2011-01-09, 03:11 AM
Eosian Wrote:On the subject of the truisms - We say "could have been worse" because better is the unlikelier of the two. Entropy exists, therefore the worst is always building up somewhere/somehow. Things break down, things dissolve, people die. The opposite never occurs without external influence therefore "could have been better" is not a probable natural outcome for most things. That aside we all know it could have been better, that's why it's being complained about in the first place, we point out it could've been even worse to again appreciate what breaks we did get. You didn't win the lotto but you still have a job, it could have been worse. Obviously winning the lotto would've been better than having a job, but a job is a nice thing to have when others are without.
Before things break down, they need to first be created; before people die, they need to have been born. If the end is considered undesirable by default, shouldn't the beginning, logically, be full of joy and laughters? Why is it that people, myself included, tend to dwell onto the sadness (by being conscious of it) whilst happiness, if any, seems ever always oh so short-lived?
That aside, when we do appreciate the worst not having been imposed on us, what makes it wrong to be pissed we didn't get what we wanted? Why should we be geared towards thinking "positively" and not rationally? That we should not cling onto the good things that didn't happen and hypocritically comfort ourselves with bad things that, also, didn't happen? That both things matter but we choose to only look at one, and not that both are factually meaningless? Why should we be biased? Why are we biased? Is it all for the sake of moving on and leading our life "positively"? Wouldn't we, then, be rather self-delusional?