Karma is essentially the worst sort of belief, in that superficially it seems to reward good behavior and punish bad behavior. This appeals to a lot of people because of its clear "carrot/stick" mentality and overall simplicity. This is the "Just-World" hypothesis.
In reality, this kind of thinking means that if you believe in Karma, you can ignore less-fortunates because clearly they screwed up their lives on their own. Conversely, you can get away with being a jerk to people, because they probably deserved it anyway. It is a self-reinforcing bias of the worst sort.
Karma is about "paying it forward", not in an attempt to gain the favor of the universe, but because it is the morally correct thing to do.
If you believe in karma, you believe that the machinations of the universe will reward and punish justly, but you don't participate in the process directly. Individuals don't get to meter out "karmic retribution" to people they perceive to be unworthy.
If I believe in Karma, arguably I believe that the best thing I can do is to fulfil my station in life as I aspire to break the cycle of rebirth. It's definitely worth remembering that Karma existed in a society that did have, and still does in some ways, a very strong caste system where the good of the society was often seen as a consequence of everyone doing their assigned role. Notably, in the Bhagavad Gita, one of the arguments that Krishna uses to convince Arjuna that he should fight against his own family is because it will fulfil his verdic duties - in this instance his station in life as a warrior.
> This kind of belief is what causes so many people in America to vote squarely against their own interests for their entire lives.
That is patronizing. There is a wide spectrum of reasons why one might say vote for lower/higher taxes between "they worked hard, so they deserve it" and "fuck you, I want mine".
'I am the owner of my actions, heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator. Whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir.' Anguttara Nikaya 5.57 (translator: Thanissaro Bhikkhu)
Lesson to self: practice noble habits and refrain from ignoble ones.
Disagree - If some one is "less-fortunate" and you are in the capacity to help them, you accumulate the negative kind of karma by ignoring them.
> Conversely, you can get away with being a jerk to people, because they probably deserved it anyway.
Maybe. But do not forget the implications on you for being a jerk.
> It is a self-reinforcing bias of the worst sort.
Depends on how you take it.
Second, at times it should be your obligation to be a jerk to others. Not saying always, but where not doing so puts you into a worse place than you would otherwise be, you should.
To explain (followed by an extreme example): consider the most important things you need to accomplish in life (remember also that these will vary depending on what you intend to achieve with your life) -
1. Stay alive. You can't do squat if you're dead.
2. Love unconditionally, but take no crap.
3. And so on.
If being an arse to someone keeps you alive then this may give you the opportunity to save your child's life. There are many less-extreme scenarios that are just as valid. Why, for example, does the FAA suggest putting your own oxygen mask on before helping others?
PS. Everybody can be successful. Ref. Wallace D. Wattles' vol 1: The Science of Getting Rich
At the essence of anyone who wishes to live a better life, is responsibility. Karma is a cultural mechanic by which we humans can discuss the phenomenon of responsibility in a manner which, while it may be broken or incomplete, has indeed - by simple stint of communication - resulted in many an individual, family, group of people, improving their lives.
A little more consciousness of the responsibility of the individual to interact with the wider universe, is all one can truly hope to 'gain' from a Karmic point of view.
Just so its clear, I don't think Karma as you understand it is necessarily complete, or at least you cannot apply the dialectic materialist point of view, if you think you 'get' Karma.. imho, of course.
Man, people on this site overuse the word "terrifying."
"stunning"
"I'm not so sure..."
"I'm curious,"
"perhaps"
"arguably"
"How My Startup ____________ (In Other Words, Something That Is Not At All a How-To Article)"
This concept, considered broadly, eliminates any kind of external, super-human forces, including deities and gods. It also opens the path for changes in oneself (a way to enlightenment) due to lack of any other obstacles but ones own mind.
Our own actions is only part of the big notion, and of course, according to ancient teachings, "good" and "bad" doesn't exist outside ones mind, there are just actions and the objective reality, which just is.
That said, anyone who is a friend of animals is a friend of mine.
Also, as a European, I am continually amazed by the low, low real estate prices in some parts of the US. There are very nice big rural properties that even I could afford without a lot of hassle.
I must admit I've actually toyed with the idea of buying one, but to make it full circle with the article, decided against it because I thought it would be utterly unfair to my cat (she suffers enough absences as it is) - I realized that she has very little time left and that we're going to make the best of it :)
I grew up in a poor, uneducated family. The only wealthy/successful people I met were people my dad worked for, and he had nothing but contempt for them generally. It wasn't until I went to college that I really started meeting people who made something of themselves. My sense of scope, of what I can do on my own, has grown with the kinds of people I know. I left the limitations of my childhood behind long ago.
And his lesson in pursuing happiness is pretty universal: Be willing to make very big life changes in the pursuit of happiness, and supposed "obligations" to others are never significant enough to sacrifice your happiness to.
P.S. In anticipation of a potential criticism of this, no, having children is not a "sacrifice." Do it because it makes you happy to do it. If it's a sacrifice, you're doing it wrong.
I know I am biased as an italian (and pretty much adhere to the true stereotype) but I can't find anything wrong from getting help from the people that brought you in this world and which probably love you more than anyone else on the planet (and therefore have more reasons to do so). There's no shame in getting helped.
Personally, I never had that support structure and had to figure out my shit the hard way; that doesn't mean I was never helped by people, it simply means that I had to work harder to get help. This means that I find it mildly annoying when those hoops are skipped easily by people who can run to mommy and daddy when things go bad.
> I know I am biased as an italian
There is a cultural element to it. I am of Indian origin; those people are big on the family support structure thing. I think it gets way too codependent. On the other hand, America has both kinds: There are enough people who run to daddy to handle their credit card bills. There also is this Randian image of a hero who arises magically from the dust and conquers everything.
Sacrifice is about hardship, tough decisions, and tangible loss, not about your parents shaking their heads and wagging their fingers at you. I'd argue that this guy's parents sacrificed more than he ever did just to give him the privilege of saying that he "sacrificed everything".
(Although, I would fucking love a family with a spare house in Tahoe. )
I actually respect him for explaining his motives and position even if I don't agree with him. Everybody acts irrationally and we rarely admit it openly.
Some of us forgive you, but just barely.
Regardless, thanks for the great article. I've often wondered myself how much taking care of our pets is just a displaced parenting instinct.
It's hard to say which animal is better, overall. I will say though that a cat whose devotion you've earned, to the point that it's as loyal as a dog (yet knows how to use the litter box)...is my favorite hybrid pet of all.
yes, some larger breeds rate higher on obedience scale, and we, humans, equate that to the intelligence in animals. There is another bias also is that large breeds are more frequently working breeds, thus a lot of specialized effort is invested into training them, and thus more of the obedience results achieved.
> As long as you use the money properly, and investing in yourself is the best possible way to use money, credit cards can give you a new life.
If by using the money properly he meant investing in his business, then, what would have happened if his business instead failed (as most do)?
Incurring high-interest debt like that isn't really advisable unless you have a solid plan B to deal with it in case things go awry (which they probably will).
Contrast this with the US, you can get federally-backed, low-interest loans, go to school majoring in engineering and move from poverty to middle class in one generation.
Pretty sweet deal, imo.
Partly because the economic collapse was driven by banks allowing high-risk credit on mortgages, loans and credit cards, and thinking they staved off a true great depression is a very weird way to approach it.
It would be a sacrifice if he had made himself miserable for the sake of the dog.
We have a culture that glorifies sacrifice, and we need to stop doing that. Sacrifice is a barbaric, religious notion. Nobody truly gains by others' sacrifices.
Whether it's a soldier throwing himself on a grenade to protect his fellow men in service, my poor immigrant aunt forgoing university to work right away so that all of her poor immigrant younger siblings would be able to afford to go to university, or a kid using his allowance to donate to charities that help kids in wartorn nations instead of buying himself a new toy, sacrifice is laudable.
And sacrifice does not necessitate misery. That's a false definition of what sacrifice entails. Yes, sacrifice can involve misery, but it does not necessitate misery. Many who sacrifice do it because it is meaningful and they have no bitterness from doing it. My aunt regrets never going to university. But she would make the same decision again in a heartbeat.
Sacrifice is glorified for a reason. In the example of the soldier, it is because of bravery and courage. In the case of my aunt, it is because of responsibility. In the case of the kid, it is because of warmheartedness. In all three cases, you could say it traces all back to a deep sense of love and wanting to do what's right. And there is nothing wrong with that at all.
That said, many Westerners are much better than the central theme of their religion. I can't really speak for eastern cultures. You may be right.
Even though I do walk him multiple times each day, I feel bad for sitting at this machine working 70+ hours a week trying to build a business. It's taking longer than expected and it's gotten to where I can't tell if he's just getting old or possibly depressed from lack of stimulation, so I tell him (probably more so myself ;) that we're going to move on soon and have all kinds of fun. That's the main thing that keeps me going. I just hope that by the time I do get back on my feet, there's still time to give him the life he deserves.
I spent $1000 last month so one of my cats could get an abcessed tooth removed on Memorial day, out of about $2500 that I took in. You're not special.
Humans are happy outdoors. Children need to be outside exploring, playing, figuring out the earth and nature, not sitting inside on iPads all day. Just because there are "good jobs" in tech doesn't mean it's OK to withdraw your child from nature in order to allow more time tinkering with computers.
Let kids get close with nature. Let them connect with animals and the earth. It will lead to calmer, more empathetic adults with less anxiety and more confidence and compassion.
Yes, there is the additional element of nature (i.e., Tahoe) in the narrative. And nature certainly enriches both our lives and a dog's life. But having interaction with others is a more basic and even more important requirement in our lives. Nature, important as it is, is more like the frosting on top.
(note: I don't have a dog.)
Ok, mosquitoes are too.
I'm really worried for those people equating their prefered pets with human beings.
I remember those technokids playing the beggars in front of a somethingmarket in France, they had four enormous dogs and wanted money supposedly for their pets' food.
Bullshit. If you like dogs, you do not chain them allday long to some grocery entrance, and then bring them back in some small stinky appartment. You either live with them in the countryside and go hunting rabbits with them in the morning, or you just don't breed them.
P.S. I love my dog too but ...
Also if you like having dogs you'll have another one with similar needs in 10-15 years.
Part of the reason I won't take a higher paying job in an office environment is the satisfaction I get working from home and having my dog(s) by my side. Being able to step out of the house for fresh air and take them on a walk is worth it's weight in gold.
As an Indian, I'd like to chip in with the actual meaning of "Karma" - the closest synonym in English is "fulfilling your purpose".
The Indian culture is heavy with assumptions that everyone has some purpose in life. The concept of karma urges you to act upon your purpose in life - intended or perceived. It never promises any rewards or punishments by itself. That is primarily taken care of by the rest of the philosophy in these books - unsurprisingly similar to all the other religions of the world.
By itself, karma has no positive or negative association. In fact, one of the holy texts dissociates your "karma" with the fruits reaped subsequent to it. "Continue fulfilling your purpose in life without expecting any rewards for your actions whatsoever." In other words:
Happiness = Reality - Expectations.
The lower the expectations and 'better' the reality, the greater your happiness. :)
I don't have the karma thing; I just moved because I thought dogs should be able to run around all day instead of sit in a small apartment (the apartment costing actually 4x as much as the villa + large plot of land making it really insane to me now that people actually choose and like living on 80m^2 vs 200m^2+30000m^2 for 4x as much money, but he, I loved it in the city; I'm not sure if that feeling grew or was always there). We would never move back to our previous life; there is no stress anymore and money is simply worth a lot more in the countryside.
I've often noticed that we treasure the unconditional love and dedication that dogs have for their owners, yet the same behavior seen among people would be considered weak, co-dependent, etc. Why is there such a disconnect here?
