2007-12-25 22:11:34 · 13 answers · asked by LUCKY3 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
No.
Suffering has a reason. That reason is a tormentor. In order to suffer some one or some thing has to torment another person or thing. Obviously the tormentor is not at his/her/it's best.
I have been around many who have suffered and while it made me compassionate it also made me sad and angry all at once. I don't consider that my best.
As for Jesus, Ghandi, and alike. They would not have suffered if others had been at their best behavior.
I will say this. The sufferer quite often find his/her best. That much I have seen.
2007-12-26 11:01:08 · answer #1 · answered by LORD Z 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't know if this is true as a universal concept. Some individuals become hyper-altruistic and a great many others play at being concerned.
The suffering of 'others' is not the same as when a village is flooded. In the latter case everyone pulls together because the common good is more or less equal to their own good and because this is highly visible to them.
The suffering of others who bear only a connection by virtue of species is no doubt able to move people, but the 'altruistic' feelings are different. This is evidently something to do with altruism being something other than what we sometimes believe it to be.
2007-12-25 22:58:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
in the long term, yes.
In short term, the pains and sufferings might spread people apart....but most of the time, in the long run, people will come together to bring around support, love, kindness, compassion, etc.
I think, some of the best things of humanity are brought out, or brought out in more clarity, by pains and sufferings of others, because without such pain and vast devestation, what true need and use woudl we have for compassion, kindness, love and etc? Yes, we can still have and show those qualities without sadness brought about, but they really shine and people really get in-depth with their spirit when those qualities are put to use by helping out a person in suffering.
It's also not to be mistaken for taking advantage of peoples' suffering. You're not hoping people will suffer so that you can bring about goodness and restoratative feelings to a person, and in result, giving yourself that good feeling of helping someone out. You're simply bringing out those qualities for the sake of humanity, and helping the person in suffering endure and get through to a state where they're not suffering.
2007-12-26 11:03:42 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If the best of humanity was brought out do you not think there would be no suffering.
The suffering of others shows us that we can be better human beings but I do not think it is necessary to bring out the best in us.
It is sometimes necessary for us to suffer in order to better ourselves but as the Buddhists teach; Life is pain and when you understand this it is not as painful any more.
Understanding teaches us about ourselves and in that way makes us better. As life will always exist somewhere between Yin and Yang the best that we can hope for is that the lessons become very isolated.
2007-12-26 19:45:17 · answer #4 · answered by Gareth B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wish that was the case!!!
Then we would never have had WARS...past and present.
What other things are capable of bringing sufferings and misery to the millions, more than the man-made wars? What exactly is the point of this power hunger? This need to show one's superiority over others?
Now natural calamities do make us forget ourselves for the time being and help others.
But I'd still think people are not that much moved to help alleviate others' sufferings. Otherwise there would not be orphans, beggars, homeless, diseased, starving people roaming the streets...
If that was the case, we would have had not just one MOTHER TERESA, but every single person could have turned into One...
2007-12-25 22:33:33 · answer #5 · answered by P'quaint! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I doubt whether , other's sufferings bring out The best in Humanity. It is only myself suffering which brings out best in me only and it give me the benefit of suffering . if humanity is to get best , it may be by product but not a consequence .
2007-12-26 02:09:38 · answer #6 · answered by krishprud@yahoo.co.in_KISHORLAL 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Every Human being tries to do his best, though it may differ from person to person, "what is one mans food may be other mans poison"
But when it comes to mass suffering the evidence and visibility is so great that each and every ones hearts melts in this situation one forgets himself and gets selflessly involved in mitigating the suffering of the victims.
These massive calamities have a way of Bringing out the BEST in HUMANITY compared to any other situations
I tried my best
2007-12-26 00:40:49 · answer #7 · answered by Deepak 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
By this do mean that when others suffer people respond?
In some sense yes, some individuals do act. Such ones are to be commended. As a whole though most feel compassion but do little or nothing. This is unfortunately especially true of those in power.
2007-12-25 22:20:45 · answer #8 · answered by S W 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Destruction and chaos are some of our nature as human beings. While observing people suffering due to human terror or natural disaster, it brings in the times of helping one another. At times of these, it evolves us and it brings more harmony to the world but we'll fail if the bad history repeats itself.
2007-12-25 22:27:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, but it is unfortunate that we must wait for suffering to be humane.
2007-12-25 22:20:40 · answer #10 · answered by missellie 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋