too much
“yet why should anyone care about this evolutionary calculus? Why would any sane person lower their standard of living just to multiply copies of human genome? No one agreed to such a deal, the agricultural revolution was a trap.”
We became slaves to toil under the misconception that hard work is going to provide a better life, yet its merely a trick! Harder work leads to further help needed. Just because you work hard doesn't magically provide a better life. More kids with more sickness and more problems. Ultimately humanity may have had a better system as foragers to start. I think the same with applies to Nietzsche; he didn't like the massive negative that Buddha left, thus he put forth everything to present an elegant solution. One can get to a similar place using Buddha's logic, with much less risk. The other thing is Buddha's method doesn't involve progress or continual building of structural intellectual boundaries upon each other, whereas Nietzsche had a much more progressive model of grasping power over phenomena. Buddha was more about the ultimate realization that power was merely the ego grasping, whereas Nietzsche, spoke of being responsible of the radius in which humanity dictates the nature of the being of things via power. Buddha's method is a much more human manner of describing how to approach life for homo-sapiens. Nietzsche fell into the very same trap I think humanity continually falls into, that being the luxury trap. He wanted a pretty elegant way out, so he began chiseling one. Much of arriving at this modern conclusion requires much more effort and energy consumption prior to actually arriving at a liveable point. Much of it is similar to jumping through subjective hoops pertaining to time, contextual, and language differences makes choosing that route a rather large gamble. I think the fact Nietzsche appears to be coming from the aesthetic pursuit of capturing beauty seems to elegantly justify such a pursuit. I respect how Buddha discovered infinity and built a foundation upon it via meditation. Infinity isn't inherently beautiful, nor is infinity a human destination. I think I understand why Buddha never responded about the self or soul.
The one major modern issue I certainly believe is definitely a massive problem is the obsessive need for perfection. Is eating too much a bad thing? Is sleeping too much a bad thing? Is running too much a bad thing? Is conquering too much a bad thing? Is exercising too much a bad thing? Is making too much money a bad thing? Is loving too much a bad thing? Is too much education a bad thing? Is living too long a bad thing?
Many odd questions one can ask about various positive things. One normally doesn't ask questions pertaining to positive things as being potentially being too much. I know that I think I might have once answered the question of if loving too much was a bad thing. When you are a person madly in love who then is perceived as one who may be infatuated or obsessively possessive rather than genuinely in love, then you become faced with the question: do you really love me or are you just extremely dominating and possessive? Such questions prove to quickly become impossible to prove within the limits of language. Love is something within human existence that manifests in various different shapes and forms. Can one love too much? I am fairly certain that one can do anything, absolutely anything, too much.
After saying that, it appears there are limits to how much something can be done. After saying that, the main reason I want to post this is that I have had some thoughts regarding the last question. Is it true that one can live too much? Is living too much somehow a bad thing? What if we can get to the point with technology that we can engineer our bodies to live forever? How now would that be a bad thing? Eternal life, isn't that what the bible says is the prize we are awarded in heaven? But wait, is earth heaven? Is life that has been systematically structured as it is now anything close to ones conceptual vision of paradise? The eternal emptiness one experiences while in deep sleep, relative to the eternal living conditions of our human finite life. Considering how the animal kingdom of the world reach their natural limit of movement, they settle and rest their awareness into the abode of unconsciousness. If living too much is potentially a bad thing, then being allowed to arrive at the dimension of unconsciousness is the opposite of being conscious. Is striving for perfect maintenance of ones physiological body that provides one access to consciousness living too much? Is the possibility of becoming a cybernetic organism going beyond the scope of being a human being? Should we keep on living and drifting into the sea of time if we can? Answer this question: is there such a thing as loving too much? Or is there such a state of meaning too much? Too much. Too much? Oot hcum? 1234567? 000 0000? abc defg? Wor word?
Too much blogging? The one thing I think I know for certain, is that I don't know.
周培森