on the same notion Austin Kleon captured in asserting that “you are the mashup of what you let into your life", Thompson says: Every man is the sum total of his reactions to experience. As your experiences differ and multiply, you become a different man, and hence your perspective changes. This goes on and on. Every reaction is a learning process; every significant experience alters your perspective.So it would seem foolish, would it not, to adjust our lives to the demands of a goal we see from a different angle every day? How could we ever hope to accomplish anything other than galloping neurosis? The answer, then, must not deal with goals at all, or not with tangible goals, anyway. It would take reams of paper to develop this subject to fulfillment. God only knows how many books have been written on “the meaning of man” and that sort of thing, and god only knows how many people have pondered the subject. (I use the term “god only knows” purely as an expression.)
sources: http://www.brainpickings.org/index.php/2013/11/04/hunter-s-thomspon-letters-of-note-advice/There’s very little sense in my trying to give it up to you in the proverbial nutshell, because I’m the first to admit my absolute lack of qualifications for reducing the meaning of life to one or two paragraphs...To put our faith in tangible goals would seem to be, at best, unwise. So we do not strive to be firemen, we do not strive to be bankers, nor policemen, nor doctors. WE STRIVE TO BE OURSELVES. But don’t misunderstand me. I don’t mean that we can’t BE firemen, bankers, or doctors—but that we must make the goal conform to the individual, rather than make the individual conform to the goal. In every man, heredity and environment have combined to produce a creature of certain abilities and desires—including a deeply ingrained need to function in such a way that his life will be MEANINGFUL. A man has to BE something; he has to matter. As I see it then, the formula runs something like this: a man must choose a path which will let his ABILITIES function at maximum efficiency toward the gratification of his DESIRES. In doing this, he is fulfilling a need (giving himself identity by functioning in a set pattern toward a set goal) he avoids frustrating his potential (choosing a path which puts no limit on his self-development), and he avoids the terror of seeing his goal wilt or lose its charm as he draws closer to it (rather than bending himself to meet the demands of that which he seeks, he has bent his goal to conform to his own abilities and desires). In short, he has not dedicated his life to reaching a pre-defined goal, but he has rather chosen a way of life he KNOWS he will enjoy. The goal is absolutely secondary: it is the functioning toward the goal which is important. And it seems almost ridiculous to say that a man MUST function in a pattern of his own choosing; for to let another man define your own goals is to give up one of the most meaningful aspects of life — the definitive act of will which makes a man an individual.A man who procrastinates in his CHOOSING will inevitably have his choice made for him by circumstance. So if you now number yourself among the disenchanted, then you have no choice but to accept things as they are, or to seriously seek something else. But beware of looking for goals: look for a way of life. Decide how you want to live and then see what you can do to make a living WITHIN that way of life. But you say, “I don’t know where to look; I don’t know what to look for.”And there’s the crux. Is it worth giving up what I have to look for something better? I don’t know—is it? Who can make that decision but you? But even by DECIDING TO LOOK, you go a long way toward making the choice.I’m not trying to send you out “on the road” in search of Valhalla, but merely pointing out that it is not necessary to accept the choices handed down to you by life as you know it. There is more to it than that — no one HAS to do something he doesn’t want to do for the rest of his life.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar