Hi Tony. I could be interested in looking into Islam with you.
That's the attitude I got. But from my reading of Seneca's writings on how he dealt with his exile - worse than death for many - by relishing the world's natural beauty was so heart wrenchingly beautiful I even felt a slight sense of envy.
A note: Shifting between the two-modes is a considerable difficulty, for me and for others. I know of a person who lets people close to him physically attack him because of his religious beliefs in nonviolence, love and righteous suffering. To do good I feel people need to santify a nagging dissatisfaction within themselves. While that person may be perfectly happy with that, if extrapolated it's a very cruel world indeed with righteous sufferers on one side and a violent uncaring minority on the other.
Thanks for you post :-).
Here's my two pence. I prefer a two pronged approach to life, and happiness.
In the short-term, when life deals me cards I prefer a stoic approach. This way I can minimise the suffering caused by an inevitable situation.
Whereas, in the long-term I try to shed that stoic attitude as it can lead to calloused, insensitive moral skin and an apathy to my life situation. I know many pious people with this attitude and many more oppressed people who believe nothing can be done, and are content with that.
Instead I let my dissatisfaction guide me and try to leave the game life's got me playing for a more preferable one.
For example, music is one of the most powerful media, yet I know of not one EA related song, rap, etc. But there are hundreds on the Israel Palestine conflict; many for veganism etc. This has probably been addressed before but I (tentatively) think ethical belief systems need a balanced diet to survive, and EA is eating too much of the logical food. Other ways are possible too, take the London activist Chakabars as an example, who has propelled to stardom from obscurity with memes and mini-essays to promote a plant-based diet and anti-colonial worldview. I'm probably being cynical, but sometimes I feel too much emphasis is put on drawn out, watertight arguments - which should, to me atleast, be in the small print for people who haven't got time to read them all.
I think what you've done is compelling. Visual is visceral. Take Stabilo's recent advertising campaign 'Highlight the Remarkable'. Or the recent mining crisis, a near-textbook case of scope insensitivity. The challenge is in reducing numbers to names, and the people who can do that - designers, creatives etc. are I think, severely lacking in EA; so keep it up! But I think that attitude should go beyond graphs to metaphors, mottos and the like; though in doing so there is a risk of a loss of rigorous thinking, something to perhaps consider.
A great resource for government CBA is Beckerman's Economics As Applied Ethics.