A game for 4 year olds

[jameseoakes]

Is every rich person bored? No, but that does not mean that the bored rich person is fiction. That would take away all the different shades of grey we have in our world. I am just saying that even with our mortal lifes those people already exist.

Now give everyone what they want and make them immortal. How long does it take for more and more people to be unhappy?

Of course we are still not the Nibiru or Ea. We could have a different path. Honestly we would probably follow the other races in Ultima Thules...those that destroyed themselves...be it through war or by destroying our planet.

FF14 is still a game and it wont ever perfectly show every aspect of life. The devs just choose that this message was the most important one they wanted to tell us. Maybe even more so with Covid and all the things going on. That a perfect life is not something that is good (thats something I learned in therapy as well..that striving for perfection just will make it worse, since you can never reach it) and that even though its horrible, suffering is part of our lifes. But happyness is too and we can find it in many ways. Even just eating enjoying a meal from your past with someone you like. Or a nice discussion that brings in different viewpoints.
.

The story has a really messed up suffering fetish that is really sick, and the whole suffering is part of life so if people don't have enough it should be inflicted on them is pure evil

[Lurina]

Is every rich person bored? No, but that does not mean that the bored rich person is fiction. That would take away all the different shades of grey we have in our world. I am just saying that even with our mortal lifes those people already exist.

Now give everyone what they want and make them immortal. How long does it take for more and more people to be unhappy?

Again. This presupposes that rich people, or rather people who can have "whatever they want", are predisposed to ennui at all. But there's just no evidence for this being the case. In fact, what studies exist suggest that greater wealth and fewer involuntary social obligations lead to greater happiness pretty much across the board.

Yes, rich people can get bored and unhappy. But using that as an argument to suggest that a society where everyone lived equivalently to the very rich would be an unhappier one is logically akin to arguing that society would be better off without flu vaccines because some people who are vaccinated still get the flu. It's using the exception, rather than the rule, to draw its conclusion.

I think a lot of people were moved by Endwalker - especially in the wake of, like you said, Covid and the slow death of the international order going on - because it ultimately preaches a comforting lie: That suffering is ultimately not only unavoidable, but good and necessary. Something that gives our lives substance and meaning.

But I just don't believe it. The truth is, suffering is only unavoidable. It has no positive side. If we'd been born into an advanced civilization 10,00 years in the future where unwilling strife ceased to exist, we would, by all psychological evidence, live richer and happier lives with no downside or loss of meaning whatsoever. That we were instead born in this moment in a time makes us victims of causality of a sort; we are trapped in suboptimal world for fundamental reason at all. Just like being born poor on a planet with people who can have their dreams granted with a snap of their fingers, it is unfair, cruel, and meaningless.

However, it doesn't bring me any comfort to indulge in fantasies that falsify the human condition, and pretend that a society filled with happy people would magically become miserable and lose their sense of meaning. Endwalker rings hollow for me for much the same reasons that I don't really get much out of Buddhism (well, at least Japanese Buddhism as it's usually echoed in media, since it's a very broad label). Rather than a philosophy of acceptance, of making peace with suffering and accepting it passively, I feel most emotionally honest and at peace with myself when it moves me to grief and indignation. I think it is beautiful to meet the injustice of the cosmos with kicking and screaming, and to never stop striving for the lives we deserve, even if they're unattainable. I could not disagree more with Yoshi-P's take on this topic.

[Alleo]

The story has a really messed up suffering fetish that is really sick, and the whole suffering is part of life so if people don't have enough it should be inflicted on them is pure evil

Where does the story say that? If that was the case the story would not have the WoL trying to stop suffering from happening. No they would let us watch and say "see its good". Instead they just say that suffering exists, that it is part of our lifes if we want it or not. That we should accept that it can happen but also try to look for the light within the Darkness of it all.

Even with the Ancient it was not "they have to constantly suffer" but that they should accept what happened and try to move forward.

@Lurina: We will never know it because none of us will reach immortality. My point was always that yes a comfortable life for us mortals would be nice but that too much, bascially perfection might not be what is good for people that live forever. Also for me the theme was never that we should just accept any suffering otherwise as I have written above this, we would not be going around and helping so many people.

And its okay that you see it different to me and others. I also wish that most people would not have to suffer so much. I find it unfair when someone young dies because of illness. But it exists. And for some of us it does help to understand that not everything is taken for granted. When I was at my lowest point in life it was hard to see beyond the dark times. Now when I am so much better I am at least grateful that I have learned lessons from that. Lessons that will help me if I suffer again. Of course I would have not wished that upon myself. Yet I can also say that it has helped me grow, especially with my world view on certain things.

In the end though SE has chosen that two of the three eternal (if you can count dragons as nearly immortal) races have gone too far and thus have created another way to suffer. Next to them we still have the other ones that have nothing to do with it. And for them Ultima Thule is bascially a way to get a better future. A future with much less suffering. I think its a nice mix of different endings for different races and how they are now able to start anew.

[jameseoakes]

Where does the story say that? If that was the case the story would not have the WoL trying to stop suffering from happening. No they would let us watch and say "see its good". Instead they just say that suffering exists, that it is part of our lifes if we want it or not. That we should accept that it can happen but also try to look for the light within the Darkness of it all.

Except the ancients where never given a chance to get over and where scoured from existence before they had a chance to come to terms with things and Venat decided they had to have more suffering actively inflicted on them that's the whole point of the sundering.

[HemlockEvergreen]

You are literally playing a game from a franchise known for magic sparkly crystals and power of friendship anime endings. Go read War and Peace or something if you want ~*depth*~.

[dynus]

Again. This presupposes that rich people, or rather people who can have "whatever they want", are predisposed to ennui at all. But there's just no evidence for this being the case. In fact, what studies exist suggest that greater wealth and fewer involuntary social obligations lead to greater happiness pretty much across the board.

Yes, rich people can get bored and unhappy. But using that as an argument to suggest that a society where everyone lived equivalently to the very rich would be an unhappier one is logically akin to arguing that society would be better off without flu vaccines because some people who are vaccinated still get the flu. It's using the exception, rather than the rule, to draw its conclusion.

I agree with you here.

I think a lot of people were moved by Endwalker - especially in the wake of, like you said, Covid and the slow death of the international order going on - because it ultimately preaches a comforting lie: That suffering is ultimately not only unavoidable, but good and necessary. Something that gives our lives substance and meaning.

But I just don't believe it. The truth is, suffering is only unavoidable. It has no positive side. If we'd been born into an advanced civilization 10,00 years in the future where unwilling strife ceased to exist, we would, by all psychological evidence, live richer and happier lives with no downside or loss of meaning whatsoever. That we were instead born in this moment in a time makes us victims of causality of a sort; we are trapped in suboptimal world for fundamental reason at all. Just like being born poor on a planet with people who can have their dreams granted with a snap of their fingers, it is unfair, cruel, and meaningless.

And this is where you lose me. Well, not the last sentence; that is true. Misery builds character is an old adage that has some truth to it. It's less about what the suffering being good and what we take from the suffering. Yes, it's unavoidable, but wallowing in it doesn't do jack. The game, and many other stories, tell us that you have to 'grin and bare it because if you just suffer instead of just moving on, you're, well, dying in one form or another. We learn from suffering. We learn to have empathy, we learn to make better choices is that suffering was self-inflicted, and we learn what the red flags are on other people so we can avoid them. We learn our limits, and we learn how to push past them. We learn about ourselves. We grow from suffering just as much as we grow from good things.

We learn that the world is unfair, and we want to make it better for our progeny. They'll have a better life and better living conditions, hopefully, but they'll still face suffering; it'll just be a different kind. Suffering is unavoidable, and yes, it's not good. But good things can come from it.

However, it doesn't bring me any comfort to indulge in fantasies that falsify the human condition, and pretend that a society filled with happy people would magically become miserable and lose their sense of meaning. Endwalker rings hollow for me for much the same reasons that I don't really get much out of Buddhism (well, at least Japanese Buddhism as it's usually echoed in media, since it's a very broad label). Rather than a philosophy of acceptance, of making peace with suffering and accepting it passively, I feel most emotionally honest and at peace with myself when it moves me to grief and indignation. I think it is beautiful to meet the injustice of the cosmos with kicking and screaming, and to never stop striving for the lives we deserve, even if they're unattainable. I could not disagree more with Yoshi-P's take on this topic.

I think we need to remember that the devs are Japanese, and this is very likely a reflection of their beliefs. Nor is Buddhism the only faith that does this. "God moves in mysterious ways" or "It's all part of God's plan" are very Christian, or at least Catholic.

However, I do think you misunderstood what's trying to be said. In no way did I see the Scions say, 'let's accept this' when facing the Endwalker. They went to meet that threat, and have, throughout the game's expansions, went kicking and screaming to stop injustices. At no point were they passive.

Endwalker is not about passively accepting suffering. It's about accepting that it happened and moving on with life to be better. Isn't that what the scions are doing now? Aren't the twins in Garelmald right now trying to help Jullus rebuild their home? Aren't we trying to help the Void now? In the game right now, with the lessons we learned from Endwalker and all that came before, we are still doing our best to right wrongs and triumph over evil.

Because the reason Venat sundered the Ancients was not to force them to accept their suffering. It was to stop them from wallowing in it, and inflicting suffering on others. Let's remember that when the ancients sacrificed half and half again to stop the Final Days and begin to heal the world, they were planning on sacrificing the new life that sprung up afterward to bring back what they had lost. Inflicting more suffering because they wanted to stop their own. And that's unhealthy.

[Brinne]

And this is where you lose me. Well, not the last sentence; that is true. Misery builds character is an old adage that has some truth to it. It's less about what the suffering being good and what we take from the suffering. Yes, it's unavoidable, but wallowing in it doesn't do jack.

"Wallowing" in it also often allows one to call attention to injustice and unnecessary suffering, and thus address it and initiative positive change for the better. There are countless places in history where people initiated positive social change for countless people because they absolutely refused to just "grin and bear with it" and "just make the best of what we have" and "move on" from their stations in life and the suffering that came with it. This is something you cannot generalize on the level that Endwalker did, and it's one of the reasons Endwalker feels incredibly irresponsible when it comes to this topic. There's a degree of truth to this when applied to individuals who may be harming themselves unnecessarily via personal grief or grievances, but Endwalker itself is the voice here overwhelmingly tell us to apply this on a societal, existential level.

Hence, Lurina is right. It's nonsense and garbage that, regardless of intention, manifests as affirming the status quo and that if we try to imagine anything better, it's actually probably bad.

We learn our limits, and we learn how to push past them. We learn about ourselves. We grow from suffering just as much as we grow from good things.

Once again, this is something that "sounds good" as a general platitude, but I have a feeling - as has been cited in previous posts - that when you say you can grow from suffering, you're thinking of smaller, personal (not trying to minimalize, just in context of how Endwalker approaches it) affairs like the "I had a fight with a friend, I had some money stolen from me by someone I trusted, I lost a family member" that were mentioned earlier in the thread. Endwalker, once again, is the voice here that isn't putting small-scale conflicts like that as what is necessary for self-reflection and self-growth - Endwalker puts forth that what is 'necessary' to inflict upon the populace to force them to be 'strong' is more along the lines of war, starvation, disease.

Maybe some people "grow" in some nebulous way to being exposed to hatred and war. At least the people who aren't broken or killed from it - omelettes and broken eggs, I guess. But hey, Social Darwinism XIV.

We learn that the world is unfair, and we want to make it better for our progeny. They'll have a better life and better living conditions, hopefully, but they'll still face suffering; it'll just be a different kind. Suffering is unavoidable, and yes, it's not good. But good things can come from it.

And once again this all falls apart once you try to apply it to the specifics of the scenario; you cannot closely evaluate the text and seriously put forth that the Ancients, for example, did not "still face suffering, just a different kind" from the modern in-game world. But they were still punished for not enough suffering. I would truly like to know the threshold.

However, I do think you misunderstood what's trying to be said. In no way did I see the Scions say, 'let's accept this' when facing the Endwalker. They went to meet that threat, and have, throughout the game's expansions, went kicking and screaming to stop injustices. At no point were they passive.

Well, this is also one of the criticisms leveled toward the messaging of the game and why there's a lot of pondering and words written about if we can ascribe this to writer mistakes and criss-crossed priorities - the theme is inconsistently applied and to some of us feels like the result of a desperation to justify Hydaelyn's action or cast it in a heroic light than a deliberate, definitive statement on humanity. Because they really, really did not want you to hate Hydaelyn (but had cornered themselves into her committing a heinous act that they hadn't planned taking into account from the onset), keeping you from hating her became more important that coherency of the message. Which is a bit grim in its own way, in terms of writing quality.

Endwalker is not about passively accepting suffering. It's about accepting that it happened and moving on with life to be better. Isn't that what the scions are doing now? Aren't the twins in Garelmald right now trying to help Jullus rebuild their home? Aren't we trying to help the Void now? In the game right now, with the lessons we learned from Endwalker and all that came before, we are still doing our best to right wrongs and triumph over evil.

And Endwalker also suggests that there's a threshold of things becoming "too good" or "not enough suffering" that would necessitate something like the Sundering to restore suffering levels back to where they need to be to be "strong" and "learn to move forward."

Because the reason Venat sundered the Ancients was not to force them to accept their suffering. It was to stop them from wallowing in it, and inflicting suffering on others. Let's remember that when the ancients sacrificed half and half again to stop the Final Days and begin to heal the world, they were planning on sacrificing the new life that sprung up afterward to bring back what they had lost. Inflicting more suffering because they wanted to stop their own. And that's unhealthy.

Probably not as unhealthy as someone killing them all, though.

And I continue to be baffled at the stance some people take that the necessary self-sacrifice the Ancients make to save the world - which is in-game cast in nothing but a positive and admiring light, even throughout Endwalker itself - being yet another piece of evidence as to why it was necessary or earned in any way that they all be eradicated.

[Lurina]

text

Feel like you're kinda talking past me here, or at least reducing what is really a pretty complicated philosophical dichotomy to surface-level tropes. Like, what do you mean when you equate what I'm saying to promoting "wallowing" in suffering? Wallowing means lying around impotently, which is certainly not what I'm saying is helpful for anyone. I am advocating pushing forward in the face of strife in the same way that EW does. The difference in my outlook versus the game isn't about how people should act, at least not broadly, but rather what the game considers to be the nature of the human condition in the face of reality.

Equally, at no point have I said that Endwalker promotes passivity in general, just in regard to how it processes the idea of trying to fundamentally transcend hardship rather than situationally overcome it. Endwalker advocates "making peace" with suffering, that people ought to stop hating death and loss and understand these are ultimately necessary parts of life even as one fights to minimize their influence. To me this feels like magical thinking; like trying to treat something disgusting as beautiful because it makes the situation easier to cope with.

In both cases, what we (meaning me and the developers, though also me and you, apparently) fundamentally disagree on is just this:

And this is where you lose me. Well, not the last sentence; that is true. Misery builds character is an old adage that has some truth to it. It's less about what the suffering being good and what we take from the suffering. Yes, it's unavoidable, but wallowing in it doesn't do jack. The game, and many other stories, tell us that you have to 'grin and bare it because if you just suffer instead of just moving on, you're, well, dying in one form or another. We learn from suffering. We learn to have empathy, we learn to make better choices is that suffering was self-inflicted, and we learn what the red flags are on other people so we can avoid them. We learn our limits, and we learn how to push past them. We learn about ourselves. We grow from suffering just as much as we grow from good things.

We learn that the world is unfair, and we want to make it better for our progeny. They'll have a better life and better living conditions, hopefully, but they'll still face suffering; it'll just be a different kind. Suffering is unavoidable, and yes, it's not good. But good things can come from it.

While I agree that good things come from struggle (which as I already talked about, can be more safely experienced artificially) I just don't agree that anything essentially good comes from unwilling suffering.

Yes, hardship can make people better. But it's even more capable of making them worse. Instead of more empathetic, it's just as likely to make someone more defensive and selfish. It emotionally deadens people, turns them cold and indifferent. And ultimately, it makes people turn to escapism. It makes people less likely to try and help the next generation because they've internalized the strife they've faced as good and natural. I don't know about you, but I know far more old people who are ending their lives filled with bitterness and regret than I do ones who managed to grow into their best selves.

Suffering has at times made me grow, but I don't believe it's ever been strictly necessary for that growth to happen. Again, it doesn't make me happy to say it, but I think it's a comforting myth. A way to instill some meaning in the inherent tragedy of our lives.

Endwalker wants me to 'grin and bare it', to smile in the face of death and find a kind of beauty in it. I do not find it comforting to be told this. I want to grimace and snarl and scream in the face of death. I want to find it absolutely revolting, because it is revolting, and because it is exactly that revulsion that will compel me to act with the greatest passion for change and care for other human beings.

I believe that, despite EW's moral, there's nothing in physics that precludes the possibility we might eventually remove suffering altogether - ultimately it's just resources and brain and body chemicals - but even if that was impossible, I reject the thesis the game has about pursuing perfection (at least on a societal, if not individual level) because I think it's worth continuously striving towards that future, Nibirun style, for its own sake. I do not believe it would make us lose all sense of meaning and kill ourselves. Cookingway is wrong and I will eat him.

[Brinne]

I believe that, despite EW's moral, there's nothing in physics that precludes the possibility we might eventually remove suffering altogether - ultimately it's just resources and brain and body chemicals - but even if that was impossible, I reject the thesis the game has about pursuing perfection (at least on a societal, if not individual level) because I think it's worth continuously striving towards that future, Nibirun style, for its own sake. I do not believe it would make us lose all sense of meaning and kill ourselves. Cookingway is wrong and I will eat him.

Once again, (and to be clear, I'm chiming in on mostly agreement/throwing in my two cents!) the question of how we see certain coping mechanisms with the fundamental injustices of the world is completely different depending on if we're talking on an individual level or a societal level. There can be a certain beauty and nobility to a person interpreting the horrors of their experiences in a way that makes them into a better person or help them to continue to live through their pain (though it must be noted that as you observed, this is only one possibility amongst many, as just as if not more often, those experiences can also make them worse or more toxic.) And in terms of personal grief, everyone's journey is going to be different and valid and shouldn't be policed. However, on a larger societal level? I would say it's incredibly rare at best if the "suffering is just a necessary part of life and you must simply deal with it and actually, it's good and beautiful to endure suffering" ever winds up as more than manipulative rhetoric that exists to serve the interests of those already in power and discourage the "suffering" from thinking too hard about their situations and potentially rising up and affecting change.

[dynus]

Probably not as unhealthy as someone killing them all, though.

And I continue to be baffled at the stance some people take that the necessary self-sacrifice the Ancients make to save the world - which is in-game cast in nothing but a positive and admiring light, even throughout Endwalker itself - being yet another piece of evidence as to why it was necessary or earned in any way that they all be eradicated.

The game doesn't really give a good explanation of what 'sundering' actually entails because I honestly don't think it was killing everyone. From how Emet-Selch explained it in Shadowbringers, it sounded to me like she split the world at the time into fourteen equal parts, still alive but lesser. Which, I agree, is heinous, but until the game says otherwise, she didn't implicitly kill anyone when she sundered the world.

Just made death a thing they had no choice in anymore. Your mileage may vary if you think it's worse or not.

The initial self-sacrifice of the Ancients wasn't the issue, it was the act of forcing that sacrifice onto others was the new life or 'new souls' as Emet-Selch put it. And the continued 'this is the solution we're going to use from now on.' It baffles me that people forget that part. That the Ancients turned Zodiark into a fix it at the cost of life.

"Wallowing" in it also often allows one to call attention to injustice and unnecessary suffering, and thus address it and initiative positive change for the better. There are countless places in history where people initiated positive social change for countless people because they absolutely refused to just "grin and bear with it" and "just make the best of what we have" and "move on" from their stations in life and the suffering that came with it. This is something you cannot generalize on the level that Endwalker did, and it's one of the reasons Endwalker feels incredibly irresponsible when it comes to this topic. There's a degree of truth to this when applied to individuals who may be harming themselves unnecessarily via personal grief or grievances, but Endwalker itself is the voice here overwhelmingly tell us to apply this on a societal, existential level.

Hence, Lurina is right. It's nonsense and garbage that, regardless of intention, manifests as affirming the status quo and that if we try to imagine anything better, it's actually probably bad.

You misunderstand me. Wallowing means not doing anything about it. Calling attention to it is not wallowing. Wallowing is throwing yourself a pity party and not doing anything.

I disagree with a lot of what you're saying. I'm not going to go into my personal history, but things have happened to me that I really wish didn't and still damage me to this day. Have I experienced war and starvation firsthand? No. I am I doubt many of us on the forum have (and to those who have, my heart goes out to you). But I know people who have; my grandfathers fought in World War II, and through my grandmothers, I know how it changed them, not always for the better. Your use of disease, however, given the recent pandemic, rings hollow, however.

Endwalker wants me to 'grin and bare it', to smile in the face of death and find a kind of beauty in it. I do not find it comforting to be told this. I want to grimace and snarl and scream in the face of death. I want to find it absolutely revolting, because it is revolting, and because it is exactly that revulsion that will compel me to act with the greatest passion for change and care for other human beings..

And I disagree with you on that. Does death scare me? Absolutely. But it's part of life. It's unavoidable, and that makes me want to do everything I can to make sure when I meet it, I'm ready, and that those who love me are too. I want to leave this world better than I came in before I have to leave it.

This acceptance of death is a very Japanese mindset, and is also a big part of FFX, so it's not surprising it's here as well.

...I'm saying to promoting "wallowing" in suffering? Wallowing means lying around impotently, which is certainly not what I'm saying is helpful for anyone. I am advocating pushing forward in the face of strife in the same way that EW does. The difference in my outlook versus the game isn't about how people should act, at least not broadly, but rather what the game considers to be the nature of the human condition in the face of reality.

Apologies, I was getting passionate when I wrote that, and ended up talking past you. My bad.