![]() | This article was the subject of an educational assignment in 2014 Q3. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Duquesne University/UCOR 143 Global and Cultural Perspectives (Fall 2014)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki. |
Priority 2
|
![]() | Suffering was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Good article nomination failed
I am impressed with the breadth of coverage of this article, as many different perspectives on suffering are presented. However, the presentation is fragmented by too many lists and too many single sentence paragraphs. These should be turned into proper paragraphs which form part of a logical structure. I have therefore added a "List to prose" tag.
Also, there is not enough references to support what is being said, so I have also added a "More sources" tag. Please make sure that a consistent reference format is used throughout (see WP:REF).
In addition, the English expression needs to be tightened. Please read the article carefully several more times, making improvements where possible.
I wish you all the best with your editing... -- Johnfos 04:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi Robert, how about we start with the definition and introduction. I would refine the opening sentences to:
Suffering is the subjective experience of mental or emotional distress, often associated with, but not synonymous with physical pain, instances of loss or difficult circumstances.
All human beings suffer during their lives, and therefore suffering has been a significant topic of discussion in philosophy and religion.
I'm aware that that doesn't say it all, so please add in what you think is necessary.
As far as structure of the article, what about four broad categories:
What do you think?
Equipoise 08:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Good categories, Equipoise! I would complete your list thus:
Concerning the Introduction and definition, this is the hardest part! I like your paragraph on significance, and would expand it a little. But your definition raises an important difficulty. The present definition in the article, from I don't know who, is far from perfect, but I'd say it is on the good track. You go toward 'a mental not physical pain' view of suffering, and that is a big big problem : at what point do you suffer from a tooth, let's say? As soon as it is unpleasant, I would say. Then, pain is suffering as soon as it is unpleasant. So there is suffering, and pain is just one form of it, like anxiety is one form of it. There is ambiguity on the use of the word suffering, sometimes it means mental distress, sometimes it means everything unpleasant. Same thing for pain: sometimes it means physical hurt, sometimes mental hurt. So, maybe we should begin by straigthening this out...
Robert Daoust 19:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Separate psycho from bio, sure... On definition, suffering is subjective, yes. but pain cannot be defined as an objective neural event (or then so can be suffering), as every pain scientist will tell you. The pin prick is an 'objective event' but what if it is on a dead body... Events and emotions are two different categories, and I am afraid that defining one by having recourse to the other is like defining an orange by its price on the market... I will come back tomorrow with a tentative definition, so that you will be able to agree or disagree on it... By the way, I reordered this page, because I had some problems finding your last messages... Robert Daoust 23:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
New Introduction is offered. The word 'uses' refers to what should be another of our categories:
Robert Daoust 21:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
The article states that suffering, by definition, includes an emotion of unhappiness or something similar, and states that suffering in and of itself is an emotion. I would strongly disagree with this - while suffering would likely make someone unhappy, I would not call suffering an emotion. I suggest that the article be changed to reflect this, and that it be removed from the category of emotions. - Lommer 04:07, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
What a load of crap. Please explain what you mean by stating that suffering is not an emotion. What is it and what evidence/academic work can you provide to support this statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.123.128.117 ( talk) 04:08, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Neuroscience has now pretty well isolated the "suffering centre of the brain". It's the anterior cingulate cortex (or gyrus). It fires up if a healthy person gets a dagger between the ribs, like several other centres (eg. primary and secondary somatosensory cortices and dorsal anterior insula) but, unlike these, it fires up when you recieve a rejection cue too. That is, the anterior cingulate cortex is active in the presence of both physical and socially inflicted suffering. Would it be appropriate for someone to contribute an essay on the neuroscience of suffering, do you think?
-- Anthony Cole 19:40, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Boredom
Aren't "suffering" and "boredom" quite different? - David Stewart 09:14 28 May 2003 (UTC)
Sadness
Question: Why do we cry when we are sad? What happens physiologically to cause crying and what is the evolutionary purpose to tears?kpa
I've seen sad in the "uncool" sense linking here. Does that need a separate article, or is there somewhere I could redirect the link to? 212.159.61.65 17:47, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
This "sadness = suffering" is anti-Western. Is sadness a Western cultural artifact? What about redirecting to grief or to despair? There seems to be enough consensus here to merit a new approach to sadness.
Miscellaneous
Do we not need to include something on the 3 different types of suffering - deliberate accidental and natural?
Collaboration
I am looking for at least one collaborator in order to bring eventually a major edit to this article.-- Robert Daoust 21:38, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Suffering makes man think [Proverb]
Old Japanese saying in the Inn of the sixth Happiness see Wisdom -- 83.70.70.171 20:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Suffer = allow
Shouldn't there be something in here about how the word suffer can also mean allow, such as in 'suffrage' ? .. perhaps how the words are related? How the meaning changed?
Suffering is a tool, suffering is a means
Just for the sake of curiosity, Google has 18,000 instances of "suffering is a tool" and 38,000 instances of "suffering is a means"
The article does mention negative utilitarianism, but it is missing some quite large bits of information on movements to use technology to end suffering in sentient life, as detailed in The Hedonistic Imperative and as the mission of the Abolitionist Society and the Abolitionist movement and David Pearce. I'll try to add this to an existing section or add a section sometimes in the near future on this subject.-- Gloriamarie 21:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
User:67.185.93.158 added the words that are struck in the following paragraph of the article introduction:
- Suffering may be called physical or mental, depending on whether it is linked primarily to a body process or a mind process. Examples of physical suffering are pain (as a sensation), nausea,
cancer and other types of illness, paralysis,breathlessness, and itching. [1] Examples of mental suffering are anxiety, grief, hatred, and boredom. [2]
It seems necessary to distinguish between physical and mental suffering, because people often make the distinction. Usually physical suffering is understood as physical pain, and mental suffering is understood as ...mental suffering. The initial version here above wanted to show that there are other physical suffering than pain: for instance breathlessness, which is not considered as a pain by pain specialists, but which is surely unpleasant and aversive, a suffering in the broad sense, and a physical rather than mental suffering. However, the user's addition above highlights a problem with the initial version: are we to consider the 'types' of suffering, or the 'causes' of suffering. The initial version attempted to speak of types of feeling rather than causes of feeling, in order to remain closer to the subject. For instance, anxiety is a type of suffering, while the threat of loosing a job or a football game is a cause of anxiety, i.e. of suffering. In other words, the user's addition may be right, but then we should also add other sources of physical and mental suffering, and this would not be really useful. I think the real problem here has to do with linguistic muddle. Then, I believe the whole paragraph should be removed, and the paragraph further down beginning with "The words pain and suffering can be confusing" should take its place. What is valuable in the content of the removed paragraph could be reinserted somewhere else later, perhaps, under section "Biological, neurological, psychological aspects". -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 19:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
References
Pain is currently Wikiproject Medicine Collaboration of the Week. From the top of the Pain article, "This article is about pain as a sensation. For pain in a broader sense see Suffering". If any editors here, in addition to Robert, would like to contribute to Pain you may assist in creating an accurate portrayal of human misery. (This sort of thing looks really good on a CV.(humour)) SmithBlue ( talk) 06:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Robert et al
I've just visited this page for the first time in a while. Can I congratulate you on the elegance and parsimony of your descriptions - not to mention their scientific rigor? Bravo! More please. Anthony ( talk) 08:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Per Robert Daoust's request for me to motivate my change for epicaricacy, let me just say this: Why use a German word when an English one is available. -- evrik ( talk) 17:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, no.
Schadenfreude (IPA: [ˈʃaːdənˌfʁɔʏ̯də] is a German word meaning 'pleasure from misfortune'. It has been borrowed by the English language [1] and is sometimes also used as a loanword by other languages.
This is the English wiki, and not the German wiki. -- evrik ( talk) 17:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Are you saying the wikipedia article on schadenfreude is wrong? -- evrik ( talk) 18:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Schadenfreude (IPA: [ˈʃaːdənˌfʁɔʏ̯də]) is enjoyment taken from the misfortune of someone else. The word has been borrowed from German by the English language [2] and is sometimes also used as a loanword by other languages.
Except that the citation you used, > Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary says its German. -- evrik ( talk) 20:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
The following external links were included under section Suffering#Selected bibliography
They cannot remain there because they are not 'books': they should rather be included under a section called External links. However, they cannot either figure under External links because of the following reasons. The first link is to an organization that deals with physical pain rather than with pain in the sense of suffering. The second link is already mentioned in the text and doesn't rquire to be mentioned again. The third or forth links may be to valuable websites but shouldn't these also be 'notable'? -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 14:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
This article claims: "Suffering (pain, unpleansantness) and pleasure (happiness, pleasantness), the former being called negative and the latter positive, are the two affects, or hedonic tones, or valences that psychologists often identify as basic in our emotional life." There is a great need for describing other approaches to "basics of emotional life":), for example: what about the conception of egzoergic(spending energy)and statergic(sparing energy) modes of behaviour? In this example egzoergic replaces positive pole and statergic would replace negative pole of behaviour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fonfeluch ( talk • contribs) 01:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I strongly object the statement "All sentient beings suffer during their lives", it defies imagination and defines sentience. -- UltimateDestroyerOfWorlds ( talk) 21:19, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Physiology, Somatopsychic I've put the terms here, but I still don't know what to do with them here.
User:23dx5assd added the following to section Biology, neurology, psychology: "Recently study also suggests that human attitudes towards suffering is the origin of the attitudes towards animal welfare [3]."
I am not sure at all about the appropriateness of that edit. According to me, first, it looks like a tautology, second, it does not belong to the section where it figures, and third, I did not find in the cited work such a statement. I undid the edit with a note about this third reason, and User:23dx5assd reinstated it with the following explication: "see page 263-266 Conclusions, its a refrase of the statments to avoid copyright issues. the conclusion is also in current wikipedia article 'animal welfare'".
I still cannot find the differently phrased statement on pages 263-266, which are quite interesting besides. I cannot clearly see that conclusion either in article animal welfare. So, I am asking User:23dx5assd to come here and discuss that edit. -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 22:18, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
1)OK here are two of the original sentences in the work: 'Avoidance of animal suffering is commonly know as animal welfare'. 'Avoidance of animal suffering and reverence for animals are two fundamentally unrelated types of attitudes towards animals.'page 264 there are more information like, you need read in the context 2)Attitude study are very often found in psychological research 23dx5assd ( talk) 04:08, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
References
i dont get how inersent people suffer for no reasen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.250.191 ( talk) 16:22, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
A few notes for a future paragraph on Islam: the faithful must endure suffering with hope and faith, not resist or ask why, accept it as Allah's will and submit to it as a test of faith (Allah never asks more than can be endured), work to alleviate suffering of others and one's own. -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 17:02, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
User BillMoyers has contributed a few sentences that are welcome in that they expand a too short section on Judaism and Christianity. As a view on suffering from the perspective of those religions, however, the section is still wanting a lot. Saying all in a few sentences is not easy. Let us hope more is to come.
Notice:
User:Robert Daoust is pushing the use of the word 'unpleasant' in this article, despite its falsehood. 'Unpleasant' means 'not pleasant', or at most, a very weak form of suffering, which is hardly the same thing as the word 'suffering'. He is also violating
WP:OWN. ...Not that anyone is actually likely to read this talk page other than Robert Daoust himself.
Potentialeverpresent (
talk)
08:27, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
The article introduction has the following sentences: "Suffering, or pain in a broad sense,[1] may be an experience of unpleasantness and aversion associated with the perception of harm or threat of harm in an individual." and "Suffering may be physical[3] or mental.[4]" Those sentences were previously written thus: "Suffering, or pain in a broad sense,[1] may be described as an experience of unpleasantness and aversion associated with the perception of harm or threat of harm in an individual." and "Suffering may be categorized as physical[3] or mental.[4]" A user removed 'redundant' terms, invoking the WP:Refers essay. My question : is it an improvement in this case to remove the 'redundant' terms? My opinion is that the terms "described as" and "categorized as" are indispensable because suffering cannot be defined but only approximately described, and suffering is not physical or mental but rather is often categorized as such. -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 17:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Jay Kirk ( https://www.english.upenn.edu/People/JayKirk) would like to speak to editors of this article. You may contact him at jaykirk@comcast.net. -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 14:59, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
The following keep appearing at the bottom of this page for unknown reason, therefore here is a dump section just for it :
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 7 external links on
Suffering. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:46, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
User:Rahong has twice deleted the word "may" from the section of this article relating to BDSM. It's quite evident that not all BDSM practices involve suffering: take, for example, animal roleplay. When I pointed this out to Rahong on their talk page, giving an example in point, they reacted by deleting my comment and trashing the animal roleplay page thus, which I thought was a bit of an overreaction; their edit comments also seem rather intemperate to me. I've now restored the word "may" one more time: I invite Rahong to take it to talk here if they disagree. -- The Anome ( talk) 17:24, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
THIS ARTICLE DISPLAYS NO UNDERSTANDING OF THE ENGLISH WORD SUFFER. This is a proposed start for someone with the proper background, although here I refer to the two definitions of suffering using physical rather than emotional examples. Does anyone have an "emotional" pair at hand?
Any discussion of suffering has to distinguish between its two radically different meanings. To suffer means simply to experience or undergo, as in the following sentence written by Barry Unsworth in “Sacred Hunger,” [ref] winner of the prestigious Booker Prize in 1992. [ref]
In a discussion of human emotion, there is no need to linger on this meaning. Its second meaning is to experience intense or unendurable misery, as in the following from the same novel for comparative purposes.
It is the latter meaning of suffering that has been the subject of religion and philosophy and medicine doubtless many millenniums before human beings acquired writing. Intense pain is experienced in the same part of the brain whether physical or emotional, but physical and emotional suffering are currently treated quite differently in the developed world.
ANYONE WITH A STRONG BACKGROUND IN PSYCHOLOGY WHO COULD CONTINUE FROM THIS, OR WITH ANOTHER CLEAR OPENING? 2601:644:8480:24A1:7846:D16B:4802:E4DD ( talk) 01:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
Displeasure. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 20#Displeasure until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Steel1943 (
talk)
05:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
From my understanding, both psychogenic pain and psychological pain all refer to pain that is emotional/affective in nature. Psychogenic pain is pain without a known etiological cause, psychological pain is pain that is usually colloquially meant to refer to pain with an internal/subjective etiology that causes pain -> suffering is affective/emotional pain. Having one page, rather than 3, might lead to a stonger article and less confusion as to whether these are related topics or not. Mr Robot 2020 ( talk) 10:27, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
==Wiki Education assignment: ENG 372 Comparative and World Literature==
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2022 and 1 May 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Abdallahtourbah,
ReineMansour (
article contribs).
![]() | This article was the subject of an educational assignment in 2014 Q3. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Duquesne University/UCOR 143 Global and Cultural Perspectives (Fall 2014)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki. |
Priority 2
|
![]() | Suffering was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Good article nomination failed
I am impressed with the breadth of coverage of this article, as many different perspectives on suffering are presented. However, the presentation is fragmented by too many lists and too many single sentence paragraphs. These should be turned into proper paragraphs which form part of a logical structure. I have therefore added a "List to prose" tag.
Also, there is not enough references to support what is being said, so I have also added a "More sources" tag. Please make sure that a consistent reference format is used throughout (see WP:REF).
In addition, the English expression needs to be tightened. Please read the article carefully several more times, making improvements where possible.
I wish you all the best with your editing... -- Johnfos 04:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi Robert, how about we start with the definition and introduction. I would refine the opening sentences to:
Suffering is the subjective experience of mental or emotional distress, often associated with, but not synonymous with physical pain, instances of loss or difficult circumstances.
All human beings suffer during their lives, and therefore suffering has been a significant topic of discussion in philosophy and religion.
I'm aware that that doesn't say it all, so please add in what you think is necessary.
As far as structure of the article, what about four broad categories:
What do you think?
Equipoise 08:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Good categories, Equipoise! I would complete your list thus:
Concerning the Introduction and definition, this is the hardest part! I like your paragraph on significance, and would expand it a little. But your definition raises an important difficulty. The present definition in the article, from I don't know who, is far from perfect, but I'd say it is on the good track. You go toward 'a mental not physical pain' view of suffering, and that is a big big problem : at what point do you suffer from a tooth, let's say? As soon as it is unpleasant, I would say. Then, pain is suffering as soon as it is unpleasant. So there is suffering, and pain is just one form of it, like anxiety is one form of it. There is ambiguity on the use of the word suffering, sometimes it means mental distress, sometimes it means everything unpleasant. Same thing for pain: sometimes it means physical hurt, sometimes mental hurt. So, maybe we should begin by straigthening this out...
Robert Daoust 19:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Separate psycho from bio, sure... On definition, suffering is subjective, yes. but pain cannot be defined as an objective neural event (or then so can be suffering), as every pain scientist will tell you. The pin prick is an 'objective event' but what if it is on a dead body... Events and emotions are two different categories, and I am afraid that defining one by having recourse to the other is like defining an orange by its price on the market... I will come back tomorrow with a tentative definition, so that you will be able to agree or disagree on it... By the way, I reordered this page, because I had some problems finding your last messages... Robert Daoust 23:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
New Introduction is offered. The word 'uses' refers to what should be another of our categories:
Robert Daoust 21:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
The article states that suffering, by definition, includes an emotion of unhappiness or something similar, and states that suffering in and of itself is an emotion. I would strongly disagree with this - while suffering would likely make someone unhappy, I would not call suffering an emotion. I suggest that the article be changed to reflect this, and that it be removed from the category of emotions. - Lommer 04:07, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
What a load of crap. Please explain what you mean by stating that suffering is not an emotion. What is it and what evidence/academic work can you provide to support this statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.123.128.117 ( talk) 04:08, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Neuroscience has now pretty well isolated the "suffering centre of the brain". It's the anterior cingulate cortex (or gyrus). It fires up if a healthy person gets a dagger between the ribs, like several other centres (eg. primary and secondary somatosensory cortices and dorsal anterior insula) but, unlike these, it fires up when you recieve a rejection cue too. That is, the anterior cingulate cortex is active in the presence of both physical and socially inflicted suffering. Would it be appropriate for someone to contribute an essay on the neuroscience of suffering, do you think?
-- Anthony Cole 19:40, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Boredom
Aren't "suffering" and "boredom" quite different? - David Stewart 09:14 28 May 2003 (UTC)
Sadness
Question: Why do we cry when we are sad? What happens physiologically to cause crying and what is the evolutionary purpose to tears?kpa
I've seen sad in the "uncool" sense linking here. Does that need a separate article, or is there somewhere I could redirect the link to? 212.159.61.65 17:47, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
This "sadness = suffering" is anti-Western. Is sadness a Western cultural artifact? What about redirecting to grief or to despair? There seems to be enough consensus here to merit a new approach to sadness.
Miscellaneous
Do we not need to include something on the 3 different types of suffering - deliberate accidental and natural?
Collaboration
I am looking for at least one collaborator in order to bring eventually a major edit to this article.-- Robert Daoust 21:38, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Suffering makes man think [Proverb]
Old Japanese saying in the Inn of the sixth Happiness see Wisdom -- 83.70.70.171 20:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Suffer = allow
Shouldn't there be something in here about how the word suffer can also mean allow, such as in 'suffrage' ? .. perhaps how the words are related? How the meaning changed?
Suffering is a tool, suffering is a means
Just for the sake of curiosity, Google has 18,000 instances of "suffering is a tool" and 38,000 instances of "suffering is a means"
The article does mention negative utilitarianism, but it is missing some quite large bits of information on movements to use technology to end suffering in sentient life, as detailed in The Hedonistic Imperative and as the mission of the Abolitionist Society and the Abolitionist movement and David Pearce. I'll try to add this to an existing section or add a section sometimes in the near future on this subject.-- Gloriamarie 21:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
User:67.185.93.158 added the words that are struck in the following paragraph of the article introduction:
- Suffering may be called physical or mental, depending on whether it is linked primarily to a body process or a mind process. Examples of physical suffering are pain (as a sensation), nausea,
cancer and other types of illness, paralysis,breathlessness, and itching. [1] Examples of mental suffering are anxiety, grief, hatred, and boredom. [2]
It seems necessary to distinguish between physical and mental suffering, because people often make the distinction. Usually physical suffering is understood as physical pain, and mental suffering is understood as ...mental suffering. The initial version here above wanted to show that there are other physical suffering than pain: for instance breathlessness, which is not considered as a pain by pain specialists, but which is surely unpleasant and aversive, a suffering in the broad sense, and a physical rather than mental suffering. However, the user's addition above highlights a problem with the initial version: are we to consider the 'types' of suffering, or the 'causes' of suffering. The initial version attempted to speak of types of feeling rather than causes of feeling, in order to remain closer to the subject. For instance, anxiety is a type of suffering, while the threat of loosing a job or a football game is a cause of anxiety, i.e. of suffering. In other words, the user's addition may be right, but then we should also add other sources of physical and mental suffering, and this would not be really useful. I think the real problem here has to do with linguistic muddle. Then, I believe the whole paragraph should be removed, and the paragraph further down beginning with "The words pain and suffering can be confusing" should take its place. What is valuable in the content of the removed paragraph could be reinserted somewhere else later, perhaps, under section "Biological, neurological, psychological aspects". -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 19:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
References
Pain is currently Wikiproject Medicine Collaboration of the Week. From the top of the Pain article, "This article is about pain as a sensation. For pain in a broader sense see Suffering". If any editors here, in addition to Robert, would like to contribute to Pain you may assist in creating an accurate portrayal of human misery. (This sort of thing looks really good on a CV.(humour)) SmithBlue ( talk) 06:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Robert et al
I've just visited this page for the first time in a while. Can I congratulate you on the elegance and parsimony of your descriptions - not to mention their scientific rigor? Bravo! More please. Anthony ( talk) 08:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Per Robert Daoust's request for me to motivate my change for epicaricacy, let me just say this: Why use a German word when an English one is available. -- evrik ( talk) 17:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, no.
Schadenfreude (IPA: [ˈʃaːdənˌfʁɔʏ̯də] is a German word meaning 'pleasure from misfortune'. It has been borrowed by the English language [1] and is sometimes also used as a loanword by other languages.
This is the English wiki, and not the German wiki. -- evrik ( talk) 17:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Are you saying the wikipedia article on schadenfreude is wrong? -- evrik ( talk) 18:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Schadenfreude (IPA: [ˈʃaːdənˌfʁɔʏ̯də]) is enjoyment taken from the misfortune of someone else. The word has been borrowed from German by the English language [2] and is sometimes also used as a loanword by other languages.
Except that the citation you used, > Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary says its German. -- evrik ( talk) 20:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
The following external links were included under section Suffering#Selected bibliography
They cannot remain there because they are not 'books': they should rather be included under a section called External links. However, they cannot either figure under External links because of the following reasons. The first link is to an organization that deals with physical pain rather than with pain in the sense of suffering. The second link is already mentioned in the text and doesn't rquire to be mentioned again. The third or forth links may be to valuable websites but shouldn't these also be 'notable'? -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 14:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
This article claims: "Suffering (pain, unpleansantness) and pleasure (happiness, pleasantness), the former being called negative and the latter positive, are the two affects, or hedonic tones, or valences that psychologists often identify as basic in our emotional life." There is a great need for describing other approaches to "basics of emotional life":), for example: what about the conception of egzoergic(spending energy)and statergic(sparing energy) modes of behaviour? In this example egzoergic replaces positive pole and statergic would replace negative pole of behaviour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fonfeluch ( talk • contribs) 01:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I strongly object the statement "All sentient beings suffer during their lives", it defies imagination and defines sentience. -- UltimateDestroyerOfWorlds ( talk) 21:19, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Physiology, Somatopsychic I've put the terms here, but I still don't know what to do with them here.
User:23dx5assd added the following to section Biology, neurology, psychology: "Recently study also suggests that human attitudes towards suffering is the origin of the attitudes towards animal welfare [3]."
I am not sure at all about the appropriateness of that edit. According to me, first, it looks like a tautology, second, it does not belong to the section where it figures, and third, I did not find in the cited work such a statement. I undid the edit with a note about this third reason, and User:23dx5assd reinstated it with the following explication: "see page 263-266 Conclusions, its a refrase of the statments to avoid copyright issues. the conclusion is also in current wikipedia article 'animal welfare'".
I still cannot find the differently phrased statement on pages 263-266, which are quite interesting besides. I cannot clearly see that conclusion either in article animal welfare. So, I am asking User:23dx5assd to come here and discuss that edit. -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 22:18, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
1)OK here are two of the original sentences in the work: 'Avoidance of animal suffering is commonly know as animal welfare'. 'Avoidance of animal suffering and reverence for animals are two fundamentally unrelated types of attitudes towards animals.'page 264 there are more information like, you need read in the context 2)Attitude study are very often found in psychological research 23dx5assd ( talk) 04:08, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
References
i dont get how inersent people suffer for no reasen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.250.191 ( talk) 16:22, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
A few notes for a future paragraph on Islam: the faithful must endure suffering with hope and faith, not resist or ask why, accept it as Allah's will and submit to it as a test of faith (Allah never asks more than can be endured), work to alleviate suffering of others and one's own. -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 17:02, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
User BillMoyers has contributed a few sentences that are welcome in that they expand a too short section on Judaism and Christianity. As a view on suffering from the perspective of those religions, however, the section is still wanting a lot. Saying all in a few sentences is not easy. Let us hope more is to come.
Notice:
User:Robert Daoust is pushing the use of the word 'unpleasant' in this article, despite its falsehood. 'Unpleasant' means 'not pleasant', or at most, a very weak form of suffering, which is hardly the same thing as the word 'suffering'. He is also violating
WP:OWN. ...Not that anyone is actually likely to read this talk page other than Robert Daoust himself.
Potentialeverpresent (
talk)
08:27, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
The article introduction has the following sentences: "Suffering, or pain in a broad sense,[1] may be an experience of unpleasantness and aversion associated with the perception of harm or threat of harm in an individual." and "Suffering may be physical[3] or mental.[4]" Those sentences were previously written thus: "Suffering, or pain in a broad sense,[1] may be described as an experience of unpleasantness and aversion associated with the perception of harm or threat of harm in an individual." and "Suffering may be categorized as physical[3] or mental.[4]" A user removed 'redundant' terms, invoking the WP:Refers essay. My question : is it an improvement in this case to remove the 'redundant' terms? My opinion is that the terms "described as" and "categorized as" are indispensable because suffering cannot be defined but only approximately described, and suffering is not physical or mental but rather is often categorized as such. -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 17:30, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Jay Kirk ( https://www.english.upenn.edu/People/JayKirk) would like to speak to editors of this article. You may contact him at jaykirk@comcast.net. -- Robert Daoust ( talk) 14:59, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
The following keep appearing at the bottom of this page for unknown reason, therefore here is a dump section just for it :
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 7 external links on
Suffering. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:46, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
User:Rahong has twice deleted the word "may" from the section of this article relating to BDSM. It's quite evident that not all BDSM practices involve suffering: take, for example, animal roleplay. When I pointed this out to Rahong on their talk page, giving an example in point, they reacted by deleting my comment and trashing the animal roleplay page thus, which I thought was a bit of an overreaction; their edit comments also seem rather intemperate to me. I've now restored the word "may" one more time: I invite Rahong to take it to talk here if they disagree. -- The Anome ( talk) 17:24, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
THIS ARTICLE DISPLAYS NO UNDERSTANDING OF THE ENGLISH WORD SUFFER. This is a proposed start for someone with the proper background, although here I refer to the two definitions of suffering using physical rather than emotional examples. Does anyone have an "emotional" pair at hand?
Any discussion of suffering has to distinguish between its two radically different meanings. To suffer means simply to experience or undergo, as in the following sentence written by Barry Unsworth in “Sacred Hunger,” [ref] winner of the prestigious Booker Prize in 1992. [ref]
In a discussion of human emotion, there is no need to linger on this meaning. Its second meaning is to experience intense or unendurable misery, as in the following from the same novel for comparative purposes.
It is the latter meaning of suffering that has been the subject of religion and philosophy and medicine doubtless many millenniums before human beings acquired writing. Intense pain is experienced in the same part of the brain whether physical or emotional, but physical and emotional suffering are currently treated quite differently in the developed world.
ANYONE WITH A STRONG BACKGROUND IN PSYCHOLOGY WHO COULD CONTINUE FROM THIS, OR WITH ANOTHER CLEAR OPENING? 2601:644:8480:24A1:7846:D16B:4802:E4DD ( talk) 01:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
Displeasure. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 20#Displeasure until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Steel1943 (
talk)
05:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
From my understanding, both psychogenic pain and psychological pain all refer to pain that is emotional/affective in nature. Psychogenic pain is pain without a known etiological cause, psychological pain is pain that is usually colloquially meant to refer to pain with an internal/subjective etiology that causes pain -> suffering is affective/emotional pain. Having one page, rather than 3, might lead to a stonger article and less confusion as to whether these are related topics or not. Mr Robot 2020 ( talk) 10:27, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
==Wiki Education assignment: ENG 372 Comparative and World Literature==
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2022 and 1 May 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Abdallahtourbah,
ReineMansour (
article contribs).