The Philosophy of "Everything will Work Out on its Own"

I was just wondering what everyone's thoughts were?

This has always been something my parents have raised me with, and thusly, I usually don't worry too much (although I still get mucho stressed when it comes to other things) about impending problems.

Maybe it's just the procrastinator in me, or maybe it is because I was raised in an environment where there was rarely ever any panicking.

Anywho, just wondering if y'all consider this a healthy way to live, or just a way of hiding from a problem?

Depends. Specifically, depends on the problem.

edited 18th Aug '11 4:03:02 PM by Yej

I would say this is a terrible position to take. Burying your head in the sand won't make the problem go away, no matter what it is. The goal is to find the intelligent method of dealing with it, and a way that won't make it worse.

Well, not everything can be solved with a snap of a finger. Some things, you just need to let time take its course. Plus, so many problems are simply unsolvable, and will only cause stress if you try to do something.

There's a difference between "be patient and have a long-term plan" and "just sit and see what happens."

One is a good idea, and one is sitting on your ass like an idiot.

How so? There are many times where waiting can lead to benefits.

For example, if you are unsure of a social situation, waiting to see how it unfolds can be highly beneficial.

^^ Not every situation has a solution. Scrambling to find an answer to a problem that doesn't have one merely wastes time, money and energy.

Yes, Major Tom said it better than I did ^_^;

"Waiting" doesn't gain you anything. "Waiting while having a plan for if something or another happens" is brilliant.

Anything can can give you a gain when done properly, and that includes waiting/not reacting.

edited 18th Aug '11 4:17:49 PM by MrAHR

No, just waiting isn't going to gain you anything. You have to have an idea of what you're going to do when you're done waiting, or you'll only be caught with no concept of what you want to happen.

I've gained things before from waiting/not trying to figure out a situation.

So...yeah. Blanket Statement.

edited 18th Aug '11 4:19:59 PM by MrAHR

That's luck, though. You probably would have done even better if you'd had a plan.

The only thing you shouldn't plan for is an Outside-Context Villain. If it's possible, you should have a basic idea for what to do if it happens.

How do you know? You know nothing about my life, nor the situations I've been.

If you want a story, here is one.

—

Recently, my dad made me break up with my significant other, so I may focus on my college work, saying I could get back together with him after the four years.

Instead of panicking, worrying and being sad about it, desperately trying to either find a way to disobey my parents, or convince them otherwise, I decided to wait. Maybe I'll be able to work around it. Maybe I'll find out he's right. But until then, there is no point in stressing about something like that.

It's going to work out in the end, so why worry?

—

Another is my dead grandfather's house. There was worry about what was going to happen, if they were going to be able to sell it in time, etc. etc. My mom just said EFFE the worries, and to go about the business as needed, and just go one buyer at a time.

edited 18th Aug '11 4:45:38 PM by MrAHR

Hm. I didn't account for this.

I suppose there are situations where there is no plan to be made, then. Fair enough.

First, if by "work out on its own" you mean "come to some sort of conclusion" then yes, everything will work out on its own eventually. It you mean "come to some sort of a conclusion that I'm happy with or can deal with" then it's bullshit.

There are things that will not turn out well (at least, not for you) without you putting in effort to make them turn out well.

And there's a huge gap between "Snap your fingers and make everything all better" and "sit on your butt and let things turn out however they will." There's also a huge gap between "no plan" and "panic"

edited 18th Aug '11 6:07:59 PM by Madrugada

I take a Laissez-feire attitude to a lot of things. But it's less that I think things will work out for the beat if left well enough alone, but rather I believe that any social system that needs outside assistance must be so irredeemably tainted that it sows the seeds of it's destruction and deserves everything it's gets upon itself.

I'm not a happy person.

Some things will work out on their own if you leave them, such as pimples, colds, some relationship problems, etc.

But in my experience the great majority of things won't. Like assignments. Nobody is going to do the assignment (which is due tomorrow that I haven't started) if I don't. I might get an extension, but that's just postphoning the problem.

You would be surprised at how many thing can be solved by not doing anything.

Eh, I think that sitting back and waiting, like every thing else, is something that should be done in moderation. Sometimes there's nothing you can do but sit back wait. However, it's fairly easy to mistake when that's actually a good idea and when you should actively do something.

I know there's been times when I should have done something and didn't, and times that I and others would have been better off if I had not gotten involved.

Depends on the problem. The way I think is, be prepared to take action against something, or expect it to stay the same for the rest of your life.

edited 18th Aug '11 11:28:18 PM by mailedbypostman

The sooner you act on a problem, the smaller it is. I take a leaf out of Sun Tzus book; attack a problem while it isn't a problem.

Of course, there are plenty of cases where action will result in a worse scenario than apathy. Most impulse crimes, for instance...

I'd say it's actually a little disturbing how often people want to hold one another accountable, or try to act as though they have real answers when so much of everything that we ever do or have happening to us boils down to triflings and coincidences working themselves out beneath the little we do understand.

This type of philosophy is inherently abhorrent to me. Neutrality is only good when things are sufficiently stable to afford it; if there is a problem, its destruction should be the first thing to do.

Its because of neutrality that social progress is so slow. Even imbeciles like the christian fundementalists, who want to reverse everything, are pro-active, meaning that they bother to work for they feel is "right".