User Tag List

View Poll Results: Fear: Too Much or Too Little?

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • Too Much Fear: Sheletered, closed in, safe, comfortable.

    6 18.75%
  • Too Little Fear: Reckless, Naivity, Experienced, Threatened

    21 65.63%
  • Can't decide.

    5 15.63%
123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 28

  1. #1
    Senior Member Nonsensical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    4,010

    Default Fear: Better to have too much or too little?

    Is it better to have too much fear and live a very sheltered life where bad things will seldom occur? Or to live a life without fear which can in turn mean that you are often naive and end up in danger and trouble occasionally?

    I know that you should have no fear to begin with, because fear is relinquished with awareness, but we all have it regardless. If you had to pick between the two options only which one would it be and why?

    Remember that having too much fear will limit the potentially good experiences you have, but also keep you away from harm and trouble for the most part.

    And having too little fear means you often run into danger and trouble. Getting hurt, going to jail, or hurting others are all possible outcomes of not having a lot of fear. Understand that you can be incredibly naive and that the world really is your oyster in which there are a lot of very good, but also very bad, things waiting for you.

    I'm only giving these two options because I want you to pick one. I know most of you would like to have a balance between the two, which is the best way to go, but let's assume you can't have a balance between the two.
    Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?

  2. #2
    Senior Member Nonsensical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    4,010

    Default

    I simply cannot decide.

    That is why I made this thread to see what others opinions are.

    Convince me!
    Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?

  3. #3
    Phantonym
    Guest

    Default

    I think I would choose too little fear. I'd like to try that "Ignorance is bliss" and "Live life to the fullest no matter what consequences" feeling for once in my life. I cannot imagine doing it indefinitely though. As you said, OWS, balance is preferred.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Nonsensical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    4,010

    Default

    I might agree with you on this one. But it is such a hard decision that it's still a bit fuzzy.

    Great start, though. It's a three way tie between 3 voters!
    Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?

  5. #5
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    Being fearless is somewhat idolized in many cultures. I'm not sure which to pick, so to debate I'll pick being fearful is better because it seems less likely to be picked in general.

    Because human beings have the ability for abstract thought, we are not limited by our external circumstances. In this way we can still explore and engage in life without external stimuli. Take Emily Dickinson for example. She explored a great deal of thought and meaning, and reached much of her potential all the while living out her life in one little home from which she rarely ventured. It is not necessary to place oneself in physical danger to be an explorer as a human being.

    We have a natural instinct to avoid dangers as all animals do. If you look at animals in the wild, they don't typically take unnecessary risks, but would prefer to sleep and eat in their little territories throughout their lives without eventful happening. It is primarily domesticated animals and people who actually seek out excitement. It simply isn't natural. What is the purpose of it? If we give in to natural instinct to self-protect we increase the possibility of longer life.

    So it is natural to do whatever it takes to remain safe. At the same time, we are not that reliant on our environment for growth. Combine these two ideas, and what is the purpose does taking unnecessary risks outside of the purposes we impose on it?
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  6. #6
    Senior Member Nonsensical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    4,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by toonia View Post
    Being fearless is somewhat idolized in many cultures. I'm not sure which to pick, so to debate I'll pick being fearful is better because it seems less likely to be picked in general.

    Because human beings have the ability for abstract thought, we are not limited by our external circumstances. In this way we can still explore and engage in life without external stimuli. Take Emily Dickinson for example. She explored a great deal of thought and meaning, and reached much of her potential all the while living out her life in one little home from which she rarely ventured. It is not necessary to place oneself in physical danger to be an explorer as a human being.

    We have a natural instinct to avoid dangers as all animals do. If you look at animals in the wild, they don't typically take unnecessary risks, but would prefer to sleep and eat in their little territories throughout their lives without eventful happening. It is primarily domesticated animals and people who actually seek out excitement. It simply isn't natural. What is the purpose of it? If we give in to natural instinct to self-protect we increase the possibility of longer life.

    So it is natural to do whatever it takes to remain safe. At the same time, we are not that reliant on our environment for growth. Combine these two ideas, and what is the purpose does taking unnecessary risks outside of the purposes we impose on it?

    Ooh, very good point. Internal vs. External. I hadn't thought of that, and Emily Dickinson was a great example, for she reached levels locked up in her room that most people who've traveled the globe could have never came to.
    Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?

  7. #7
    your resident asshole
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,411

    Default

    That's a tough one. I almost want to pick fearless because it seems you'd have more fun in life that way. If you spend your whole time in your safe place, too afraid to do anything, what are you really getting out of it? I don't think anyone would really be happy living that way.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Nonsensical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    4,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyGeek View Post
    That's a tough one. I almost want to pick fearless because it seems you'd have more fun in life that way. If you spend your whole time in your safe place, too afraid to do anything, what are you really getting out of it? I don't think anyone would really be happy living that way.
    Somebody could put up a perfect argument against you, too. That's why this is such a tough question...
    Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?

  9. #9
    your resident asshole
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    4,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OneWithSoul View Post
    Somebody could put up a perfect argument against you, too. That's why this is such a tough question...
    Yeah, that's why I picked "can't decide." :/

  10. #10
    Senior Member Nonsensical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    4,010

    Default

    Same here.
    Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?

Similar Threads

  1. Is it better to master one skill or be a jack of all trades?
    By Destiny in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-03-2015, 06:08 PM
  2. Do we have too much time to think about ourselves?
    By Illmatic in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-27-2013, 03:30 PM
  3. Would you choose to have a T or F child?
    By LucrativeSid in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 120
    Last Post: 12-15-2010, 09:39 AM
  4. [NF] Do NF's tend to have low, medium, or high self-esteem?
    By NashK in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 02-18-2009, 07:35 PM
  5. Replies: 42
    Last Post: 12-20-2008, 01:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO