I think as we go on accumulating the number of days in our life, we keep on filling two kinds of bags - one, a bag of "been there and done that", another of " should never have been there and should never have done that". In my opinion, the quality or the measure of goodness of a life well spent is decided by the difference in the weights these two bags carry, but not by the separate "heaviness" of each.
And these bags fill not just because the wheel of time turns, but also because how intensely you "experienced" the life around you. For example, a raging alcoholic would have experienced a threshold of intoxication which a mild drinker might never know or understand. His intensity of experiencing inebriation surpasses that of the mild drinker, but possibly so his share of regrets with his damaged liver and who knows, personal relationships.
But what I am not sure about is, how should the alcoholic measure his situation ? I mean, on all those occasions when he must have gotten hammered, he must have enjoyed the thrill (or the relaxation) . So did he capitalize on the currency worth of paper to turn it into a rich experience ? Because if he had decided not to indulge in that moment, the equivalent amount of cash worth he still would have with him - but without the sequence of momentary blissfulness.
Or should he have played a far-sighted thinking gentleman and played along on the "safe" margins, to ensure his fun and frolic doesn't get the better of him in the long run. But is he missing out on something ?
Well, in the above example there are obvious factors to bias our decision against the drunkard, but there could be situations where the choices could become fuzzy. Like for example, 3 romantic dinner nights in a month, going out with family on expensive holidays etc. or keeping it a notch or two down and always being prepared for contingencies.
The question I wish to bring to notice is what would decide the quantum of regret in a larger measure- having experienced less or having escaped the "possible" outcomes of our "short-sighted happiness". Who calls it a day, with a heavier share of one of the bags vs. the other - the reckless or the methodical ?
And these bags fill not just because the wheel of time turns, but also because how intensely you "experienced" the life around you. For example, a raging alcoholic would have experienced a threshold of intoxication which a mild drinker might never know or understand. His intensity of experiencing inebriation surpasses that of the mild drinker, but possibly so his share of regrets with his damaged liver and who knows, personal relationships.
But what I am not sure about is, how should the alcoholic measure his situation ? I mean, on all those occasions when he must have gotten hammered, he must have enjoyed the thrill (or the relaxation) . So did he capitalize on the currency worth of paper to turn it into a rich experience ? Because if he had decided not to indulge in that moment, the equivalent amount of cash worth he still would have with him - but without the sequence of momentary blissfulness.
Or should he have played a far-sighted thinking gentleman and played along on the "safe" margins, to ensure his fun and frolic doesn't get the better of him in the long run. But is he missing out on something ?
Well, in the above example there are obvious factors to bias our decision against the drunkard, but there could be situations where the choices could become fuzzy. Like for example, 3 romantic dinner nights in a month, going out with family on expensive holidays etc. or keeping it a notch or two down and always being prepared for contingencies.
The question I wish to bring to notice is what would decide the quantum of regret in a larger measure- having experienced less or having escaped the "possible" outcomes of our "short-sighted happiness". Who calls it a day, with a heavier share of one of the bags vs. the other - the reckless or the methodical ?
No comments:
Post a Comment