>>81537278
>most people cannot recognize that suffering is the catalyst for growth
Ok, "growth." Let's presume it's context system has actuality to what matters. If you're going to engage the ficton's engine that is transcendent function to summon SUFFERING and MARTYRDOM and WISDOM and whatnot, why not cut to the core and summon something more efficient for growth, something that's even more efficient than what rejects no-suffering efficiency to boost efficiency through SUFFERING and MARTYRDOM and WISDOM?
>You're the one who put forth the idea that everyone is pampered.
Everyone?
>>You're pampered if you have enough mental room to try processing the meta of having a decision.

>It's merely an unavoidable fact of life.
>Meaning is the central point.
If meaning is the central, why try giving suffering validity?

>>81537406
Suffering is only ever chosen to be (mis)interpreted to be.

>Suffering transcends physical pain.
Yeah, as it's fictional and you can force mind-over-matter whilst having the pain be weak enough to be recognized as pain, having it all as cerebral fiction phenomenon play.

>Pain is a completely subjective thing, as are all experiences. If you can dismiss suffering on that basis, you can dismiss pain, and basically all experiences.
You can empirically/scientifically/pragmatically measure pain's specific signals even in animals. Vague "suffering" doesn't have such consistency. As a human example, you may see depression biomarkers, but depression isn't suffering.

>the tool
And what the term "suffering" would be a tool for?

>something that is completely subjective
How would you say that suffering is not a social construct?