>And my point from before still remains: you're trying to minimize suffering rather than enjoy life. If you're constantly miserable, being less miserable is only going to lead to a state that is at best neither enjoyable nor painful. The best you can achieve by purely minimizing misery is a life hollowed out of both the good and the bad. It strikes me as similar to Agamben's conception of ζωή: bare living that lacks any worth or value. That, I think, isn't how a person should live.
You can enjoy life, if you do, death will be misery to you and death is inescapable. You can have temporary enjoyment if you ignore this. You can choose not to enjoy life, death will be pointless, but life itself will be pointless too. It's like a fire, burning the very thing that gives you nourishment or glowing coals that are neither burning nor extinguished.
Both alternatives don't seem that different to me.
Do you assume that enjoying life to its fullest is the better path because you are a neet yourself and can't do that? Because the grass is greener on that side? People say that the successful pursuit of happiness is the measure of a good life and from that position I can understand why you value enjoyment. I obviously don't think so and if that is how you want to measure your life you also have to accept that your ageing and death will be misery to you, because you will lose that which you enjoy.
One wants to minimize suffering, the other wants to maximize enjoyment. I can't say which one of them is better. General opinion says that burning out is better than fading away. But I think that it's not possible to measure the worth of a life anyway. At least not from a human perspective. If you are unhappy, then change. But then again, being unhappy with the current state is a normal human emotion. So change if you want or don't.
Think about if a normal life would make you happy. But be sincere, if you think gaining money will make you happy, think about losing that money and the responsibility that comes with having investments, property and having to maintain your wealth. If you want friends, think about losing them, fighting with them, having to be there for them when they need you, having them betray your trust and sacrificing your freedom to make them happy. If you want to have a family, think about losing them, think about them falling ill, think about them leaving you because of a misunderstanding, think about sacrificing your freedom to make them happy.
If you lead a "normal" life, you will still be unhappy with things. Maybe you are overwhelmed by all the responsibilities you have and you will want to be a neet again. You will still want more money, more wealth, more enjoyment. There is no "normal" threshold where life is without problems.
If you want to get rid of misery, trying to live a "normal" life is not the right way.
>youre jealous of people who have material wealth, good relationships etc. so you rationalize this away as "its all shit anyway".
>sorry was paraphrasing. replace "shit" with "devoid of meaning, devoid of existence, making you happy for a short while and then leading to suffering once again"
So you think such a person exists? One with material wealth and good relationships? There is no such thing. No one man has material wealth, you gain it and you lose it, it's not an intrinsic part of yourself. Just like no man has good relationships. You have to acquire them and you have to let them go, relationships will flourish and go bad, that's the way it is. You assume a man that is rich, no matter what. A man that has good relationships, no matter what. But things don't work that way. That is why I'm not jealous.
I didn't want to generalize a meaning into them, that's why I chose to call them devoid of meaning. It's not to qualify them.