but Woody Allen a thinker to says"but the examined life is no picinic either" hahaha do you agree?"The greatest challenges & the most agonizing struggles........
2007-07-09 14:21:44 · 18 answers · asked by Rita 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
I agree with Socrates and Woody Allen. The question I would want to ask, though, is why some people choose not to examine their lives. Besides ignorance, could fear be a factor? I think some people don't want to venture outside of their comfort zone. I also think the society, family or religion you belong to can have great influence on your decisions. If a person is repeatedly chastized or made to feel guilty about looking beyond the conventional, they have to have more courage than a person who is supported and encouraged to seek beyond their normal boundaries. So, maybe an additional question to ask ourselves would be: do you give yourself and others permission to explore other facets of the self or the world?
2007-07-09 16:20:21 · answer #1 · answered by Rikki 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In a word - No But many lives go pretty well unexamined, and most of them would view their basically unquestioned existence as worthwhile. I am aquainted with a lot of "barbie dolls" who live in a white bread world where they somehow escape serious tragedy/conflict. These are happy people, but they seem to just play out the role assigned to them in life without making any waves or leaving their comfort zone. I'd say thier lives are reasonably worthwhile, and happy. But they could have more depth and richness. They are not at all worthless but they could choose to be worth more.
2016-05-22 00:34:45 · answer #2 · answered by theresa 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think I would have to examine examine first. One of the most creative, & serene persons I've ever known, might have been considered one who didn't "examine." Did he? From my perspective, he "examined" each beautiful moment, was in tune with nature far more than I shall ever be, & never had an agonizing moment. He was so other worldly, I've wondered if that's why he died so young. What he "examined" was selective. He created beautiful things, not to make money or be successful. This was his passion. I can't judge someone who lives the "perfect" life. (In my view.) I'm guilty of examining perhaps excessively, & indeed, that's no picnic. I tend to agree more with Woody Allen!
2007-07-09 16:55:41 · answer #3 · answered by Valac Gypsy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is the difference between the unexamined and the examined life? Both those who examine and those who do not examine life (in the Socratic sense) die. Life is hard for the philosopher and the non-philosopher. So why examine life? I think that one sage said it best when he pointed out that we human beings can live with one, two or no eyes. However, most of us want two good eyes because, although life is no picnic for those with two eyes, it might be a little easier in most circumstances. It might afford certain opportunities that a person with one or no eyes could not enjoy. Living the examined life is like having two eyes. It is not necessary for the perpetuation of one's biological life; but it beats learning how to walk down a road with a dog or walking stick.
2007-07-09 14:39:24 · answer #4 · answered by sokrates 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think i'm going to disagree with Socrates here. Our purpose/meaning is already there, pulling it out will only waste time and energy better spent elsewhere. And examining the past makes us lose focus on the present. Oh, how i wish i could be stuck in the present moment, really enjoying it. Instead I always seem to be thinking of the past, which is unchangeable, and planning or getting anxiety over the future. And why do I want to plan for the future? so that i can be happy then, but even then i'm planning on the future again! instead of enjoying the present moment :/
2007-07-09 14:41:03 · answer #5 · answered by lufiabuu 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
For my life, I agree with both of those visionary thinkers :) But to say that every life must be examined in order to have worth is going too far.
If a person has led an unexamined selfish, worthless life, and then, in their later years, they help to save hundreds because of a unintended consequence of one of their selfish acts, isn't that life worth living to those who were saved?
But ultimately, worth is a personal estimation and if someone values life moment to moment, it is no less valid than any other measure: whether we judge it so or not.
Peace
2007-07-09 15:13:59 · answer #6 · answered by zingis 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
while i wouldnt say an unexamined life may not be worth living, i think an examined life makes life more worthwhile, but true, its not picinic, neither the living nor often the examining of it
2007-07-09 14:36:11 · answer #7 · answered by dlin333 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The unexamined life may not be worth living and the examined
life may not be a picnic, but no-one was ever promised a rose
garden.
2007-07-09 14:34:45 · answer #8 · answered by producer_vortex 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Life is tough and then you die. Yes, I agree with Socrates. If we're just going to wander blithely though life without ever considering our purpose and goals, we're no different than animals. But you can take it too far, as Woody seems to. No need to get neurotic about it.
2007-07-09 14:26:34 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
life is only lived in the process of examination. it is the examining that creates life. life is only there if it is examined.
essentially, life is; because we believe it is.
and dear Woody is always trying to create sale-able drama in all our lives.
and the dear Socrates used negative terms such as "not" far too often in his discourses. these terms the sub-conscious mind omits automatically and would hear: "...life may be worth living..."
2007-07-10 09:35:32 · answer #10 · answered by ỉη ץ٥ڵ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋