|
I'm Josef. I only post a little bit nowadays as I don't want to interrupt sincere faith posting. I'm an Atheist and pretty far on the Left, and I like reading what people have to write here because it's very different from what I usually think about, whilst also being usually well thought through. Keep safe everyone. White Coke posted:Good news, Jelly Bean pulled through. Good news, and I hope they stay well!
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2021 16:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 21:04 |
|
|
White Coke posted:I've found that as my politics moved to the left I've become more religious. How was it for you? I've usually moved leftwards because it seemed like the best thing to do to help people. It's not that I don't want to believe it's more just that I don't feel the belief. Was raised sort of Atheistically? My mum and dad never really talked much about it and the only really "religious" people in the family were my Grandma and Grandad. After Grandad died I don't think my mum ever stepped inside a church for prayer. I love religions and faith itself is something really cool, but in the same way that I can't make myself feel happy, I also can't make myself feel faith. How was it for yourself? White Coke posted:She's got a moderate heart murmur, which is to be expected with a cat her age (which according to the vet is 15 years & 7 months not 17 years like we thought) and shrunken kidneys which were because of dehydration. Good grief! That is an old lady. I hope she continues to have a long and happy life, and that she gets watered enough.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2021 21:16
|
|
|
White Coke posted:I struggle with my faith, but faith isn't just what you believe, it's what you do and who you do it with. One of my biggest realizations was that while I thought of myself as an antisocial loner, I was really missing human company, being part of a faith community. Growing up my family wasn't super religious but we did go to church every Sunday and we had a lot of friends through that. I think some Calvinists would disagree with you there. I suppose so but I feel like you need to believe in a divinity or that the universe makes a kind of sense in order to have "faith" I guess. That is good, having a community is important! A good cat.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2021 11:24
|
|
|
I think it would be fairer to simply understand that you don't believe and to reconcile yourself to it, instead of to aim at it continually when you are, in effect, lying about it. If you don't believe in God, but act in a moral way and make it plain that you do not believe in God whilst doing so, is that more of a blasphemy than to do all the correct actions whilst also committing crimes?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2021 19:33
|
|
|
Nessus posted:The reason you would continue the practice of belief that you may not hold completely or reliably would be to reinforce that belief. When you repeat a practice and train and discipline yourself in a certain way, you will tend to build particular habits, whatever they are. I would say that these habits, these trainings, these conditionings are what you could actually call "belief" in a more objective way than your own interior perspectives, which as we both know, can often be badly skewed. You will remember the four or five intervals, non longer than a weekend, where you questioned your faith, and will overlook the twenty, thirty, sixty, ninety years of dedication. If you don't hold that belief to start with though it seems... not "unreasonable" but also not exactly "fair" to pray. It seems more like "I know that this is right action so I am doing this in expectation that this will stand me in good stead" as opposed to "I am doing this based on what I know to be true". Sure our interior view can be badly skewed, but there is no way of telling that even if it comes into contact with the real world. Nessus posted:The latter probably depends on your particular sect, although to quote Shinran Shonin who was dealing with the question of 'if we say Amida's name and go to the pure land for sure, why not do crimes and engage in lusts and defilements right now since we're going there anyway?' of 'Do not develop a taste for poison, just because there is an antidote.' But there is an antidote. The belief that "God will forgive me, it's his job" effectively means that there is no punishment for any crime, no matter how foul and that "justice" in such a universe is rendered comic and tragic. It's one of the big things I am trying to find out about is if one should forgive oneself. I keep trying to find readable discussions on the subject ,as opposed to self-help guff about "how" to forgive yourself, and it's a real bloody problem.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2021 11:52
|
|
|
Nessus posted:On the first topic, you are right that it is impossible to Know in the absolute sense, with our fallible human minds. It is possible that a buddha or God truly Knows, in the absolute sense; but they may simply be completely aware of the limits of knowledge. The entire cosmos you inhabit could be a cruel simulation on a disembodied vat-grown brain. It could and that is deeply irritating. Wanting to have some level of sureness about stuff in general and the ability of myself to perceive and know "stuff" is important. If not it degenerates swiftly into "I have the most power, ergo I am right". More like I am hoping that there is a philosophy that can reconcile itself with suffering in a way that doesn't equivocate about "Doing X makes up for doing Y". It's like with confession or stuff of that nature, or having a hierarchy of sins. Somehow it always feels... it feels as if it's ignoring stuff or making excuses for how things were done/ how things are. Things shouldn't be able to make up for other things, but at the same time it feels weird to not have forgiveness, as you said that isn't a very likely set up, and certainly isn't going to do well when compared with faiths where there is some level of forgiveness. The purpose of justice is restitution and the creation of something better. If there is no justice or no punishment then there is no consequence for wrong action. If you allow for people to do wrong action and then be happy, thrive and grow stronger then there is no such thing as wrong action. Sure, I understand that, but the operative thing I am looking for is an argument as to why we should forgive ourselves. How is something to work on in the future.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2021 12:38
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:It's possible to grow and learn and undergo consequences, and also to forgive yourself. You're very caught up in ideas of what people 'deserve' and a specific form of justice. You've heard the saying 'an eye for an eye makes all the world blind'? Retribution and justice aren't the same thing. Sure, I would agree on the bolded bit. However I think there needs to be a set amount of it. Like there needs to be some level of "this is enough suffering" or "no, you still need to keep going". And sometimes there just needs to be a big old sign saying "don't". Also retribution is often unjust, but every bit of justice requires either retribution, reconcilitation or redistribution. Again in response of the second bolded bit,. Yes. That is what I am going for and that is fine. It isn't really fine and that is why I am continually discussing it on the internet, but still. And yeah, it is a difference but I would like to ask, in absolute honesty why we should forgive ourselves. I think it's okay to forgive other people but I can't fully wrap my head round the idea of forgiving oneself. Nessus posted:I disagree with your sentiment that the fact that you can do bad things, and then appear to benefit from them and not suffer those downsides in the immediate perceptible time horizons, means that there is no such thing as a wrong action. However, I can reconcile this through the concept of rebirths, and if you are looking solely at an individual's current incarnated form you will get situations like this. However, I think this is arbitrary - it would be equally arbitrary to say "if they aren't convicted within a week of the crime, there ain't no justice." It's just a question of the time horizon. It effectively means that though. If there is no downside to doing something bad, then why not do bad things. Those bad things become good because they result in positives for oneself. Time span matters. Every guard who beat prisoners who then becomes an important politician and dies happy and content at the age of 85 lauded by everyone is an escapee from consequence, no matter the time frame. Nessus posted:As for why to forgive yourself, my argument is: Doing something wrong, and suffering from it, are two separate things. Which is why this universe is poorly designed. There should be a direct 1:1 relationship between those two things. Nessus posted:So in this example (and I'm sure you can think of many others in that general vein), seeking forgiveness or its experience would be eminently valuable. I think it is also valuable if your own forgiveness is sought and you are able to grant it. I would disagree. The only way that you are going to be able to truly learn that lesson is to hold on to that hurt. You don't forgive yourself of something like that. It is a part of you that is never going anywhere and it should hurt to think about. It's the only way to make sure that something stays. You should suffer, the question is, I suppose, more based around the idea of "how much".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2021 13:24
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:It isn't fine. Suffering is not fine. You being unhappy and hating yourself is not fine. Your ideas are hurting you. I'm about to head out to work so please don't take this as my being flippant or brusque or anything but I think we're friends, and I think you deserve to be happy, and not tearing yourself in half all the time, and we should talk about this properly sometime. You know how to get hold of me. ...though not right now clearly cause I do have to go to work. I don't think it's being flippant, don't worry in the least about that! Thank you, it is appreciated. Nessus posted:Dude, it is not fine. There is, quite literally, no crime or offense that you are possibly capable of performing that would somehow make it OK for you to suffer forever, or which would somehow make it good for you to suffer while other people do not. (At least in my perception, but even doctrines of Hell tend to be somewhat less adamant here.) Many of these posts seem to kind of sidewise carve out a situation where you, forums poster Josef Bugman, are uniquely depraved and deserving of eternal or indefinite suffering, and I just do not think that this is true. It is against my morality. It's more wanting a defined end point for it and knowing that, through being human, there is going to be an urge to judge myself by the softest possible criteria it therefore behoves the person doing it to assume the harshest possible criteria. We all tend to forgive ourselves too easily for our faults and the pain we cause others, to attempt to explain away our actions through ignorance as opposed to malice. Interior negative feelings are still deserved in some instances though. To try and do away with them because they add to the pool of suffering overall seems impossible. Heck the best place to keep them may well be internal. That way there is no suffering forced outwards on to other people. White Coke posted:That reminds me of a joke my grandfather told me: If God created man what kind of a designer was he? A civil engineer, since he ran a sewage line through the entertainment district. It would also explain things like the shortcuts we make!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2021 23:18
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I disagree and find your case unpersuasive. Your viewpoint would seem to be that everyone ought to be suffering constantly, but it being OK - even good - because this is teaching them not to misbehave. I wouldn't say "ought to" I would say "is the current state in which we exist". We are all going to do harm to others as part of being alive. And by doing so, to a greater or lesser extent, we should ensure we hold on to it. The other option is to forget it, to forgive. I don't think that is a good thing to do. It robs us of the opportunity to understand our actions and it means we are more than likely going to do more harm. In terms of "Ought" in a perfect world, no. We learn to live with people and with ourselves. But we are not perfect, our actions will not be out of ignorance or mistake alone, and so we should sit with our actions, at least a bit, for what we have done. If that dictates suffering, as best as we can approximate it, then that is what it approximates. I would not say this has to be applied widely. I certainly wouldn't want anyone to think this should be universal. But if we can't have justice, then we have to build something that is an approximation of it for ourselves. I am more trying to explain what it feels like and why it feels as if things should be done in this manner. If we cannot do good to help people, then our best option is to prevent doing bad.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 00:27
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:But we shouldn't torment ourselves forever. That sucks and does no good. Doesn't do any bad though! This is meant in a little bit of unseriousness to lighten the mood. Nessus posted:Suffering is not somehow good just because you have decided that you're the worst and deserve it. If it's a personal choice that person has made, isn't it? The alternative of forgiving oneself seems wrong in a way that I have difficulty articulating. It feels, trying to describe the word here, unjustifiable maybe?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 01:31
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I would say that carrying all this stuff around does have bad consequences, even though I know you mean it as a joke. It takes away joy in life. It has quantifiable health effects from stress and so on. It can burden and confine your ability to engage in right action, because the right action today may have some resemblance to what was wrong action in another context. This is independent of my general point of, "actually, suffering is bad." It has consequences for you. It has no consequence for others. Could you elaborate more as to why? Inflicting suffering on others is obviously bad, but I don't think that can apply when recrimination is aimed inward.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 02:09
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Yes it does. It has a wide range of consequences for others! More than I can easily sum up. Would you find hypothetical interior reactions of individuals, or larger-scale social effects taken en masse, more interesting or convincing? Both if possible! But social if it's one or the other.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 02:24
|
|
|
Nessus posted:You could train people to not pay attention to the interior states of others. This already happens to some extent. I don't think it needs to be encouraged or facilitated any further. Those suffering great interior distress already move heaven and earth to conceal it, in many or most cases, because they do not want to be a bother. This is exhausting, and therefore their other actions are weaker and less focused, and they are more likely to succumb to various temptations and negative outcomes because they have expended their effort on attempting to conceal their interior suffering from others. I think it's necessary to not pay too much attention to the suffering we see all around us, otherwise we'd all go completely bananas. In response to the bolded bit I am unsure that that happens, least of all I am wondering what temptations or negative outcomes there could be. One can have compassion and still reserve it from oneself. I appreciate the idea but I am unsure as to how true it is. White Coke posted:I'd also like to know where you draw the line on forgiving yourself. Should one torment themselves every time they snap at a coworker, or forget a birthday? Or are you talking about more serious things like murder? Depends on the person, I would personally say something closer to the latter than the former though. Liquid Communism posted:Could also go with St. Christopher, in his dog-headed depiction: Who is the best boy, Christopher or Guinefort?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 11:27
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:Bugman the line of thinking you espouse is the exact one that leads people to spiral into blackpill inceldom, I know because I spent a long time walking it. I would disagree, but only a bit. For starters I think that Inceldom comes out of a similar impulse but instead of aiming the loathing inward alone it instead gets broadcast to anyone who is vaguely feminine. Indeed, I would say that the problem with Inceldom and "black pill" poo poo in general is that the disdain for the self is not amplified and focussed. It is instead aimed outwardly. If incels truly believed in what they state then they would keep quiet and allow themselves to suffer. But since that is not all they feel they instead aim it outwardly at other people. "These other people are the fault for my problems because of [X]", that sort of idea. It can be anything as silly as "hot girls won't date me" to "my skull is the wrong shape", but instead of focussing on actions done it is instead focussed on things other people are. If you've made a thread or having anything to say more about it would love to hear about it, though more than understandable if the subject is a bit invasive! HopperUK posted:1) You have to have compassion for yourself to an extent, you are not a less worthy person than everyone around you, trust me Who is a better judge on ones internal world and actions than ourselves? We just have to counter-balance our intrinsic drives/ automatic excuse making. Though I do appreciate you saying so! I would also have accepted Gelert as best boy, but yes they both are the best boy.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 16:50
|
|
|
Guinfort is just Gelert wearing a beret and putting on a bad accent. Sure, but in the same way that we can know the weight of something and can compensate for it. If I know that something I have lists to one side, I can compensate by being heavier on the other. If I know that often we're too soft on our own reasoning for stuff, it's better and easier to swing it in the opposite direction. I mean it's hard enough doing it here. It's not something I can, or should, talk about IRL. Mainly because it's taking up enough space on here! I would, and again this is only personally, disagree. I think that there are often lots of reasons we tell ourselves why we shouldn't, why doing X or Y makes us virtuous or moral. Nessus posted:In my view, it is one thing to not emphasize your compassion upon yourself, or even to question that kind of an attitude as a primary focus. But it is another to adamantly set that part of the universe aside. Myself in particular, but extended out to folks that feel they should, I suppose? I would not want to talk on the behalf of other people, I am just me and should not be used as a representative of anything. I disagree, people can be kind and generous and loving towards people and also unbelievably awful towards others in their life. It's an attempt to try and prevent the latter by making sure to focus that inward. I am not sure you can, but I am wondering if we should. I suppose Where else could the energy be focussed? For all we know it could be aimed at significantly worse things. From personal experience only I don't tend to buy that much more when I especially dislike myself. It'd be like trying to buy a keychain for a 2 metre high key, it wouldn't fit and it'd look silly. Refusing to do so doesn't seem to have been a matter of much conjecture, it's why I wonder about it a fair bit. White Coke posted:We don't even know what our own voices sound like. Fair point.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 23:44
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I'd say Christopher would be your best buddy for walks in general, while Guinefort would be better if you're looking for a companion for your kids. That's very true. I do wonder why the "loyal dog getting killed" motif is so common in certain places. I hope that he gets better soon, and that he stays better! White Coke posted:Where did this argument come from? It seems to me like it's something that was worked backwards from the conclusion, since it contradicts scripture, but it can do so at will since it allows one to just declare any part of the bible that contradicts the theory to be a later addition contrary to what Jesus "really" taught. I know that a few people had arguments a few years back, though I again can't remember who exactly, that Jesus was essentially a reform minded Jewish teacher (I am not sure that Rabbi is the correct term since I think Rabbinical Judaism dates from after Jesus Christ the historical figure was around?) Bilirubin posted:After forever (even longer than I resisted getting a paid account here) I finally got a FB account. And one of the first people to follow me was someone that, to my (personal) shame, I had wronged. After they friended me in chat I finally apologized to them for having been such a dick to them over such and such incident that weighed so heavily with me. Their response? "Uh, whatever the gently caress are you talking about? I have no memory of such a thing, it obviously didn't affect me, whatever, give yourself a break!" Sure but, I dunno. Even if the other person feels that no harm was done to them or that "enough time has passed" or what have you, I don't think the person involved should necessarily feel let off the hook. Even if a person forgives another person it doesn't necessarily remedy what has been done. Sometimes even if the other person forgives you it isn't what is needed. The book sounds on the weirder end of things, the synopsis and overarching themes also seem weird as all heck. But what if it's not. Sure it might appear to be a small thing to you at one point, but upon re-examining it we find out that it was in fact a huge mistake that we now cannot undo?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2021 14:51
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:So it would be correct to say Jesus was a lowercase-r rabbi, a sage and spiritualist, but not an uppercase-R Rabbi, because that system didn't yet exist. Got it, thank you. I don't want to get the terms wrong, but is interesting to find out more of the overarching nature of this stuff. Thanks! What is the latter based on? My knowledge on Jesus' life is just the highlights really (curing people, Lazarus, etc) but the whole idea of "render unto Caeser what is Caesers" doesn't seem to be based around an immediate apocalyptic vision per say.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2021 15:23
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Then you play the ball where it lies, my dude. Why do anything? It might be a devastating mistake. This is what me posting is. I am not entirely joking. I sometimes don't leave the house or talk to anyone because "this" is safe. How much of this was contemporaneous with Christ himself? I don't remember where I read it but some people argued that his life was more moulded to fit the Messiah ideal post death, rather than something done by Christ himself during his lifetime. Civilized Fishbot posted:I think other posters have already covered the general eschatological focus of Jesus' ministry better than I could, but I want to add that "renter unto Caesar what is Caesar's" was, in fact, based on an immediate apocalyptic vision. Jesus was answering the question among Jews in his time and place, "what do we do about the Roman Empire occupying and abusing us?" For a lot of Jews, the answer was violent resistance or refusal to pay taxes. Jesus's answer was, "we can wait it out, because in our own lifetimes, G-d will address and resolve this problem by delivering His kingdom." And how do Christians square this point of view with the lack of apocalypse? Could you provide a bit of a quote about the third bit, as I am unsure too! Dukkha, right? The belief that things "are" and that no moral weight can be given to them is very hard for me to wrap my head around. And if I face it by saying "this is part of me". No-one moves on from trauma or pain and "accepting" those things is as near as I can get to feeling blasphemous. I don't accept those things, I reject that any correctly built system would allow these things to flourish. How are we defining "utility"? Because, whilst it might not be doing me any good I also can't say that it is doing me any ill. Like if we applied this more widely it shades rapidly into "drunk driving may kill a lot of people, but it also helps a lot of people get to work on time, so, it;s impossible to say if its bad or not" territory. I don't think one exists either, but I think one should. The guilty should suffer, so I do. It's not enough, but it is all I can do at present. Josef bugman fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Jan 21, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2021 20:17
|
|
|
As a question about the destruction of the second temple, would it ever have been possible to stop the Romans from destroying it? Or would that be a question more apropos for the Milhist thread? That's fair, will try and work it out. I mean if we don't believe our interpretation of reality is true, we'd stop wouldn't we. I think it comes down to defining and realising that I am not other people. That difference or separation means that others are/can be worthy because they are not me. I'm me, and my choices are crappy ones. But then morality becomes a matter of popular vote. Which I don't think can be true, or at least I hope is not true. It is good to abuse oneself if it is a choice you've made about something you believe you deserve. It is not fair to do that to others, because they don't deserve it. I wouldn't say that violence is necessarily wrong. I don't see it as an ill aprioi and, unfortunately, it's impossible to prove that it is an ill. If everything is in flux all the time and all that sort of thing, then we can't prove that hurting yourself isn't okay. (also quick side note, but my spellcheck keeps trying to change "apriori into "DiCaprio" which is hilarious. That's fair! People don't learn a lesson, and it's why I am generally against a carceral state, but at the same time I see the value in penance and atonement. And sometimes, yeah I do want to go to prison forever, but I still stick around for what needs doing, and for the harm it might cause others.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2021 22:24
|
|
|
Fair enough. More meaning it along the lines of "I do not want morality to be a matter of popular vote". I think that it is fundamentally unjust to have morality be decided upon simply because "eh, most of us believe it". To me that seems... I dunno it seems fundamentally at odds with how stuff should be. Like it makes murder okay if done under certain circumstances, or other things and I cannot reconcile that with people trying to be good in general. No. Things are either good or bad. Other factors may eventually inform if something is good or bad, but those are the only two options. Anything else is introducing complexity for the sake of doing the old thing of "Well I want to do this, but I can't justify it, let me think up some way in which it becomes justifiable". No-one in a story or in real life has ever really agreed with the idea that morality is subjective and not been, at bare minimum, a bit of an arse. You can't go "We are not so different you and I" without falling into Bond Villain solipsism. Just till I die. That's long enough. A pity, I do find the "what if" ideas of history fascinating! shame on an IGA posted:I'm completely serious here, please watch Neon Genesis Evangelion. I felt this way about myself for a long time and watching a fictional character do exactly the same thing and feeling the compassion I refused to have for myself for someone doing exactly that, because they were doing exactly that, was the jolt I needed to finally wake up and be ok to myself. Please do take this as light joking, but this feels like the anime fan version of the " a man falls through the earth and into parisian catacombs. taking a torch from the wall he spies row upon row of skeletons. grasping the nearest by the shoulders, he shakes it madly, yelling "... have u tried lsd". Thank you though, I probably should. Thirteen Orphans posted:I'm positive the "Bible Code" folks have at least tried it. I always love linking this Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Disappointment
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2021 23:41
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Dogg this is exactly what you are doing while searching for a justification on why you, personally, deserve to be miserable and unforgiven. If you allow yourself to do that, surely you must allow the existence of moral complexity, particularly when you recently said "violence is not a priori wrong". That isn't morally complex though! Things are either good or bad, depending on when, but that doesn't mean that the binary state does not exist for either of those things. Plus any attempt to justify oneself is inherently suspect! You wouldn't trust someone on trial just because they said "honest guv" at the end of what they were saying! It's a very interesting article. I like how it still has shock waves down to the current day! I still don't know why this didn't result in a lot of people getting very cross at their priests. CrypticFox posted:Julian only reigned 2 years before his death. It is interesting to imagine how the history of Rome, Christianity, and Judaism would have developed differently if Julian had reigned for decades instead. The development of rabbinic Judaism may well have been halted if a Third Temple got up and running. That would be interesting. Another thing I found interesting was how much Julians hatred for Christianity might have come out of his own time spent around the Constantine family. I think things may well have developed in a more syncretic direction, and that would have been very cool to see!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2021 00:41
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I don't understand the trial metaphor. This all seems to keep coming back to criminal justice metaphors. Reminds me of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Oven_of_Akhnai Justice is pretty much what I think about a lot. It's how everything needs to be seen, what is just and unjust and how guilt and recompense are meted out. They are important things.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2021 01:17
|
|
|
And if you are unwilling to let it go? What then? We shouldn't have to forgive other people, or ourselves. To do so might be a good thing, but it can still be the wrong thing to do.Keromaru5 posted:there's also a big difference between self-punishment and humility. This is like the office meme. It's just me going "they are the same picture".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2021 01:38
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:They are super not the same thing. JB I really like you but sometimes I want to find whoever taught you about guilt and recrimination and morality and smack them around with a loaf of bread. Even if that person is you. Especially if it's you. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2021 02:04
|
|
|
Gaius Marius posted:You have an extremely unhealthy way of thinking Bugman. Hey, take that back! I have an unhealthy way of thinking about myself. My other opinions are fine.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2021 02:11
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:That is exactly what my abusive father taught me because it resulted in me engaging in behavior patterns that were super-convenient for him and terrible for me. I am so sorry to hear this! I don't want to pry, but I do hope things are going better for you now! Nessus posted:
Ha, not quite. I am meaning it at least in part in self-mockery. I wish we could emoji usage was more prevalent on the forum, it's what I usually do to show I'm joking. Deteriorata posted:No, it colors everything about you. You tend to have very absolutist, unhealthy opinions about almost everything. I have absolutist opinions about a lot of things, that is very true, but I am not sure that those things are inherently unhealthy. Having clear delineation is a good thing when it comes to how we view certain subjects. Sometimes things are just bad, there doesn't need to be an excuse made for them or a reason to examine.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2021 02:26
|
|
Are you trying to be an Internet Circumcellion or something here?
|
Oh dear, I am sorry. I don't mean to come across that way. Antivehicular posted:The thing is that the way you think about yourself, and the resulting behavior, can have effects on others. Often painful ones! I am sorry to hear that you feel this about yourself! I don't believe that you should. However, if it's okay I try and just not tell people IRL my feelings. It all gets vented on here where no-one knows me and, let us be blunt, I am just another dude with a mech avatar. It's less impactful. All of this talk is me trying to explain myself and the way I feel, because I know that it won't weigh so heavily on other people. What's that old quote "we should beware of what we pretend to be" and all that? Sure there might be a chance, but believe me on this, there really isn't any chance that I am wrong on this. I am happy that you don't feel like that though! That's a good thing!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2021 03:05
|
|
|
White Coke posted:Murder is an interesting example because we do consider it okay under certain circumstances. Self defense is acceptable, and we tend to distinguish murder by various degrees of severity so we acknowledge that accidentally hitting and killing someone with your car is different than putting a bomb in theirs. We also generally consider it acceptable for some people to kill as part of their profession, soldiers and police officers. Yeah, see that is the problem. "We agree that murdering all these people is good" doesn't end well. It gives people ways to get around simple precepts and instead go "oh but you see it's fine, he was running at me" and even if people disagree with the person in question if no-one saw it, there would be no easy way of telling if the person was lying or not. Violence is, unfortunately, a fundamental part of everything. There is no way to remove oneself from what it is, or what it represents to people. Not least because, to the powerless, violence always feel like it could/would be giving them liberty. I can't even say they would be wrong. Liquid Communism posted:but it is empty in the end and it colors everything else in your thoughts. As a response to the first bit, the overarching thing is though is that it is just your thoughts. As long as other people can't see them, they don't exist and you can continue to hate yourself with no outward showing of it. To the other bit, sure it is pride, to a greater or lesser extent. But I don't hold myself up any higher standard than I hold other people. People cannot fundamentally know each other, there is no way of you seeing things from my point of view or me seeing things from your point of view exactly as you intend to. It's just not possible, there is always going to be a degree of seperateness between "you" and others which is fundamentally unbridgeable. Probably just standard hell, leastwise it's not like Buddhism where there are lots of different sorts of hell. If God is with us everywhere and everywhen then I really have some questions about none intervention. zonohedron posted:somebody who suffers from depression isn't culpable for that despair, at least not fully. This seems like a recent development. I thought that the Church buried didn't bury suicides in consecrated ground? Would no-one else prefer nothing? No, just me? Make some weird P-zombie version of me for other people if they want to see me, but Gods I can't wait to not be.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2021 17:50
|
|
|
Thanks for the welcome back folks. I figured it'd be good to wait some time before reappearing. Still won't be posting for a little while, but wanted to say thank you and hope that everyone is doing well!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2022 08:55
|
|
|
Happy Easter to those that celebrate it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 19:21
|
|
|
Pershing posted:If anyone feels like praying, my friend's mom died today after a lengthy struggle with brain cancer. Please pray for the repose of her soul and the consolation of her family. Worthleast posted:Requiescat in pace. I am so sorry for you both, and I hope you'll accept my condolences. Make sure to look after yourselves as well.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2022 09:14
|
|
|
Every single Tudor was a horrible piece of work. Sure all of them suffered but they could, at any point, have decided to stop. They even had the most ability to do so and people around them were still saying how poo poo things were. Having some measure of sympathy for them is understanable but, I feel, misplaced. They were the ones with power in this instance
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2022 15:23
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:I'm not sure this is the thread that's gonna decide some people aren't worthy of compassion. I mean compassion is great. The average person of the time period would have had similar lives, the only difference is that they would have had no power or ability to stop it because they were acting only on the awareness they have from below. The greater onus to change things should rest upon the ones with power. And if they are deserving of compassion it must be delivered alongside awareness of that fact. One can have compassion for Queen Ann being constantly pregnant and losing every child. But her governance still oversaw the expansion of the slave trade.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2022 22:52
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:Edward VI didn't really hang around long enough to be a horrible piece of work, dying at 15 and ruling under a regency all his life. I always forget Edward, that's fair.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2022 06:00
|
|
|
I hope that there are other forms of life and I hope they are having a good time of it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2022 10:34
|
|
|
Everything being impermanent is a joke. A cruel one played on the universe as a whole. Some things should b allowed to carry on. To change but continue.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2022 15:24
|
|
|
BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:Well that’s also everything my dude if that’s you’re definition of impermanence. Matter is never created or destroyed but only transformed, energy is never created or destroyed but only transformed, momentum is never created and destroyed but only transformed. All things in the universe are the changed, carried-on, and reassembled things of the universe ten minutes ago. Impermenance of good things is a waste tbh. Energy that is not put towards a helpful or at least neutral end and the slow decay of things in general is a bad joke played on us all. The fact that life itself may not continue and we get left with naught but empty matter is also a massive pain.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2022 12:59
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:Permanence is death though. As is change. Past a certain point everything changing into "no heat" is not exactly a great thing to look forward to. The changing from self to other should only happen towards and eventual better end state. One that we can eventually reach or at least see and should lead to better things. More food, more housing etc. Nessus posted:A bad joke played by who? A waste of what? A pain to whom? A waste of hard work an effort to improve things, a pain to one who sees it. And to answer both questions, a joke doesn't have to be played by any particular person, no one directs the growth of a root so that it trips you, but it's still a prat fall done by something that is unthinking. Keromaru5 posted:Part of why I like St. Gregory of Nyssa's view of heaven as "passing from glory to glory." If heaven is union with God, and God is infinite, then there's literally no limit to how much more we can become like God. Why is such not possible within a finite world? If we can become like God then surely there is a better option than this.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2022 19:15
|
|
|
Thirteen Orphans posted:I’ve done a lot of soul searching these past few weeks. It’s clear to me now, I will not be a priest or religious. It hurt, a lot, recognizing that to be true. In fact for a time it felt like grief. Then I also had to reconcile the fact that I thought my vocation would be my career. Thanks be to God, I’ve made peace with my realizations and in fact find it is a moment of grace. It is an opportunity to re-examine my strengths and talents and find my way in the world. I just wanted to thank everyone who supported me with your prayers, they didn’t fall on deaf ears, God worked His Will in His own time. Thanks again, and please say one last prayer that in all things God’s Will be done. Keep yourself safe friend.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2022 19:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 21:04 |
|
|
I mean just a lot of people go through life fairly easily lying about everything. Why take responsibility for stuff if you don't think it'll have any good reason? What is one more person in prison doing that is good for the world?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2022 18:53
|
|