> He said little, but one phrase he did repeat more than any other was simple: "Any day you're breathing is a good day." To him, every day, every year, every one of the six decades past 1944 was a cherry on top gift.
My father, B-17 navigator, said he accepted that he was going to die in combat. The odds at the time of surviving were terrible (about 80% casualties).
He did survive (hence my existence), and told me that whenever he felt down about something he'd remember his buddies who died in the war and how he'd been given a chance to live through it, and he'd re-appreciate his life.
Upon his return to the states, the crews were led to tables to eat. There was nothing to order, the staff assured them "we know what you want." Sure enough, they did - steak, eggs, tomatoes, etc.
Upon return to civilian life, he said he was astounded by the triviality of peoples' everyday life concerns. They were going to live another day, what did they have to be concerned about?
This seems trivally easy to counter. Should the starving homeless person look at every day as a blessing? How about the sex traded slaves? "They were going to live another day, what did they have to be concerned about?"
I'm not trying to discount your point that you should have some gratitude or put things in perspective but happiness requires much more than just not dying. If nothing else your father had a wife and you as other hopefully joys in his life. Some people have no one.
Starvation and rape aren't everyday life concerns for Americans. Everyday life concerns are my car won't start, my date stood me up, will I get that promotion, I haven't got a thing to wear, the cabbie overcharged me, etc.
Going through any traumatic experience will change you in ways you can't imagine until it happens. It moves the bar to a point from which it will probably never fully come back, something will always be there to serve as a reference. To anybody who went through trauma looking at other people's lesser trauma looks like "trivialities". But it never works the same way the other way around. You can imagine lesser trauma but not really greater trauma.
> happiness requires much more than just not dying
Probably not for the people who don't have just the hypothetical appreciation of being alive but actually "cheated" death when it was all but certain.
> Upon return to civilian life, he said he was astounded by the triviality of peoples' everyday life concerns. They were going to live another day, what did they have to be concerned about?
Perhaps the key to a well-adjusted view of life is trauma? To show you how good the rest of life can be.
I've learned the most about life from "character building experiences". They are usually unpleasant. They could be as simple as somone telling you not to be stupid, or as complicated as finding lessons out the hard way.
The experiences give you the resolve or clues or whatever to avoid bad choices, or appreciate good ones. Or help others understand (if they're receptive).
My grandfather was a teenager during WW2. He was a Polish Jew and lucky to have seen the writing on the wall and fled eastwards when the Nazis invaded (almost the entire rest of his large family died in the holocaust - his only living relative was his brother, who died as a soldier in 1948 in the Israeli war of independence).
He had a horrible time during the war but eventually found safety as a refugee in the soviet union (after they put him to 2 years of forced labor in a coal mine). He met my grandmother in the Ukraine & together they fled to Uzbekistan where my mother was born a few months after the end of the war.
He used to say that during those time he fantasied about owning/operating a flour mill after the war, so that he could always bake bread and never be hungry.
He had a psychotic episode in the 70s and was put on medication that he continued taking his entire life afterwards. He was a deeply harsh, grumpy & unhappy person the entire time I knew him (roughly the last 20 years of his life). According to what my mother told me about her & my uncle's upbringing he would also be considered a terrible father these days (due to his own emotional/psychic state no doubt).
So I would personally put a strong recommendation against experiencing extreme hardships in order to "build character" - I rather my character remain unbuilt than experience war, genocide & forced labor camps.
Pretty much the same story here. My granda was a Polish teenager who got thrown into Stallinist right prison after surviving 5 years of German WWII occupation. I think the abuse there pretty much wrecked his psyche for life, with signs of mental illness and a pretty miserable character in general afterwards.
I tentatively agree that character isn't built by extreme hardships. But I do suspect that being shot at would determine what kind of a man you are, and there's no way to know that in advance.
For example, being a navigator, my father sat up front behind the bombardier. There's a plexiglass hemisphere in the nose. The Me-109's favorite attack plan was the head on attack (because the B-17's had a gap in coverage in the front). He said you can see the cannon flash as they fired at him (usually aiming for the pilots, who were right behind my father's position, thinking "how can they miss".
What would you do in such a situation? Nobody can tell in advance.
It seems obvious that living and pushing through real hardships can have highly variable impacts on people, depending on the person and the circumstances.
I suspect that one element that makes such experiences more likely to provide positive long-term impacts is perceived or real personal agency during the events in question.
If, during the difficult times, a person feels like they have some material influence over the outcome, and then the outcome is neutral or good, then it's more likely that the whole mess will end up being a net positive life influence.
Can’t you just read about others stories like this and put yourself in their shoes, I guess it’s enough.
There is suffering on an immense scale daily.
* Warning - Following is Graphic not for sensitive people *
For example I read from the comfort of my bed last night that a beekeeper just lost practically everything in Australia and when fires ripped through his property, to add insult to injury, when he went into the Forrest, all he could hear was a choir of moaning, wounded or dying animals. Koalas, kangaroos etc.
One can easily be grateful this day they didn’t experience something this catastrophic and that you’re not one of those animals. You can also realise one day you might be, so while your ok, make the most of it.
I have to admit that the warning (multiple) for sensitive people bugs me. I believe you mean well but I think this meme should die. If this is not overprotectiveness then I do not know what is. You are not leading people to fire, you are leading them to an article about fire. Everybody reading it should be happy they can just read about it and they do not have to live it.
Indeed, nothing says condescending and self absorbed like a disclosure that is code for "you may be too mentally challenged/fragile to participate in an open exhange of ideas, particularly these, child"
It seems you might be the one who is over sensitive?
I didn’t mean it to be condescending at all, I genuinely found that story super disturbing and I didn’t want to put others through it unless they wanted to be put through it.
The scene the guy is describing real sounds like an apocalyptic hellscape, if you’re not somewhat disturbed by it, then I’m not sure what to say.
I am not the one who finds what you wrote condescending but I would like to ask you a question - you seem to believe that being disturbed by an article is something bad - where does this come from? Is this common where you live?
It is just that this view seems to be gaining popularity and I don't get it. Being disturbed by something is an emotion and emotions serve to orient us. They are useful - both pleasant and unpleasant. Filtering out unpleasant emotions is like wearing glasses that only let you see things you like - why would anyone want that? Do you believe this is a good thing?
And BTW, if you find that article disturbing, I would really like to know what would you think about things like reading The Kindly Ones by Jonathan Littell... or visiting Auschwitz?
I think climate change and the current climate emergency will cause more unimaginable suffering, as bad as imaginable, if you read the article you’d might realise the fires are a result of severe drought predicted by climate scientists and caused by climate change.
Therefore I feel some will find this article disturbing because humans and many living beings have suffered horrible deaths in what I’d call unnatural ways (fire isn’t new to these animals, the intensity of the fires is). It’s also a glimpse of more very tragic times ahead.
I put a link to the article and a warning, what do you find so concerning about it ? Maybe people don’t read hacker news to feel like shit? Maybe some people are reading who have been directly affected too. So I gave people the option to skip that article and the details if they weren’t in the mood for it right now Who cares? I just wanted to give people the choice.
I agree with your point about good and bad emotions. I mean, I read the article in the first place.
If you have trouble seeing why some would find a forest full of crying animals who has been partially burned to death sad or troubling with more to come, maybe you’re someone who has trouble feeling empathy? Which is ok, but you would have trouble understanding people that might.
By the way, I am from Earth, just like you. I don’t see how that question was relevant.
>>> If you have trouble seeing why some would find a forest full of crying animals who has been partially burned to death sad or troubling with more to come, maybe you’re someone who has trouble feeling empathy?
I have no trouble seeing why some would find it troubling - what I do not get is why you would think this is a reason to put there the warning. You say it yourself - we are going to have a lot of problems. Shouldn't you encourage people to face them? Is it not a good thing to be disturbed by disturbing things? What is better - that people face the hard truths or that they cover their eyes in front of them? This is what bugs me on those warnings - that I perceive them as making our society more fragile and less able to handle the problems. There is such a thing as too much sensitivity. Coddling is not good for us.
Agreed. Assuming you're someone who is in this club, may I ask: do you think there's a material difference between being shot at in a military sense (for both, say, proper battles as well as what our people were subject to in Iraq, 2003 and later) and being shot at in the city sense (random drive-bys, verbal altercations turning into gunfire) ? Thanks for your consideration.
I'm not, hence I'm not fit to answer your question. I've been robbed at gunpoint, but the thief wasn't trying to kill me. It does still set my teeth on edge when someone comes up behind me.
When people would greet my dad with "hey, how are you doing?" he'd often reply "shot at and missed".
My father was a healthy, fit, active guy who suffered from a bit of acid reflux which turned into esophageal cancer which claimed his life at 46. I was in my early twenties and just starting my career when that happened. I'm 44 now, and that experience has shaped my approach to life and it's been both a good and bad thing. On one hand, it's made me live more in the now and not for a distant future. On the other hand, I experience guilt when I don't take advantage of every day I have.
My father, B-17 navigator, said he accepted that he was going to die in combat. The odds at the time of surviving were terrible (about 80% casualties).
He did survive (hence my existence), and told me that whenever he felt down about something he'd remember his buddies who died in the war and how he'd been given a chance to live through it, and he'd re-appreciate his life.
Upon his return to the states, the crews were led to tables to eat. There was nothing to order, the staff assured them "we know what you want." Sure enough, they did - steak, eggs, tomatoes, etc.
Upon return to civilian life, he said he was astounded by the triviality of peoples' everyday life concerns. They were going to live another day, what did they have to be concerned about?