I think “see” is doing a lot of work here that needs to be unpacked, especially when talking about other people’s perceptions/actions. You need to distinguish between “don’t see” and “don’t prioritize fixing” or “sympathize but accept” or “think alternatives are overall worse”.
All the classifications you mention apply to “think about suffering”, while I’m really just talking about “see suffering”. As in, the way your perception works.
This is much more tricky than merely changing your opinion or morality.
Hmm. I’m not sure I can clearly distinguish between “see” and “think about” for this topic. There’s a lot of layers to cognition, and this kind of perception is well toward the “modeling/thinking” end of the spectrum, rather than the “sensory input” end. Maybe “recognize” or “notice” is closer to what I think you mean, but you may even mean higher—would the title “you too can react to suffering” have matched your thoughts?
I think that for myself (I’ll try to stay agnostic on my typicality or lack thereof), the lack of focus/perception on this unpleasant aspect of life is a direct result of choosing not to think about it most of the time. I do set aside time to think about it, and in those times I certainly remember and recognize suffering and consider what, if anything, to do about it.
Most of the time, though, especially in contexts where I have spent considerable time considering problems and options, my conscious perception cuts off before this specific instance really affects me. You can call it “denial”, “compartmentalization”, or other things, and you may be right. But I argue that’s very different from “not seeing”.
More importantly, how far, really, is the accusation of willfully not seeing (“you don’t see, but you can and you should”) from the accusation of not caring?
I think “see” is doing a lot of work here that needs to be unpacked, especially when talking about other people’s perceptions/actions. You need to distinguish between “don’t see” and “don’t prioritize fixing” or “sympathize but accept” or “think alternatives are overall worse”.
No no no you got that all wrong!
All the classifications you mention apply to “think about suffering”, while I’m really just talking about “see suffering”. As in, the way your perception works.
This is much more tricky than merely changing your opinion or morality.
Hmm. I’m not sure I can clearly distinguish between “see” and “think about” for this topic. There’s a lot of layers to cognition, and this kind of perception is well toward the “modeling/thinking” end of the spectrum, rather than the “sensory input” end. Maybe “recognize” or “notice” is closer to what I think you mean, but you may even mean higher—would the title “you too can react to suffering” have matched your thoughts?
I think that for myself (I’ll try to stay agnostic on my typicality or lack thereof), the lack of focus/perception on this unpleasant aspect of life is a direct result of choosing not to think about it most of the time. I do set aside time to think about it, and in those times I certainly remember and recognize suffering and consider what, if anything, to do about it.
Most of the time, though, especially in contexts where I have spent considerable time considering problems and options, my conscious perception cuts off before this specific instance really affects me. You can call it “denial”, “compartmentalization”, or other things, and you may be right. But I argue that’s very different from “not seeing”.
More importantly, how far, really, is the accusation of willfully not seeing (“you don’t see, but you can and you should”) from the accusation of not caring?
aaaand, I belatedly see/notice/understand your postscript
It was, in fact, not what I needed, and I also wish you good luck.