[split] Ethics - parental responsibility re: children

[emjay]

In Buddhism there's the useful analogy of the 'two darts'... that is, distinguishing between the avoidable and unavoidable aspects of pain/suffering. The person hit by the first dart feels sensory pain, ie raw pain let's say, and that can't be removed, only endured. But the second dart represents the additional pain/suffering we often create mentally on top of raw pain, such as fear (that it won't end for instance, or that it will worsen or lead to this or that etc), exaggeration, delusion etc... that part is avoidable... if you basically don't feed it, or in Buddhist terms, aren't attached to it. So to deal with physical pain, this is what Buddhism teaches... ie that most people naturally are as if hit by two darts when it only needs to be one... ie no magic bullet to get rid of physical pain, the first dart... you just have to endure it... but oftentimes the mental baggage that goes with physical pain, the second dart, is far worse, and that part is avoidable.

I know you guys aren't talking about physical pain per se, but I think this speaks to any kind of suffering really; just our ability/tendency to make our suffering worse by the mental baggage we often pile on top of it.

I hadn't heard "two darts" before. That makes a lot of sense. 

No doubt it applies to emotional issues as well as physical pain. Like when you get depressed you get inactive, and the inactivity makes you feel guilty and angry with yourself. It's a terrible feedback loop.

Yep, that makes sense. In Buddhism, suffering has a much broader definition than what we'd typically associate with suffering (ie physical pain and obvious negative mental states) - such as the notions of impermanence and 'unsatisfactoriness', ie nothing lasts forever, so everything is, as you might put it, contingent, and is therefore subject to loss - but I figured this two darts example was one of Buddhism's more immediately relatable/less abstract/less subtle teachings, so thought it might be helpful here.

In case you're interested in learning more, there's a book on Buddhism that I think would specifically appeal to you. I was curious if there was anything similar to a Bible in Buddhism, as in a centralised compendium of the Buddha's discourses ('suttas'), and found that no there wasn't; a lot is preserved but not in a single volume akin to the Bible and not in any seemingly organised/structured manner. But the book I'm recommending to you, is basically the author's magnum opus, attempting to do pretty much that; to compile a selection of suttas from across the whole breadth of Buddhism, and into a logical, structured, and meaningful order, and with thorough and insightful commentaries on everything.

The reason I think it would appeal to you specifically is that it gives equal if not more focus to the traditional/religious (as in religion, as you defined it before, more about community etc than what is specifically believed) aspects of Buddhism... ie family life, rules for good living (essentially), community, ethics, its equivalent of virtues etc... ie it's written from the perspective, from the outset, of someone shopping for a religion and all that that entails from your sort of perspective. Whereas for me, my primary interest in Buddhism has always been in the philosophical and introspective aspects... the insights into the mind and psychology, rather than... or more than... the religious aspects. This book covers both in equal detail, and is a wonderful book, a great history and introduction as much as anything, but it's just clear from its structure that it has a different focus to a lot of the books I've read thus far on Buddhism, and more akin to your sort of perspective. Anyways, in case you're interested, the book in question is In the Buddha's Words: An Anthology of Discourses from the Pali Canon, edited and introduced by Bhikkhu Bodhi, ISBN 9780861714919.

It occurs to me that my cats feel pain and have hormonal or other physical changes -- obviously -- but don't pass judgement on themselves for it. The pain is just pain. There are some advantages to being a cat, I guess. (In addition to the free food.)

Another book I've been reading lately might have something to say on that. It's the most compelling book I've read on consciousness so far, Being You by Anil Seth, and a book that really attempts to address the hard problem/'phenomenology' of consciousness... well, where we're used to talking about the soft and hard problems of consciousness, it defines another type of problem, 'the real problem of consciousness', slap bang in the middle between the two. Whether you agree that it does address the hard problem is always going to be a matter of opinion, but personally I think it bridges the gap very well and makes a very strong case, but I would be very interested in hearing your verdict if you chose to read it.

Anyway, how it relates to what you've said, is that it has a chapter talking about animal consciousness, and talks about an interesting research finding where dogs for instance, do not recognise themselves in a mirror... which in humans is considered a key cornerstone in the development of the self and of a 'theory of mind', as in the ability to model other people's minds not just our own... suggesting then that some animals' experience of a self, if they even have one, may be very different than ours even when our intuitions, often anthropomorphic, suggest otherwise. Monkeys were another example. So yeah, very interesting, and well worth a read imo.