I saw this one online a few days ago, and it really got me thinking:
Is the unexamined life a life worth living?
As I understand it, this question asks whether a person who is capable of truly analysing his own actions is truly able to better himself, or if the process of self-examination somehow corrupts the essence of the individual. Can thinking about oneself too much cause a person to lose sight of the bigger picture and somehow over-complicate things? Is just letting things be the better option?
Personally, I would say that I owe a large part of who I am to my ability to be self-critical. I know lot of people who don't do this and they seem perfectly happy though. I find this question hard to answer as I really can't imagine not being self-critical. I think that it falls into the category of Ignorance is Bliss. Would you prefer ignorance if it guaranteed happiness, or do you derive a deeper level of happiness from investigating things in greater detail? Personally the latter is my choice.
I have a strip I wrote and illustrated awhile back dealing with a person perception of reality after developing cap graws sydrome. The final words of his doctor were "The unexamined life is not worth living and the overexamined life is unlivable. What a beautiful night." An thats my basic take on the subject.
" See, for me it's hard to take someone seriously when they make broad, sweeping generalizations that conflict with my personal experience in the world. I suppose my main beef with conservatives is that- like dogs and…"
"I'm not sure this is the target demographic for the article (I'll get around to reading it someday). I'd imagine many of us were like that.
I was reading on the 11th grade level after 6 weeks in 4th so they moved me up to the 5th…"