Is there always somebody worse off than (whoever)?

[rwbuild]

This has now separated into 2 distinct areas, a persons circumstance as a direct action of their own making and those who circumstance is the result of someone else's/entity's/natures action either deliberately or unknowingly. For someone to respond in the correct context to the affected person would require knowledge of the situation.

[elanjacobs]

You can't become more happy. hell..."more happy" isn't even good english!

I think the word you're looking for is "happier"

[elanjacobs]

I don't believe it. I believe we are just terrible at understanding our own happiness.
And because of not understanding what really makes us happy we either instinctively resort in quick fixes (substances, food, etc) or we set our targets based on what we see around us, what other people do. "That dude has that car? Must be a reason, if I get the same or better I'll be happy. And if I'm not happy at least I'll be accepted, or someone will be jealous of me which is also strangely satisfying"

We're pretty dumb
And also happiness is not as simple as it seems.

I think this is part of the reason why there are so many studies that show that religious people tend to be happier/more content than non-religious people, even if objectively they seem worse off. If you have faith in a benevolent higher power, it follows that you're more likely to be accepting of your current situation because that's the lot you've been allocated and, more importantly, you're in that situation for a reason. Working out why and what to do is a separate challenge, but at least it gives you the potential to make something meaningful out of it and the search for meaning, I think, is the real drive beneath everything.

[woodPixel]

My daughter is studying psychology (has 2 degrees and finished her thesis this week). I often talk to her about this stuff. Happiness is a psychological flaw... People who are happy are delusional. It's a state that is hard to attain and even more problematic to retain.

For many years I've been meditating (trying!!!!) and I'd regard contentment to be far more important.

Through contentment I believe you can remove want. Want causes unhappiness.

(I'm still neither. It's a work in progress!!!!)

Back to FenceFurniture... I hope that the root cause of your post is solvable. Some things are not. Sometimes there is little we can do other than to Take Our Lumps. Introspection can attempt to reveal what really motivates, or demotivates one's self.

An old Maxim Temet Nosce is one of my all time favorites.

[Spyro]

I think this is part of the reason why there are so many studies that show that religious people tend to be happier/more content than non-religious people, even if objectively they seem worse off. If you have faith in a benevolent higher power, it follows that you're more likely to be accepting of your current situation because that's the lot you've been allocated and, more importantly, you're in that situation for a reason. Working out why and what to do is a separate challenge, but at least it gives you the potential to make something meaningful out of it and the search for meaning, I think, is the real drive beneath everything.

When your 7 year old child looks at you and asks "So dad, are we all gonna die one day?", religion gives you something to say. And something to say to yourself as well when you ask the same question. It's a fkn tough question, I'll take any help I can

Religion is a package of tried and tested answers to all the difficult questions, so of course it takes away that burden. I am nowhere near smart of arrogant enough to judge religion, and it works for a lot of people but I know it doesn't work for everybody. I think it pays to look for your own answers if you can.

My answer by the way is that no, I will never die, I will always live through my kids, I am a part of them, everything they learned and everything they do. And they will always live through their kids and the people they love.
The circle of life is my answer to death, it's the only thing that makes this thought tolerable to me.

[rrich]

For many years I've been meditating (trying!!!!) and I'd regard contentment to be far more important.

Through contentment I believe you can remove want. Want causes unhappiness.

(I'm still neither. It's a work in progress!!!!)

Absolutely Brilliant!

[rrich]

Sarcasm Intended

Someone is always worse off ? ? ?

Isn't that what the religious leaders always say? That way you feel better and toss more than spare change into the collection plate.

[Glider]

We've all heard it..."there's always someone who is worse of than (you, them, whoever)".

I suspect the original reason for this saying was to try to redirect the focus of the receiver towards others. However it's totally inappropriate except in the case of banal 21st century complaints like "Instagram won't let me log in"; because it lacks empathy.

I think our basic emotional need is love and the giving of it is the best way of receiving it. Trying to develop good habits like forgiveness, generosity, kindness etc. are not always easy but great emotional nutrition and good material for one's eulogy.

My two bob's worth,

mick

[rrich]

mick,
" "Instagram won't let me log in"; because it lacks empathy. "

I owe you a beer for that one.

[Bushmiller]

The thread has developed into an interesting mix of philosophy and psychology with a large dash of humanity thrown in. My cautionary comment would be that most of us are hugely unqualified to offer opinion om the subject other than a genuine desire to help. In saying that I don't wish to throw cold water on the discussion at all: Quite the opposite and I am impressed at some of the profound remarks that have already been made. One problem is that every situation is an individual scenario and very difficult to apply generalities. Situations that can be brushed off by one person are the end of the world for another.

I believe that as far as so called happiness is concerned we have to go back to the fundamental psyche, which I believe started out as survival. In fact let's go back even further and suggest that human motivation was the propagation of the species. Almost everything was dictated by the that goal. If I can digress for a brief moment I was once told that the aim of a cattle breeder was to wean a live calf. So it was with humans because everything was geared to the success of raising a family. Everything that you did helped to reach that outcome. Today we see this increasingly as money, material wealth, status etc, but to my mind in the end it is still all about the propagation of the species. If it is not that I am not quite sure of the purpose of life as it is certainly not about having the latest I-phone, a 72" TV or a brand new car.

Of course along the way we find greed and this confuses the issue. In fact it may be the single most disruptive element in society. It stems from the basic ambition of humans and the desire to succeed, but we lose the reason to say something is unnecessary. Ambition is the reason the human race is successful, but that is as a group and not necessarily on an individual basis.

So at some point we either decide that we are not living up to our original goal (and it is quite likely that we have not even identified to ourselves what that goal is) or we find something that we perceive is threatening our ability to achieve that goal. The solution is to get around these problems: The trick is being able to do it. Easier said than done and sometimes we need help. On occasions just talking about is suffices as it is a therapy in itself, but frequently more than that is needed.

Most of us participate on the Forums because of our common interest in some form of woodworking or associated discipline and discussions such as this thread alert us to the fact that not all like minded people are travelling well. I particularly like the way that Forum members "rally" at such times.

We are are here to help if we can.

Regards
Paul

[FenceFurniture]

The thread has developed into an interesting mix of philosophy and psychology with a large dash of humanity thrown in. Not the original intention, but happy for it to drift around.
My cautionary comment would be that most of us are hugely unqualified to offer opinion on the subject other than a genuine desire to help. Perhaps we are, but it's us that have to deal with the matter at the time, so offering an opinion is only a reflection of what we might do in any given situation.
Situations that can be brushed off by one person are the end of the world for another.

And this goes to the heart of the matter. Of course there are shades of grey in between those two extremes, but I suspect that when someone says "I know a bloke who is worse off than you" they have no real empathy for either person, which is probably exacerbated by thinking that the people ought to be able to cope with whatever it is in any case, just like the commenter can (or so they think).

Most of us participate on the Forums because of our common interest in some form of woodworking or associated discipline and discussions such as this thread alert us to the fact that not all like minded people are travelling well. I particularly like the way that Forum members "rally" at such times.

We are are here to help if we can.

Indeed.

What doesn't work is when the helper indicates or even overtly says "help is on offer, but only if it's done in a certain way...... ahem, MY way". Just as you were saying that some can brush something off that is otherwise a big deal for someone else, people can react in different ways to what could be called a "progress report" on the situation as it develops. The progress may affect the subject in a very different way to the way the helper might react, if they were in the same situation. The very worst thing the helper can do is to invalidate the subject's feelings or position by saying "well you should do/feel this or that in the same way that I would. And if you don't.....well, then I have to withdraw my support."

[Bushmiller]

What doesn't work is when the helper indicates or even overtly says "help is on offer, but only if it's done in a certain way...... ahem, MY way". Just as you were saying that some can brush something off that is otherwise a big deal for someone else, people can react in different ways to what could be called a "progress report" on the situation as it develops. The progress may affect the subject in a very different way to the way the helper might react, if they were in the same situation. The very worst thing the helper can do is to invalidate the subject's feelings or position by saying "well you should do/feel this or that in the same way that I would. And if you don't.....well, then I have to withdraw my support."

This was at least partially why I made one of my first statements that most of us, but probably not all, are unqualified to diagnose and treat such situations. I would agree that conditional support is problematical. I would suggest that problem could also be leveled at the patient too (namely, "if you don't fix the problem this way I'm not interested"). Arguably it is not a level playing field and the patient is less likely to see alternative viewpoints, which is where the expertise of the helper come in. The irony here is that the closer we are to the person concerned the more likely we are unable to communicate productively. My layman's perspective is that we are too emotionally involved and too prejudiced. To help objectively we need to stand back in a detached manner. Not all of us are equipped to do this.

It is not an easy task from either person's viewpoint. There is one aspect that I believe cannot be overstated and that is the patient has to either like or respect (or more likely both) the "helper."

Regards
Paul

[FenceFurniture]

I would suggest that problem could also be leveled at the patient too (namely, "if you don't fix the problem this way I'm not interested").

No, that is definitely counter-productive. After all, quite often the patient won't know what is the best way to solve the problem.

My layman's perspective is that we are too emotionally involved and too prejudiced. To help objectively we need to stand back in a detached manner. Not all of us are equipped to do this.
It is not an easy task from either person's viewpoint. There is one aspect that I believe cannot be overstated and that is the patient has to either like or respect (or more likely both) the "helper."

I may not have made myself clear Paul: by help I really mean support. The help, and guidance, as such usually has to come from trained professionals such as Psychologists et al. Where it can go horribly wrong is a support person thinking they know better than a professional either because:
1. they have known the patient in a private capacity for some time, or
2. they have vast experience in managing people professionally in the workplace, and therefore believe that friendships are managed in the same fairly structured way, or
3. perhaps they think they are immune to making mistakes or incorrect assumptions because their opinion has previously been taken when offered (assuming it was sought, in the first place). This may be inextricably linked to point 2 above.

[DaveTTC]

I would never advise someone against professional advise. This advise from professional, one to another can sometimes be contradictory. Some have found more help thru friends than professionals. There is no one simple answer from what I see. Like raising children, every individual is different and what works with one may not work with another.




Dave TTC
The Turning Cowboy

Turning Wood Into Art

[rwbuild]

Dave has made a salient point, there can be/is differences between professionals, also, the patient's interaction with the professional is crucial also, if they feel comfortable and trusting/respectful of the professional, then there should/can be a good outcome, but if not, then not a lot will change.