Discussion Do humans suffer worse?

[Saponification]

As a result of being social animals, humans evolved the necessary ability of predicting others' behavior by observing and understanding the causes behind others' actions. However, evolution is not an intelligent force, and it has overshot in the process of selecting for this adaptive trait, causing us to have a psychological predisposition to look for the cause behind everything. Thus, we are effectively meaning machines, and it is for this reason that we have a tendency towards religion and attributing divine figures and purposes to the universe's and reality's mysteries. We cannot psychologically fathom the idea of there not being "anything" behind the world around us.

Sentient existence is horror. But it is for the reasons I explained above that I'm starting to think that humans have it the worst. Think of when an animal is being devoured alive. For it, it's a torturous experience, but it doesn't look for the meaning behind that experience. It doesn't ask itself "why" or "if", that experience is simply all there is. Furthermore, it lacks the capacity to abstract itself in hypotheticals, meaning it wouldn't imagine any pasts or futures where the torment isn't happening. The suffering just "is". As for us, our psychology adds another layer of torture into the mix.

Unless there're other animals who evolved to look for meaning and abstract themselves in much the same way we do (which, now that I think about it, there probably are. I would research it if I wasn't so lazy.), we may very well be amongst the most unfortunate out of all the species.

 

[orvreader]

I don't think it's that clear-cut; finding reasons is as much a great coping mechanism for humans as it is the cause of torment for humans. Rationalisation is a very powerful cope as we naturally find solace in causality and logic; so when we can discover/make up a reason for something, we are largely not disturbed by it; but that also means that when we can't find a reason to things, we'd be greatly disturbed. The ideal case is being someone who is smart enough to benefit from rationalistion, but stupid enough not to need much proof for believing in that rationalisation (so that we can rationalise everything without any problems). "When an animal see its loved one die, it doesn't get to think that it's god's plan" is what I'm trying to say.

 

[amor.dor]

I believe that we used to be more like automatons, like a camera that only captures movement. The problem arose when we started using fire to cook and developed agriculture, which gave us much more nutrients and energy for the brain to develop, as well as time for reflection. Neurons that only understood the outside world had so much energy that they began to look inward and perceive themselves. This was the true fall of human beings, who lost their animal paradise. And because realizing our finite and exhausting condition afflicts us, the human mind began to invent narratives to continue living. I believe that this is where myths and religion arose.

after all, it is said : If you have your why for life, you can get by with almost any how - friedrich nietzsche

 

[pthnrdnojvsc]

Most animals trillions died by being slowly eaten alive by other animals

Humans can suffer even longer than animals because medical monsters can keep you alive for decades in unbearable pain even though you want to die to escape the excruciating pain. They can keep you alive with antibiotics, iv, machines etc even if u are in constant being eaten alive level pain . For decades.

You can beg them all you want to let you have a lethal dose of morphine or Nembutal but they will never let you have that

Life is an extreme torture mechanism

Life has tortured a trillion trillion animals and billions of humans which are also animals

Even fish can suffer intense pain

The sunfish has 300 million offspring at one time most of which die very soon suffocating to Death inside the stomach of a larger fish

Fish Suffer Up to 22 Minutes of Intense Pain When Taken Out of Water

Each year, a trillion or so fish are pulled from the water, typically destined for our plates.

www.sciencealert.com

I tried holding my breath. After a minute I couldn't tolerate the pain and had to breathe. At around 60 seconds I thought I have to breathe this is unbearable pain. I kept pushing through the pain and horrible suffocating feeling. It took all my willpower. The pain kept increasing by a million times worse every second. Finally I couldn't tolerate it and longer and had to take a breath. The horror thought struck me "what if I couldn't breathe and had to keep suffering unbearable pain for 5 more minutes ?" A shiver went down my spine
An epiphany hit me. It's the brain that can create that level of pain and sustain it. How is this not a torture chamber?

Nothing is worth even 1 second of the worst pain

I and a fish never asked to be in this hell much less to be tortured.

 

[Forever Sleep]

I'm sure @Dejected 55 will argue that we can't begin to understand what animals think and experience- which is a fair comment. However- I agree with you. Some animals at least appear to accept their fate. Even when that fate is terrible. Some seem to exhibit a remarkabke calmness during the most horrific scenarios. That could of course be shock kicking in.

I worked in retail once and took the first aid training. One of my very first calls was unfortunately one of the worst you are likely to encounter. An elderly lady fell on the esculator. Fractured her cheekbone, multiple cuts. She was remarkably calm throughout though. I think shock tends to numb us to an extent. So- if either we or animals die in that moment- we may be too disorientated to be able to really think about what's going on and the injustice of it overall.

Less specifically than that though- I do absolutely agree with you. And, I love your term 'meaning machines.' I just find it curious if I'm honest. That our brains have maybe become so complicated that we're prone to things like depression. Some people argue that that still fits evolution. That depreesed can be split into 'deep rest' or rather- the need for it. That depression's triggers to hide and isolate protect us. I'd query that though. Isolating, reduced sex drive, lethargy doesn't benefit a social species! If it was supposed to be a mini hiatus to allow us to recuperate then- it backfired quite often! Similarly- more complex tends to mean more to go wrong so- I don't know how well it has really served us.

Ultimately though- we've actually done too well. Despite all the complications cleverness has brought us. We're all alive in the billions. To the point we are a victim of our own success.

Also- being happy isn't exactly necessary for survival. Even depressed and starving people procreate. Presumably creating more depressed and starving people.

I also agree with you. I can't see the human race going voluntarily extinct. Conditions however could become so difficult- with more threats from global warming, AI gobbling up jobs etc. that only the wealthiest or suvivalist people want to risk having offspring.

 

[Dejected 55]

I'm sure @Dejected 55 will argue that we can't begin to understand what animals think and experience- which is a fair comment. However- I agree with you. Some animals at least appear to accept their fate. Even when that fate is terrible. Some seem to exhibit a remarkabke calmness during the most horrific scenarios. That could of course be shock kicking in.

Touche'! As I often say, we don't have a good handle on what other humans think or why we think the way we do even in our own minds, much less any other human... so guessing at what other animals are thinking or feeling is a dice roll. Anyone remember that whole argument about how human babies feel no pain when first born? Why they do surgeries like circumcision without anesthetic because anesthetic can be dangerous to an infant and they figure the baby feels no pain anyway OR will not remember it even if they do... but think about that for a second... that might be horrifying to experience as an infant, newborn, and nobody will ever know you suffered it. So, deciding pain that an animal suffers or not based on how they react to it is another dice roll. I know for me, physical pain has to get really bad before I complain. Doctors usually tell me whatever I'm complaining about is WAY worse than they expected based on the level of pain I described, they think I should have been hurting a lot more once they find whatever problem and address it... but it takes a while for pain to register in me.

That argument assumed then... On a different note, some of this is also related to the comparing my depression or trauma with your depression and trauma and deciding one of us has it "worse" and, thus, deserves more sympathy or something. We have this discussion here all the time when someone says such-and-such depresses them and someone else comes in and says "you shouldn't feel bad because I have it worse than you!" and nonsense ensues and someone gets irrationally mad because they think someone else doesn't "deserve" to complain because their trauma is not as harsh as the trauma the complainer suffered.

There's no point in that comparison. Your trauma is your trauma. It bothers you however it bothers you. We all have different pain thresholds. You don't know how someone else truly feels with their trauma. That fish has trauma and so do you. Why does it matter if your trauma is worse? Is it even worse? On what scale and by what criteria do you measure?

Is a broken leg worse than a broken arm? Is a stomach ache worse than a headache? Is the loss of a child worse than the loss of a spouse? Do any of those questions need to be asked or answered?

 

[Forever Sleep]

Touche'! As I often say, we don't have a good handle on what other humans think or why we think the way we do even in our own minds, much less any other human... so guessing at what other animals are thinking or feeling is a dice roll. Anyone remember that whole argument about how human babies feel no pain when first born? Why they do surgeries like circumcision without anesthetic because anesthetic can be dangerous to an infant and they figure the baby feels no pain anyway OR will not remember it even if they do... but think about that for a second... that might be horrifying to experience as an infant, newborn, and nobody will ever know you suffered it. So, deciding pain that an animal suffers or not based on how they react to it is another dice roll. I know for me, physical pain has to get really bad before I complain. Doctors usually tell me whatever I'm complaining about is WAY worse than they expected based on the level of pain I described, they think I should have been hurting a lot more once they find whatever problem and address it... but it takes a while for pain to register in me.

That argument assumed then... On a different note, some of this is also related to the comparing my depression or trauma with your depression and trauma and deciding one of us has it "worse" and, thus, deserves more sympathy or something. We have this discussion here all the time when someone says such-and-such depresses them and someone else comes in and says "you shouldn't feel bad because I have it worse than you!" and nonsense ensues and someone gets irrationally mad because they think someone else doesn't "deserve" to complain because their trauma is not as harsh as the trauma the complainer suffered.

There's no point in that comparison. Your trauma is your trauma. It bothers you however it bothers you. We all have different pain thresholds. You don't know how someone else truly feels with their trauma. That fish has trauma and so do you. Why does it matter if your trauma is worse? Is it even worse? On what scale and by what criteria do you measure?

Is a broken leg worse than a broken arm? Is a stomach ache worse than a headache? Is the loss of a child worse than the loss of a spouse? Do any of those questions need to be asked or answered?

All fair points. I guess leaving the classification of other animals as intellectually inferior aside though, I suppose I have also asked the same question the OP has- fundamentally. Have we become too deep thinking and reflective for our own good?

Not even deep thinking really. We are maybe more under strain from constant surface chatter about stuff. Plus, the deeper questions don't always have definitive answers so- we go around in circles, tie ourselves up in knots or latch on to 'answers' without necessarily maybe questioning the things we maybe should question eg. Who benefits my believing in this theory? Are some theories in fact 'trojan horses' that look ok overall but have a bunch of less pleasant things tagged on?

 

[Dejected 55]

I realize I didn't tackle that part...

Can't speak to other animals obviously... but humans are wired to be puzzle solvers. We seem designed to look for connections. That is a good thing. It allows you to put things together in interesting ways to solve problems and it allows people to skip steps, something we have yet to be able to design a computer to do. A computer cracks a code by trying all the combinations... a human cracks a code by knowing the person who chose the password and thinking what that person is most likely to use and can ignore lots of combinations from the jump and sometimes get there faster than the computer does by brute force.

But... the downside of looking for connections is... we are wired so hard to find connections that IF we don't find obvious ones, we fabricate them. I saw this literally in play when I was at the mental facility. Many of us worked together on puzzles. There was one lady who was really bad at it. She would repeatedly force pieces together because they had similar color and similar adjoining shapes, but it was obvious they didn't go together if for no other reason than how hard she had to force them to connect... but every day I would wake to a bunch of ill-fitted pieces crammed together and spend the first portion of that time looking and undoing all her "work" and trying to move those pieces far away from each other so she wouldn't rejoin them.

People will find connections even where there are none. This can be a huge problem. It leads to conspiracy theories that people will not let go of... it leads to false assumptions and false theories that linger. Once an idea is out there, it is hard to stamp out even when disproven. It's why someone can get accused of a thing, then get conclusively exonerated BUT still people will give that person the side-eye and figure there "must be some reason" they were accused, so they must be guilty of something.

Connections.

People will force them if they can't find the real ones.

 

[Saponification]

I worked in retail once and took the first aid training. One of my very first calls was unfortunately one of the worst you are likely to encounter. An elderly lady fell on the esculator. Fractured her cheekbone, multiple cuts. She was remarkably calm throughout though. I think shock tends to numb us to an extent. So- if either we or animals die in that moment- we may be too disorientated to be able to really think about what's going on and the injustice of it overall.

It would seem the body does try to compensate for extreme suffering, at times. Adrenaline and shock, as you mentioned here, numb us to pain. Under excessive agony, the body usually shuts down. NDEs suggest the brain tries to accept its own demise and find some peace during its last moments. Lucky us.

Less specifically than that though- I do absolutely agree with you. And, I love your term 'meaning machines.' I just find it curious if I'm honest. That our brains have maybe become so complicated that we're prone to things like depression. Some people argue that that still fits evolution. That depreesed can be split into 'deep rest' or rather- the need for it. That depression's triggers to hide and isolate protect us. I'd query that though. Isolating, reduced sex drive, lethargy doesn't benefit a social species! If it was supposed to be a mini hiatus to allow us to recuperate then- it backfired quite often! Similarly- more complex tends to mean more to go wrong so- I don't know how well it has really served us.

My guess about the function of depression evolutionarily speaking was that it's actually our bodies telling us that we have failed to adapt—that we should remove ourselves from the gene pool. But yes, it's fascinatingly mysterious how depression is so common, considering it's not much more than a direct threat to one's own survival.

Ultimately though- we've actually done too well. Despite all the complications cleverness has brought us. We're all alive in the billions. To the point we are a victim of our own success.

Also- being happy isn't exactly necessary for survival. Even depressed and starving people procreate. Presumably creating more depressed and starving people.

I also agree with you. I can't see the human race going voluntarily extinct. Conditions however could become so difficult- with more threats from global warming, AI gobbling up jobs etc. that only the wealthiest or suvivalist people want to risk having offspring.

I would love for all of sentient life to go extinct if it meant the permanent end to suffering, alas, life has a record of surviving extreme conditions and massive extinction events, so it's not happening anytime soon.

 

[FuneralCry]

Yes certainly, human existence is the most terrible, dreadful abomination that is only suffering with no limit as to how much one can be tortured, to me existence will always be the most terrible mistake, every second of being conscious in this painful, deeply undesirable existence is torturous.

I'd just never wish to exist, to exist means to suffer and I suffer so much as a result of being burdened with this existence, humans really are the worst species and I always wish I could erase this existence so it's like I never suffered at all, the fact that humans continue to cause all this terrible harm, cruelty and suffering by deciding to procreate even know there was never a need for any of this and there was no disadvantages to never suffering at all truly is the most horrific tragedy.

 

[Saponification]

That argument assumed then... On a different note, some of this is also related to the comparing my depression or trauma with your depression and trauma and deciding one of us has it "worse" and, thus, deserves more sympathy or something. We have this discussion here all the time when someone says such-and-such depresses them and someone else comes in and says "you shouldn't feel bad because I have it worse than you!" and nonsense ensues and someone gets irrationally mad because they think someone else doesn't "deserve" to complain because their trauma is not as harsh as the trauma the complainer suffered.

There's no point in that comparison. Your trauma is your trauma. It bothers you however it bothers you. We all have different pain thresholds. You don't know how someone else truly feels with their trauma. That fish has trauma and so do you. Why does it matter if your trauma is worse? Is it even worse? On what scale and by what criteria do you measure?

Is a broken leg worse than a broken arm? Is a stomach ache worse than a headache? Is the loss of a child worse than the loss of a spouse? Do any of those questions need to be asked or answered?

Many questions are pointless, mine included. Specially considering I'm no neuroscientist and just a suicidal guy whose coping mechanism is over-intellectualizing. Oh well.

I like your point about suffering being unmeasureable. It's one of the reasons I'm really worried about non-human suffering, as opposed to just human suffering, like most people. There might be animals who perceive suffering more acutely than we do, ones with lower pain thresholds, etc. Point is, sentience is scary as shit, and people don't realize it from their privileged POVs.

I realize I didn't tackle that part...

Can't speak to other animals obviously... but humans are wired to be puzzle solvers. We seem designed to look for connections. That is a good thing. It allows you to put things together in interesting ways to solve problems and it allows people to skip steps, something we have yet to be able to design a computer to do. A computer cracks a code by trying all the combinations... a human cracks a code by knowing the person who chose the password and thinking what that person is most likely to use and can ignore lots of combinations from the jump and sometimes get there faster than the computer does by brute force.

But... the downside of looking for connections is... we are wired so hard to find connections that IF we don't find obvious ones, we fabricate them. I saw this literally in play when I was at the mental facility. Many of us worked together on puzzles. There was one lady who was really bad at it. She would repeatedly force pieces together because they had similar color and similar adjoining shapes, but it was obvious they didn't go together if for no other reason than how hard she had to force them to connect... but every day I would wake to a bunch of ill-fitted pieces crammed together and spend the first portion of that time looking and undoing all her "work" and trying to move those pieces far away from each other so she wouldn't rejoin them.

People will find connections even where there are none. This can be a huge problem. It leads to conspiracy theories that people will not let go of... it leads to false assumptions and false theories that linger. Once an idea is out there, it is hard to stamp out even when disproven. It's why someone can get accused of a thing, then get conclusively exonerated BUT still people will give that person the side-eye and figure there "must be some reason" they were accused, so they must be guilty of something.

Connections.

People will force them if they can't find the real ones.

Indeed, we're natural conspiracy theorists. Whether it's religion or flat-earth theory (fuck, flat-earthers are so stupid), we just love plots, meaning, stories, purposes... It was simply adaptive for us to have this psychological trait.