A channel full of diagrams? This is neat, I love trying to figure out where my characters fall into the ones I encounter, such a great way to both get to know them better and gauge my understanding of them. The additions of the drives for each sector reminded me of the Enneagram (mainly bc of the Gut, Heart, Head triad), it also made it more easy to categorise characters into archetypes! Edit: Though I do have some Sage tendencies, I feel I mostly stay on the Artist axis, oscillating between Ruler and Innocent more often than not.
Hey great video, and while you didn't really use the first diagram in the rest of the video, I think you might want to change the labels for the stoic vs hedonist axis. If you look at them from the philosophical point of view, they aren't really diametrically opposed and can be combined just fine. Even looking at it from their common language definitions, they still aren't opposed. Something like ascetic vs indulgent/sybarite is more of what you were describing.
That's an interesting perspective! From what I've understood, it's in what their core values are predicated on. Stoicism values virtue as the greatest good and Hedonism places pleasure as the greatest good. I can definitely see them overlapping in terms of prioritizing self-autonomy and free will. That being said, your point still stands that it might be closer to ascetic vs indulgent from my given definitions. If I decide to revisit this diagram in the future, I'll address this for sure.
@@vizzyven You are correct about the ultimate good for both of them. It's just that these things are not opposed in the slightest, especially when we look at what Hedonism traditionally treats pleasure as, which is just straight up happiness. Most people get hedonism wrong and associate it with strictly physical pleasures. Food, drugs, sex, etc. And while some sects of hedonism do subscribe to that interpretation, it isn't the norm if you're talking to a philosopher that says they're a hedonist. Hedonism is just about maximizing happiness and minimizing pain in their many forms, so we can see it has no natural dichotomy with stoicism and in fact one can be a hedonistic stoic. Stoicism says that living a virtuous life, which means acting in accordance with nature, having control of your emotions, and not worrying about things you have no power over, is the way to living the happiest life. Stoicism is also often misinterpreted in the public eye as being unfeeling. As if the only way to control your emotions is to not have them, when really that is the worst way to be a stoic. A stoic should experience the full breadth and depth of emotion but have enough sense to not let it influence their decisions. They can proudly display their emotions, but they should not make decisions because of it. For example, one should not strike another just because they made you angry, but you could strike someone if it was prudent to do so, like you had prior knowledge that they respond well to being slapped silly and will correct their antagonizing behavior. To show restraint despite the fire you feel within and possibly showing is to be stoic, not to pretend as if it never fazed you in the first place by being stone faced. So, both schools are advocating for the method to achieving the happiest life, but hedonists are actually playing a fence sitter position. Pleasures can take any and all forms, pleasure is anything that leads to happiness. If living virtuously makes you happy, you are indulging in a pleasure. Hedonism is also about limiting pain, and we can see that in built within stoicism via controlling your reactions and not worrying about things outside of your control. Even a hedonist of only physical pleasures may still be a stoic in some manner, as they may interpret living a life in pursuit of these as being in accordance with nature and reason. Why shouldn't I pursue the things that make me feel good, so long as I am able to control how I react? Hedonism is rather nonconfrontational, as long as one is willing to admit that your motivations eventually boil down to pleasure and pain in some form. Your value system has to be really out there for this to not be an eventuality in my opinion. Even Ascetism, which is traditionally viewed as the natural opposite of Hedonism isn't really once we apply this lens, as the ascetic is happy most naturally via their limiting of physical pleasures and as such still fulfill the hedonistic principle. Masochists derive pleasure from pain, and so once again are still acting in a hedonistic manner. So on and so on. Something like nihilism fits the bill, saying that there is no purpose, there is no meaning, that nothing matters in life. That there is no fence to sit on. Which means pleasure cannot be the ultimate good, because there is no ultimate good. Though I am admittedly heavily biased. As a hedonist, I truly cannot comprehend a value system that does not boil down to pleasure and pain eventually. That one would actively act in a way that does not make them happy. Even when we appear to be choosing something for the greater good, for others and not ourselves, we take that on because we want to, that in some way it makes us happier knowing we are martyring ourselves, even if we never experience the things that may come from it like praise and thanks after the fact. IT is paradoxical to me to hate a decision you make from its outset. Perhaps you are in a lose-lose situation, but you choose the one you think will be less painful in some way, you hate it, but you hate it less than the alternative. To me, and this is likely projecting, hedonism is to be honest with oneself. To recognize the true driver of our decisions. We sacrifice for our community, for our children, for our partners, because it makes us happy to do so. The act itself may be painful, but we think it will lead to a greater amount of happiness or less amount of pain in the end, and as the source of it, we ourselves become happy because of it. At least that is the hope, plenty of sacrifices are made in vain. That in the end it isn't a philosophy at all, it is the starting point from which others branch, or maybe actually it is the end point, the goal of other moral and ethical frameworks under different guises.
I appreciate your perspective! The biggest disagreement I have with your comment is actually only about your comments on asceticism. I think your lens is still too western in mindset. If we go a little east, in the Buddhist understanding of things, this is part of its doctrine. Desire creates suffering, so to limit oneself is not for more pleasure or maximum happiness, it's to leave the cycle of reincarnation, which is not a happy or pleasurable pursuit. It's about not having desire, that's part of how to get to enlightenment. If you think it's about getting some form of pleasure, you're missing the point of the teachings. Thank you being upfront about your position. I actually would classify myself as some type of hedonist as well, so I think that many people act in accordance with hedonism even if they don't know they do. I think in the grand scheme of things, it's a very straight forward philosophy, if you want to call it that, to do what feels good and avoid the bad is very integral to our nature. I think we do run into issues as technology progresses, everything becomes easy to obtain and what we want or what feels good, may not actually be what we need or what is best for human thriving. The ease of access in convenient, cheap fast food, practically any type of content you want to see online, and the overall decline in mental health especially following the pandemic are all indicative of a larger problem with our current value system. I strongly believe that we're encouraged to consume and not question what it is we're being fed. Whether that's misinformation or straight up agitated propaganda to keep us uninformed, upset, and stuck being cogs in the system. I think when you take the time to look at what you desire, that can help narrow things down to, in hedonistic terms, get more pleasure out of life, and I do think that life should be pleasurable but not just for myself, but I digress.
@@vizzyven I appreciate the discussion! I'm about to have a moment of rambling though. I agree, my lens is too western. I see Ascetism as another form of Hedonism. Hedonism is not only the idolization of pleasure or happiness, but also the limiter of pain in equal regards. Some sects advocate for the limiting of pain above the gain or engenderment of pleasure. That for any amount of pain to enter the universe, an inordinate amount of pleasure would be needed to equate for it. That if we have 1 million pleasure over 5 pain, we have a ratio of 200000, and if we increase the pain by 1 we'd need 200,000 pleasure to get back to where we were. Or maybe it's the opposite, that for every pleasure you open yourself to innumerous new opportunities for pain. Either way, better to not feel at all, than to have felt this thing at all. And I'll say it again, but with my chest now, I'm projecting here. I don't see how once you peel the layers of yourself back. After you justify the why you feel the way about things. That everything doesn't just lead back to pride. My pride is hurt, my pride is stoked. Which did you feel more strongly about? Did the pain leave you stunned? To know what it feels like to have no warmth? To never know the love of a mother's embrace? To look around yourself and feel destroyed by the overwhelming fear of missing out? To have missed out on a feeling integral to knowing what it is to be human? To have to go through life grasping with information you were never told how to process? To lack innately the ability to sort this information? This is not me saying everyone that chooses to limit pain has mommy issues. When you first tasted success, did it leave you in bliss? Did you look out across the ocean of achievement and smile? To see the appreciative faces of those around you and know you are the source of their smile in this moment? To not care about the downtrodden faces of those beneath you? Of the defeated and conquered? How you still don't notice the innocent bystanders that were caught in the crossfire? This is not me saying everyone that advocates for the advancement of pleasure is a cruel conqueror. Hedonism isn't worth talking about, it should be something innately understood once a person does self-reflection. Once one becomes honest with themselves. That it fits and flows with everything. That all roads start and end here. That there is little wisdom in its discussion beyond recognition. It is not philosophy, it is being. And I'll say it again, I'm projecting here. That I may have a warped and damaged sense of pride. That I may be missing the cog in my microscope to shift the lens. That with all the reading, with all the introspection it leads back to me, myself, and I. At the selfishness within. At how you become more unsure as the evidence keeps mounting up. You must have made a blunder in judgement somewhere. That the ultimate question we ask ourselves every moment is what do I think will lead to the greatest amount of happiness in the long run? That maybe happiness isn't simply equal to pleasure but is the ratio of pleasure to pain. That the Ascetic sees me proudly saying how everything starts and ends with hedonism and thinks to themselves what a fool they (Jonny) are. That this is the cycle they are trying to break free from. This is what it means for a soul every time it enters a new prison. That it will always see that everything leads back to hedonism, to pride. That everything starts there. That it will always grow unsure of itself as the evidence becomes overwhelming. That maybe they know I know it's the cycle and that I'm too afraid to let go. That enlightenment is suicide in its most ethical form. That you remove yourself from the equation. That 1 million pleasure over 5 pain is now at 4 pain, so the ratio has increased. But, oh no! Why did I do that? Why do I think removing myself from the cycle is good? If I left, wouldn't my pleasure leave with me too? Is the ratio still the same without me? Did I actually do anything with my removal? To think with I is to have pride, to not think with I is to be dead. If you can truly think without I, you have lost yourself and are dead. You have let the concept of you flow on, leaving a corporeal form behind. That it is an act of selfishness and pride to be enlightened. By leaving the cycle, you protect the pride of your future selves, and thus have acted in your best interest. Pride is desire. Did I actually break the cycle or must I walk the road again? That with each pass of the cycle my pace quickens, from a walk to a canter to a gallop to a sprint. Until I can't keep pace and break and can move no more. I'm exhausted and just want to be free of this circle. Was I foolish for thinking I could break the cycle, or was I foolish for not trying sooner? True Enlightenment is seeing this eternal internal monologue and realizing it is Sisyphean. The cycle is not a circle. It is a mountain. That the boulder is our pride. That the path is every philosophy that entails a value system. That the only philosophical problem worth addressing is whether I choose to die in this moment or not is just another form of what can I do to make myself the happiest going forward. Asceticism is like when the boulder falls back to the base of the mountain. It is still a part of the cycle. There is no breaking it. There is no leaving it. There is no being apart from the cycle. There is only being a part of the cycle. The Hedonist is the first dimension, always with the boulder. The second dimension is the Ascetic, seeing themselves with the boulder on the cyclical path. The Absurdist is the third dimension, seeing themselves view the path. Hedonism does not provide meaning to life; it is just how to live life. I agree that technology presents issues. I think the problem it creates for the value system is that it makes it harder to be a good estimator. We are imperfect calculators of the ratio. Technology can make it harder as we become exposed to an influx of information. Our tiny little calculator that was already struggling to calculate the output gets even more bogged down. People can become blinded by a sudden influx of pleasure, unable to recognize the amount of pain the action also incurs. They still act as hedonists, but the calculation just got harder, and one must become capable of taking it in without getting lost in the sauce. We went from arithmetic to algebra and solving for x. Did you solve for x before or after the initial calculation? Are we capable of solving for x before the result is known? Is it just algebra or is it actually an ever-expanding tree of nested if then else? I agree life shouldn't be just about my pleasure. I was trying to convey that when I said that about why we make sacrifices. Though it ultimately turns back on ourselves, our act engenders happiness for the rest of the group. Though we feel the pain of taking on the burden, the feelings or the thought of those feelings that the group gains is reflected back on ourselves. That is the bargain made within the mind as it chooses to sacrifice itself. There is no divorcing self without suicide in some capacity. That as much as you try to see things from other perspectives, they still come through your frame. So, we may try to increase other's happiness, but the decision is ultimately led by our own happiness and pride. I agree that narrowing your desires makes it easier to get more happiness out of life. As more history is built with the desire, the algebra becomes easier to estimate, meaning you make more informed decisions by staying with what you know. This is also why we can become slaves to consumption that don't question. It is easy to exist when you know the outcome of the interaction from the outset. This makes choice easy to optimize for. When you expand, you open yourself to the unknown. It may be better, it may be worse. It definitely isn't easier.
@@vizzyven love Jung and love anime. Glad the algorithm brought this to me. I honestly believe that anime brings in a lot of psychological and philosophical themes. One piece in particular could be a gold mine for you. Luffy being the ubermensch is my hot take. Being so free that he sets others free through his actions. Blackbeard is also my favorite character so a video on him would be great haha. There’s of course Pain in Naruto and his speech. Doflamgio’s justice speech kind of parallels with Kafka’s take on justice. Many routes to go down this niche if you so choose. Best of luck
This made me think of something I asked my friends at some point Best Outlaw: Pirate, Ninja, or Cowboy/Gunslinger? Best Fantasy Protagonist: Wizard, Vampire, or Fae? Best Apocalypse: Robot, Zombie, or Alien? Think there's a diagram in there?
Eren's arc deals with the loss of control that his society faces as a result of the titans. As he progresses, he gets more power and thus more ways to control what he wants the world to be. If he wants to lead a war, he will, and he does. Though, of course, this doesn't end well for him.
I'm not a licensed therapist, so take my advice with a grain of salt, so here are 3 things for you: 1. Everything changes. To deny change is to deny life itself. People grow old, babies are born, and flowers bloom. You too must allow yourself to bloom. 2. The only thing in your control is how you choose to react to the world around you. Accepting your lack of control is the first step to improving your life. If you keep thinking how life should be, you'll keep running away from how life really is. 3. Challenge yourself to pursue what you want. If it's easy, it won't be satisfying, so pick something that will take some effort, but it shouldn't be something someone else chose for you. If you don't know what that is yet, that's okay. You might need to give it some thought before knowing what that really will end up being and seeing what your goals and values are, but just pick a direction and move. Staying in the same spot gets easier the more you do it, and eventually, you will realize how many years have passed and the people around you have changed, and you stood in the current of time instead of learning how to swim. I hope this helped in some way.
as a psych major and huge shounen fan, i love this
Thank you!!
Make a Part 2 with Anime Girls.
🫡 on it
This was such a great, concise crash course in Jungian archetypes. Very accessible for all audiences. Loved it on every level. 👏
Thank you very much!
I honestly thought that Magician would have went to Hisoka
Clever! But I was trying to stick to protagonists! Or at least deuteragonists
This video was an absolute treat~
I feel like I land directly in the middle of it all
Thanks a ton!
A channel full of diagrams? This is neat, I love trying to figure out where my characters fall into the ones I encounter, such a great way to both get to know them better and gauge my understanding of them.
The additions of the drives for each sector reminded me of the Enneagram (mainly bc of the Gut, Heart, Head triad), it also made it more easy to categorise characters into archetypes!
Edit: Though I do have some Sage tendencies, I feel I mostly stay on the Artist axis, oscillating between Ruler and Innocent more often than not.
Good video, glad the algorithm thought i would like it 😂🙏
Thank you! I appreciate it
i'd say i'm probably a mix of sage, explorer, artist, and lover!
I feel like I'm a mix of lover, ruler and innocent with a hint of magician🤔
this was an interesting watch👍👍
Thank you! Yeah, I feel like everyone is usually a combination of multiple categories.
Hey great video, and while you didn't really use the first diagram in the rest of the video, I think you might want to change the labels for the stoic vs hedonist axis. If you look at them from the philosophical point of view, they aren't really diametrically opposed and can be combined just fine. Even looking at it from their common language definitions, they still aren't opposed. Something like ascetic vs indulgent/sybarite is more of what you were describing.
That's an interesting perspective! From what I've understood, it's in what their core values are predicated on. Stoicism values virtue as the greatest good and Hedonism places pleasure as the greatest good. I can definitely see them overlapping in terms of prioritizing self-autonomy and free will.
That being said, your point still stands that it might be closer to ascetic vs indulgent from my given definitions. If I decide to revisit this diagram in the future, I'll address this for sure.
@@vizzyven You are correct about the ultimate good for both of them. It's just that these things are not opposed in the slightest, especially when we look at what Hedonism traditionally treats pleasure as, which is just straight up happiness. Most people get hedonism wrong and associate it with strictly physical pleasures. Food, drugs, sex, etc. And while some sects of hedonism do subscribe to that interpretation, it isn't the norm if you're talking to a philosopher that says they're a hedonist. Hedonism is just about maximizing happiness and minimizing pain in their many forms, so we can see it has no natural dichotomy with stoicism and in fact one can be a hedonistic stoic. Stoicism says that living a virtuous life, which means acting in accordance with nature, having control of your emotions, and not worrying about things you have no power over, is the way to living the happiest life. Stoicism is also often misinterpreted in the public eye as being unfeeling. As if the only way to control your emotions is to not have them, when really that is the worst way to be a stoic. A stoic should experience the full breadth and depth of emotion but have enough sense to not let it influence their decisions. They can proudly display their emotions, but they should not make decisions because of it. For example, one should not strike another just because they made you angry, but you could strike someone if it was prudent to do so, like you had prior knowledge that they respond well to being slapped silly and will correct their antagonizing behavior. To show restraint despite the fire you feel within and possibly showing is to be stoic, not to pretend as if it never fazed you in the first place by being stone faced.
So, both schools are advocating for the method to achieving the happiest life, but hedonists are actually playing a fence sitter position. Pleasures can take any and all forms, pleasure is anything that leads to happiness. If living virtuously makes you happy, you are indulging in a pleasure. Hedonism is also about limiting pain, and we can see that in built within stoicism via controlling your reactions and not worrying about things outside of your control. Even a hedonist of only physical pleasures may still be a stoic in some manner, as they may interpret living a life in pursuit of these as being in accordance with nature and reason. Why shouldn't I pursue the things that make me feel good, so long as I am able to control how I react? Hedonism is rather nonconfrontational, as long as one is willing to admit that your motivations eventually boil down to pleasure and pain in some form. Your value system has to be really out there for this to not be an eventuality in my opinion. Even Ascetism, which is traditionally viewed as the natural opposite of Hedonism isn't really once we apply this lens, as the ascetic is happy most naturally via their limiting of physical pleasures and as such still fulfill the hedonistic principle. Masochists derive pleasure from pain, and so once again are still acting in a hedonistic manner. So on and so on. Something like nihilism fits the bill, saying that there is no purpose, there is no meaning, that nothing matters in life. That there is no fence to sit on. Which means pleasure cannot be the ultimate good, because there is no ultimate good.
Though I am admittedly heavily biased. As a hedonist, I truly cannot comprehend a value system that does not boil down to pleasure and pain eventually. That one would actively act in a way that does not make them happy. Even when we appear to be choosing something for the greater good, for others and not ourselves, we take that on because we want to, that in some way it makes us happier knowing we are martyring ourselves, even if we never experience the things that may come from it like praise and thanks after the fact. IT is paradoxical to me to hate a decision you make from its outset. Perhaps you are in a lose-lose situation, but you choose the one you think will be less painful in some way, you hate it, but you hate it less than the alternative.
To me, and this is likely projecting, hedonism is to be honest with oneself. To recognize the true driver of our decisions. We sacrifice for our community, for our children, for our partners, because it makes us happy to do so. The act itself may be painful, but we think it will lead to a greater amount of happiness or less amount of pain in the end, and as the source of it, we ourselves become happy because of it. At least that is the hope, plenty of sacrifices are made in vain. That in the end it isn't a philosophy at all, it is the starting point from which others branch, or maybe actually it is the end point, the goal of other moral and ethical frameworks under different guises.
I appreciate your perspective!
The biggest disagreement I have with your comment is actually only about your comments on asceticism. I think your lens is still too western in mindset. If we go a little east, in the Buddhist understanding of things, this is part of its doctrine. Desire creates suffering, so to limit oneself is not for more pleasure or maximum happiness, it's to leave the cycle of reincarnation, which is not a happy or pleasurable pursuit. It's about not having desire, that's part of how to get to enlightenment. If you think it's about getting some form of pleasure, you're missing the point of the teachings.
Thank you being upfront about your position. I actually would classify myself as some type of hedonist as well, so I think that many people act in accordance with hedonism even if they don't know they do. I think in the grand scheme of things, it's a very straight forward philosophy, if you want to call it that, to do what feels good and avoid the bad is very integral to our nature. I think we do run into issues as technology progresses, everything becomes easy to obtain and what we want or what feels good, may not actually be what we need or what is best for human thriving. The ease of access in convenient, cheap fast food, practically any type of content you want to see online, and the overall decline in mental health especially following the pandemic are all indicative of a larger problem with our current value system.
I strongly believe that we're encouraged to consume and not question what it is we're being fed. Whether that's misinformation or straight up agitated propaganda to keep us uninformed, upset, and stuck being cogs in the system. I think when you take the time to look at what you desire, that can help narrow things down to, in hedonistic terms, get more pleasure out of life, and I do think that life should be pleasurable but not just for myself, but I digress.
@@vizzyven
I appreciate the discussion! I'm about to have a moment of rambling though.
I agree, my lens is too western. I see Ascetism as another form of Hedonism. Hedonism is not only the idolization of pleasure or happiness, but also the limiter of pain in equal regards. Some sects advocate for the limiting of pain above the gain or engenderment of pleasure. That for any amount of pain to enter the universe, an inordinate amount of pleasure would be needed to equate for it. That if we have 1 million pleasure over 5 pain, we have a ratio of 200000, and if we increase the pain by 1 we'd need 200,000 pleasure to get back to where we were. Or maybe it's the opposite, that for every pleasure you open yourself to innumerous new opportunities for pain. Either way, better to not feel at all, than to have felt this thing at all. And I'll say it again, but with my chest now, I'm projecting here. I don't see how once you peel the layers of yourself back. After you justify the why you feel the way about things. That everything doesn't just lead back to pride. My pride is hurt, my pride is stoked. Which did you feel more strongly about? Did the pain leave you stunned? To know what it feels like to have no warmth? To never know the love of a mother's embrace? To look around yourself and feel destroyed by the overwhelming fear of missing out? To have missed out on a feeling integral to knowing what it is to be human? To have to go through life grasping with information you were never told how to process? To lack innately the ability to sort this information? This is not me saying everyone that chooses to limit pain has mommy issues. When you first tasted success, did it leave you in bliss? Did you look out across the ocean of achievement and smile? To see the appreciative faces of those around you and know you are the source of their smile in this moment? To not care about the downtrodden faces of those beneath you? Of the defeated and conquered? How you still don't notice the innocent bystanders that were caught in the crossfire? This is not me saying everyone that advocates for the advancement of pleasure is a cruel conqueror.
Hedonism isn't worth talking about, it should be something innately understood once a person does self-reflection. Once one becomes honest with themselves. That it fits and flows with everything. That all roads start and end here. That there is little wisdom in its discussion beyond recognition. It is not philosophy, it is being. And I'll say it again, I'm projecting here. That I may have a warped and damaged sense of pride. That I may be missing the cog in my microscope to shift the lens. That with all the reading, with all the introspection it leads back to me, myself, and I. At the selfishness within. At how you become more unsure as the evidence keeps mounting up. You must have made a blunder in judgement somewhere. That the ultimate question we ask ourselves every moment is what do I think will lead to the greatest amount of happiness in the long run? That maybe happiness isn't simply equal to pleasure but is the ratio of pleasure to pain. That the Ascetic sees me proudly saying how everything starts and ends with hedonism and thinks to themselves what a fool they (Jonny) are. That this is the cycle they are trying to break free from. This is what it means for a soul every time it enters a new prison. That it will always see that everything leads back to hedonism, to pride. That everything starts there. That it will always grow unsure of itself as the evidence becomes overwhelming. That maybe they know I know it's the cycle and that I'm too afraid to let go. That enlightenment is suicide in its most ethical form. That you remove yourself from the equation. That 1 million pleasure over 5 pain is now at 4 pain, so the ratio has increased. But, oh no! Why did I do that? Why do I think removing myself from the cycle is good? If I left, wouldn't my pleasure leave with me too? Is the ratio still the same without me? Did I actually do anything with my removal? To think with I is to have pride, to not think with I is to be dead. If you can truly think without I, you have lost yourself and are dead. You have let the concept of you flow on, leaving a corporeal form behind. That it is an act of selfishness and pride to be enlightened. By leaving the cycle, you protect the pride of your future selves, and thus have acted in your best interest. Pride is desire. Did I actually break the cycle or must I walk the road again? That with each pass of the cycle my pace quickens, from a walk to a canter to a gallop to a sprint. Until I can't keep pace and break and can move no more. I'm exhausted and just want to be free of this circle. Was I foolish for thinking I could break the cycle, or was I foolish for not trying sooner?
True Enlightenment is seeing this eternal internal monologue and realizing it is Sisyphean. The cycle is not a circle. It is a mountain. That the boulder is our pride. That the path is every philosophy that entails a value system. That the only philosophical problem worth addressing is whether I choose to die in this moment or not is just another form of what can I do to make myself the happiest going forward. Asceticism is like when the boulder falls back to the base of the mountain. It is still a part of the cycle. There is no breaking it. There is no leaving it. There is no being apart from the cycle. There is only being a part of the cycle. The Hedonist is the first dimension, always with the boulder. The second dimension is the Ascetic, seeing themselves with the boulder on the cyclical path. The Absurdist is the third dimension, seeing themselves view the path. Hedonism does not provide meaning to life; it is just how to live life.
I agree that technology presents issues. I think the problem it creates for the value system is that it makes it harder to be a good estimator. We are imperfect calculators of the ratio. Technology can make it harder as we become exposed to an influx of information. Our tiny little calculator that was already struggling to calculate the output gets even more bogged down. People can become blinded by a sudden influx of pleasure, unable to recognize the amount of pain the action also incurs. They still act as hedonists, but the calculation just got harder, and one must become capable of taking it in without getting lost in the sauce. We went from arithmetic to algebra and solving for x. Did you solve for x before or after the initial calculation? Are we capable of solving for x before the result is known? Is it just algebra or is it actually an ever-expanding tree of nested if then else?
I agree life shouldn't be just about my pleasure. I was trying to convey that when I said that about why we make sacrifices. Though it ultimately turns back on ourselves, our act engenders happiness for the rest of the group. Though we feel the pain of taking on the burden, the feelings or the thought of those feelings that the group gains is reflected back on ourselves. That is the bargain made within the mind as it chooses to sacrifice itself. There is no divorcing self without suicide in some capacity. That as much as you try to see things from other perspectives, they still come through your frame. So, we may try to increase other's happiness, but the decision is ultimately led by our own happiness and pride.
I agree that narrowing your desires makes it easier to get more happiness out of life. As more history is built with the desire, the algebra becomes easier to estimate, meaning you make more informed decisions by staying with what you know. This is also why we can become slaves to consumption that don't question. It is easy to exist when you know the outcome of the interaction from the outset. This makes choice easy to optimize for. When you expand, you open yourself to the unknown. It may be better, it may be worse. It definitely isn't easier.
I'm probably in the soul category and a Explorer
Great video
Thank you!
@@vizzyven love Jung and love anime. Glad the algorithm brought this to me. I honestly believe that anime brings in a lot of psychological and philosophical themes. One piece in particular could be a gold mine for you. Luffy being the ubermensch is my hot take. Being so free that he sets others free through his actions. Blackbeard is also my favorite character so a video on him would be great haha. There’s of course Pain in Naruto and his speech. Doflamgio’s justice speech kind of parallels with Kafka’s take on justice. Many routes to go down this niche if you so choose. Best of luck
Nice Video!
Thanks!
Love it!
this reminds me of CS Josephs "temples" he could of borrowed from jungs archetypes actually
Interesting! I've never heard of that before, I'll definitely look into it. He may have been influenced by it.
Feel like you could have gone into your reasoning a bit more for each character, but good video overall!
Thank you! That's a fair point! I'll keep that in mind for next time.
@@vizzyven thank you so much!
This made me think of something I asked my friends at some point
Best Outlaw: Pirate, Ninja, or Cowboy/Gunslinger?
Best Fantasy Protagonist: Wizard, Vampire, or Fae?
Best Apocalypse: Robot, Zombie, or Alien?
Think there's a diagram in there?
I really liked your video well do e
Thank you!
Great!
im all as so are you my son
But why erin yager ?
Eren's arc deals with the loss of control that his society faces as a result of the titans. As he progresses, he gets more power and thus more ways to control what he wants the world to be. If he wants to lead a war, he will, and he does. Though, of course, this doesn't end well for him.
@@vizzyven i have innovation archetype, and i have iq above 170 and i am lost and now i am 24 , do you have any advice for me ?
I'm not a licensed therapist, so take my advice with a grain of salt, so here are 3 things for you:
1. Everything changes. To deny change is to deny life itself. People grow old, babies are born, and flowers bloom. You too must allow yourself to bloom.
2. The only thing in your control is how you choose to react to the world around you. Accepting your lack of control is the first step to improving your life. If you keep thinking how life should be, you'll keep running away from how life really is.
3. Challenge yourself to pursue what you want. If it's easy, it won't be satisfying, so pick something that will take some effort, but it shouldn't be something someone else chose for you. If you don't know what that is yet, that's okay. You might need to give it some thought before knowing what that really will end up being and seeing what your goals and values are, but just pick a direction and move. Staying in the same spot gets easier the more you do it, and eventually, you will realize how many years have passed and the people around you have changed, and you stood in the current of time instead of learning how to swim.
I hope this helped in some way.
@@vizzyven man that will change my life no kidding