How does saving people work? And if you can save people from themselves isn’t that tyranny?
So my own take on the whole apathy matter, my philosophy of how to deal with it, and it has proven reliable…
I hate dead ends. Dead end trains of thought, dead end understandings. “It is because it is” answers. They vex me seriously, but my moto is (and yes it’s a circular thought) understanding brings understanding. The very faculties that enable any initial understanding, enable all understanding, and of everything.
It isn’t anything in the outside world you have to understand. You don’t have to understand any object at all. The heart of understanding, your capacity to understand, this is the soul of the mind, the arms and limbs and senses. To me a root of life, if not the root. Dudley Do Right was an effective hero, not because he had a rationale, some training or education. He was notoriously clueless. He was an effective hero simply because he understood. This is why they wrote the book titled the “Tao of Pooh.” He was indeed a bear of very little brain, but he understood all the stories as they were happening, perfectly well.
Everyone in the stories was heavily invested in their rationale, in their attempt to relate their point of view. Pooh was just the one who did it least so he understood best.
I saw a cartoon showing how he was often a jerk to his friends. Freedom from apathy won’t make you a saint which is a good thing. The saint is really a miserable soul.
Honestly, while I am doing these classes, I seem like a jerk to myself. A jerk for even saying the things I do. As far as I know I am just running off at the mouth saying things everyone already knows. Maybe I am just amusing people with my dog and pony act. This does occur to me. Travis’ amazing intellectual flea circus. So is there a point to what I do?
If it’s something that has nothing to do with you at all, then yes, these classes would be pointless, and by nothing to do with you I mean nothing you could relate to, nothing you could find in yourself. So now I am genuinely worried. Have I offended anyone?
You haven’t offended me today. Have I offended you before?
When you said that artists don’t own their own work, that was a very touchy subject for me. Point of view clash, interpretation issue. Should I stop doing these because of my arrogance or ignorance?
Because there are far too many people on the internet that say that crap as an excuse to steal people’s work. Ah, I wasn’t talking about the artist in the framework of the community. I actually am against stealing creative work. Music piracy, movie piracy. I don’t download anything from sharing websites. I consider them irresponsible. From the point of view of the artist was my reference, from the experience of the individual there is an I and thou relationship between the artist and their creative work.
It’s mostly the attitude that bothers me. The way they try to demonize creative people. I demonize demonizing people which means I demonize myself as you have seen here. My deepest pet peeve, my most profound spiritual unrest, is this tendency people have to abandon anything and everything they are for, to talk about things they like or approve of. Criticism comes cheap and is pointless, meaningless, even self sabotaging. I would want to see a world of positive expression, and I don’t mean sunshine and rainbows. I mean reality affirming expression. I don’t post critical comments anywhere. I never comment in comment boxes because it’s nothing more than argument fodder. This is why I like the Facebook Like button. Used appropriately it’s a very simple version of what I would want to see happen in our society. Bronies should be bronies. WoW fans should be WoW fans. Like which game console you like.
The apathetic want a dislike button? Indeed, excellent.
“It’s now very common to hear people say, ‘I’m rather offended by that.’ As if that gives them certain rights. It’s actually nothing more… than a whine. ‘I find that offensive.’ It has no meaning. It has no purpose. It has no reason to be respected as a phrase. ‘I am offended by that.’ Well, so fucking what.”
[I saw hate in a graveyard — Stephen Fry, The Guardian, 5 June 2005]
That quote is very smug and narcissistic. I don’t know Stephen Fry, but he seems like a twat. We should be free to be smug and narcissistic. The creator creates ultimately out of self love.
He’s awesome for being so honest.
Honestly, I like criticism when it actually is criticism. I am offended by that which doesn’t serve, is empty and meaningless. When you take an idea and run with it further, when you take note of and point out some important element that would serve well to be added, you are a hero. I love at least the spirit behind Wikipedia. Deletion serves no purpose, and statements like “I am offended by that” are nothing more than functional efforts at deletion. Am I wrong?
I think what Stephen means is it is pointless to whine and do nothing else.
They are to shut down communication. I’ve noticed apathy always shuts down communication.
I love discussing evil twisted thinking, the perverse and corrupt, the sick and apathetic, some of my favourite things to explore.
Well, to abjectly ignore that you are upsetting someone is juvenile, and frankly very dangerous. If the person was genuinely upset they would not stop at posting that statement, they would express the meaning behind their upset so that can be an invitation to further explanation, It’s honestly what I mean when I say it, so what = say on.
Yes, build on it to reveal what they see to the other.
There are many people in the world who think that just because you have upset them, that they then have the right to do bad things to you…I’ve found this out the hard way. Yes, that’s the rule in my experience as well and why I ignore declarations of upset. I skirt around them, or just ignore them when I have a meaningful purpose.
He is homosexual and also bi polar, so probably has plenty in his past that offended him. When someone declares their sexuality, my response is so what. For me personally, their preference for a type of sex partner is not relevant. For me when someone declares their faith , or rejection of faith, my response is so what. Unless they want to share their reasoning behind a course of action with me, enlighten me with a new way of looking at a situation, then their declaration of faith means nothing to me personally. If these statements are cries for help, then I do care. If they somehow mean to display a lack of understanding, some sort of victimization, either enacted or received, then I do care.
If gay people are looking to get people fired then their fight is already lost for equal rights. Equal rights means not having their sexuality be an issue. I will not verbally accost a gay person for expressing affection for their partner in public, I will speak against someone who does attack them for that, but otherwise it doesn’t need my attention. Likewise, I will freely express affection for my wife in public, which she has actually had a little anxiety about but has not asked me to stop doing, and I will speak up against anyone who wants to fault find my giving my wife a peck on the cheek or hug in public. Is that morally wrong of me? Am I a twat?
Has anyone actually done that? Some have given funny looks, others have whispered a bit, but as long as they don’t confront me they can stew in their unpleasant attitudes all they want.
Was it wrong for an IKEA employee to tell a breast feeding woman to stop being disgusting? It was indeed wrong.
My husband likes to dance in grocery store lines. I think he should dance in grocery store lines, as well as respect the motion of the line, and finish his purchases steadily as well. It can all be done.
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.