Posts by lonegardener

Kyle Watson8 said:I truly feel for you all while you're wandering out in the wilderness 😛 and I sincerely hope you stumble upon some kind of universal truth along the way. :/

Personally, I think there’s an even more fundamental way to define our identity: we are defined by what we love, not by what we desire. Perhaps once we finally figure out what we actually love, we truly become ourselves. Or, at the very least, we reach a stage where we can love ourselves for who we aren't, rather than just who we are. :P

You all seem far too insecure, so please, 🙄, I can already see my true self soaring somewhere high above the walls. :P

When was the last time any of you truly lost yourselves wandering across the Serengeti? It feels like an eternity, doesn't it? :I



Archetype.

Well, look at us, we’ve got a true believer! 😁

What wall are we talking about?

Sandra Parker3 said:you're taking it to an extreme
you'll take someone else's values into account in a reasonable way
now tell me how those values are undefined and vary from one person to the next...
that's just reality

but if you live by that principle—and honestly, I don't see any other way—you'll eventually learn where their rights end
meaning, by respecting their values, you aren't erasing your own
if you don't pick it up right away, you will, but if you refuse to learn, people will manipulate you and you'll just end up having a hard time
for now, the only one having issues is the guy who interprets a "wrong" look as an act of aggression😛

I didn't say there were no problems, I said it wasn't "insanely difficult"
and people adapt their behavior; we aren't isolated rocks or grains of sand in your desert

by adaptation, I didn't mean submission, because then the people with the strongest convictions regarding their ideas and needs would always come out on top

though... 🤔

so, since I don't believe these domains are strictly walled off, you can't really use me as an example
and the reason I'm even bothering to explain this is

because I think we often overthink things until they become absurd, convincing ourselves that something is impossible
when it's actually not
basically, live & let live is possible, as long as you don't take it so literally that you lose the nuance

Seriously, please tell me where you found this 😁
If everyone actually lived by this code, we'd all just end up as zombies

I actually like this one:

11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.

😁

Yeah, I might be taking this a bit too far...

Sandra Parker3 Asks:
If you’re going to live by that principle, then honestly, I don't see any other way. To me, there isn't an alternative: you have to understand exactly where one person's rights end and another's begin.
In other words, by respecting his value system, you aren't undermining your own.
If you don't take the initiative to learn right away, you'll eventually pick it up. But if you refuse to learn at all? People will start manipulating you, and that’s when things get difficult.
Right now, the only one having an issue is the person who interprets a simple "wrong" look as an act of aggression. 😛

Do you think so? What if they respond to that phantom aggression with a counteroffensive? 😬

Sandra Parker3 As specified by:
So, "live and let live" actually works—provided you don't take the phrase too literally.

Errr... personally, I think it’s possible, but I definitely lean toward an avoidant personality. I’m just completely non-confrontational by nature. I can't even think of anyone I've ever truly gone toe-to-toe with. Honestly, if everyone could just embrace that principle, there wouldn't be nearly as many arguments, fights, or wars as we see today.

Sandra Parker3 said:you're taking it to an extreme
you'll take someone else's values into account in a reasonable way
now tell me how those values are undefined and vary from one person to the next...
that's just reality

but if you live by that principle—and honestly, I don't see any other way—you'll eventually learn where their rights end
meaning, by respecting their values, you aren't erasing your own
if you don't pick it up right away, you will, but if you refuse to learn, people will manipulate you and you'll just end up having a hard time
for now, the only one having issues is the guy who interprets a "wrong" look as an act of aggression😛

I didn't say there were no problems, I said it wasn't "insanely difficult"
and people adapt their behavior; we aren't isolated rocks or grains of sand in your desert

by adaptation, I didn't mean submission, because then the people with the strongest convictions regarding their ideas and needs would always come out on top

though... 🤔

so, since I don't believe these domains are strictly walled off, you can't really use me as an example
and the reason I'm even bothering to explain this is

because I think we often overthink things until they become absurd, convincing ourselves that something is impossible
when it's actually not
basically, live & let live is possible, as long as you don't take it so literally that you lose the nuance

Seriously, please tell me where you found this 😁
If everyone actually lived by this code, we'd all just end up as zombies

I actually like this one:

11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.

😁

The history of the Churches of the Earth is a fascinating study in how spiritual movements evolve alongside the societies they inhabit. It’s a narrative that isn't just about theology, but about the shifting cultural landscapes of America over the centuries. What strikes me most is how these groups managed to maintain their core identities while navigating massive social upheavals. You see this pattern repeated throughout American religious history—groups attempting to find a balance between ancient tradition and the rapid modernization of the New World. It wasn't always a smooth transition, of course. There were periods of intense friction where institutional doctrines clashed directly with the burgeoning democratic ideals of the nation. It makes you wonder how much of our modern sense of community was shaped by these early religious structures. They weren't just places of worship; they functioned as vital social hubs during times when centralized government influence was still finding its footing. Looking back, it’s clear that these organizations played a role far more significant than many realize when discussing the foundational layers of American social fabric.

😈

Sandra Parker3 said:It’s not about believing, I know it's true.

What kind of "glance at civilization," even a casual one, 😁
isn't really just about you and your own attitudes and how you act?

The whole "live and let live" thing basically boils down to staying out of business that isn't yours
which makes things much easier.
I'm pretty sure most people instinctively know where that line is drawn.
If you’re hell-bent on making life miserable for someone or some group, there’s nothing that’ll stop you.

So, the issue isn't some failure to balance value systems or whatever—it's just that you simply want to.

The only way to truly stay out of everyone else's business is to live in the middle of the Mojave Desert with zero contact with other human beings.

A stranger's glance could easily be interpreted as an assault on one's integrity. If I were actually living by someone else's value system, I'd have to account for that too, wouldn't I?

But honestly, your conviction that this is easy—that there aren't any complications involved—is exactly why it's so difficult. If a handful of people firmly believe that different spheres of life are surgically separated, then any overlap between those domains is bound to trigger conflict. Both sides end up feeling like their boundaries were violated. And what you think won't happen because "everyone is minding their own business," you'll react even more violently to if someone actually *does* meddle in what you consider your territory. (Or, even if you personally won't—and I don't know how you operate—I'm fairly certain many others will. That brings us back to that superficial view of civilization 😬)

edit: Take a look at this list of rules, which illustrates your idea of "minding one's own business" quite well:

1. Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.
2. Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure they want to hear them.
3. When in another’s lair, show him respect or else do not go there.
4. If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy.
5. Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.
6. Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.
7. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.
8. Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself.
9. Do not harm little children.
10. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.
11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.

Do you really think this set of rules would lead to a harmonious society if everyone followed it to the letter?

Samuel Miller21 said:I suspect your primary issue lies in an almost infantile psychological framework, 😁
(which I am essentially diagnosing within yourself, so please don't mistake my intention for a mere attempt at insult)

Looking back through your contributions to these discussions where our paths cross, I notice a recurring set of themes: mortality (the question of why we should assign value to life if everything is transient), selfishness (your various proofs for its existence and why this effectively strips human relationships of any foundation for beauty), and the inherent limitations of human willpower, among others.

To be fair, much of what you say is accurate; life is fleeting, insignificant when viewed against the backdrop of eternity, humans are inherently self-interested, and absolute altruism is a biological impossibility... things a mature adult should be capable of accepting.
Instead, you seem to react to life like an offended child who realizes they didn't get the toy they wanted—because their brother was lent it instead—throwing a tantrum and refusing to settle until someone steps in to tell them that life isn't actually that fleeting, or that altruism can be achieved through some specific formula just to make them feel better.

It feels as though you became stuck at some point during your childhood, and now you are attempting to use intellect to solve existential puzzles that simply cannot be solved, at least not from your current vantage point.
The reality is that you "simply" need to grow up and reach a stage where the truths your mind presents—such as the fact that absolute selflessness does not exist in humans—are both recognized as true and simultaneously bearable, allowing you to still find value, interest, and warmth in human connection despite those facts.

As for how one actually grows up... well, that is quite another matter entirely. 😁

Bingo.😁 Another spot-on diagnosis. By the way, you don't need to hold back on my account; I honestly can't imagine being offended by anything on this platform. First off, nobody here knows even ten percent of what I actually know about myself. Whatever someone writes about me, I can guarantee I’ve already thought of it myself, or I've already had the nagging feeling that it's true.

What really gets under my skin isn't being insulted; it's the sheer lack of logic. Imagine walking through a strange town where random strangers are desperately trying to convince you that 2+2=5. At first, you'd assume it's some kind of joke, right? But once you realize they are being dead serious? 😲 That's the thing. When someone tries to argue that 2+2=5, it bothers me far more than if they called me immoral, selfish, or—pick your poison—a "spoiled brat." 🤣 I'll lose my mind over the math error, but the insults? I'll just shrug and say, "Well, you haven't heard anything yet." 😬

Samuel Miller21 said:I suspect your primary issue lies in an almost infantile psychological framework, 😁
(which I am essentially diagnosing within yourself, so please don't mistake my intention for a mere attempt at insult)

Looking back through your contributions to these discussions where our paths cross, I notice a recurring set of themes: mortality (the question of why we should assign value to life if everything is transient), selfishness (your various proofs for its existence and why this effectively strips human relationships of any foundation for beauty), and the inherent limitations of human willpower, among others.

To be fair, much of what you say is accurate; life is fleeting, insignificant when viewed against the backdrop of eternity, humans are inherently self-interested, and absolute altruism is a biological impossibility... things a mature adult should be capable of accepting.
Instead, you seem to react to life like an offended child who realizes they didn't get the toy they wanted—because their brother was lent it instead—throwing a tantrum and refusing to settle until someone steps in to tell them that life isn't actually that fleeting, or that altruism can be achieved through some specific formula just to make them feel better.

It feels as though you became stuck at some point during your childhood, and now you are attempting to use intellect to solve existential puzzles that simply cannot be solved, at least not from your current vantage point.
The reality is that you "simply" need to grow up and reach a stage where the truths your mind presents—such as the fact that absolute selflessness does not exist in humans—are both recognized as true and simultaneously bearable, allowing you to still find value, interest, and warmth in human connection despite those facts.

As for how one actually grows up... well, that is quite another matter entirely. 😁

Hmm. What does "accept" actually mean in this context? It’s never quite clear to me. I "accept" everything that I simply have no choice but to accept—as Ronald Rogers27 so eloquently put it. What more is there to do?

Samuel Miller21 said:I suspect your primary issue lies in an almost infantile psychological framework, 😁
(which I am essentially diagnosing within yourself, so please don't mistake my intention for a mere attempt at insult)

Looking back through your contributions to these discussions where our paths cross, I notice a recurring set of themes: mortality (the question of why we should assign value to life if everything is transient), selfishness (your various proofs for its existence and why this effectively strips human relationships of any foundation for beauty), and the inherent limitations of human willpower, among others.

To be fair, much of what you say is accurate; life is fleeting, insignificant when viewed against the backdrop of eternity, humans are inherently self-interested, and absolute altruism is a biological impossibility... things a mature adult should be capable of accepting.
Instead, you seem to react to life like an offended child who realizes they didn't get the toy they wanted—because their brother was lent it instead—throwing a tantrum and refusing to settle until someone steps in to tell them that life isn't actually that fleeting, or that altruism can be achieved through some specific formula just to make them feel better.

It feels as though you became stuck at some point during your childhood, and now you are attempting to use intellect to solve existential puzzles that simply cannot be solved, at least not from your current vantage point.
The reality is that you "simply" need to grow up and reach a stage where the truths your mind presents—such as the fact that absolute selflessness does not exist in humans—are both recognized as true and simultaneously bearable, allowing you to still find value, interest, and warmth in human connection despite those facts.

As for how one actually grows up... well, that is quite another matter entirely. 😁

🙂 Sounds like an impossible mission, doesn't it? But honestly, what other choice do I really have? My intellect is the only thing left standing; everything else has been shattered into a thousand little pieces. And even then, my mind is fully aware of how inadequate it feels in so many areas. For instance, if your motivation is completely shot, your intellect can't just conjure it out of thin air. It’s not exactly a comfortable way to live, but it is what it is.

Ronald Rogers27 said:I don't have the time or space to reply to everything you wrote, but I'll try to give you some answers...

You think so? Let’s bet money that if you sit on a hot stove burner and someone cranks it to max, you’re going to jump off almost instantly—or your skin is gonna sizzle. We can also bet that if a crazed guy with a club starts charging at you, you WON'T just stay calm. You’ll react—you'll grab a rock, duck, run, or scramble toward someone else. You'll know exactly how to meet that need, because if you don't, things are going to get ugly, fast.😲

Well, the outlook isn't great. But maybe you could take a second to remember how you ended up in this mess? And why were you careless enough to let it happen in the first place?

If I were stuck in the desert, I'd start thinking. Where am I? Exactly where am I located? Can I figure out North, South, East, or West by looking at the shadows and the sun? What does the terrain look like—is it nothing but sand dunes for miles, or is there something different on the horizon? Are there birds nearby? If so, what kind? Is there any wildlife—snakes, lizards, scorpions—that I could use for food? Are there cacti, and if so, how can I get moisture out of them? I'd focus on conserving energy, finding shade to hide from the sun, and moving at night while resting during the day...

Like you see, it's not nothing; I've got plenty of ideas. I definitely wouldn't act like a headless chicken (I wouldn't just run around aimlessly or dig holes in the sand for no reason). I'd do exactly what I just described. 👍

Ronald Rogers27

Well, now. 😍

Well, look, I’ll take the hit here—it's my own fault for being vague. I honestly thought we were on the same page and weren't talking about these kinds of trivial cases. You know how it goes with Fermat's Last Theorem: $x^n + y^n = z^n$ has no integer solutions for any $n > 2$... *except* for the trivial ones. I tend to gloss over that "except for the trivial ones" part because, in my head, it feels like a given.
Look, of course I’m going to open an umbrella if it starts pouring. That’s just common sense. But were you actually *forced* to move to the States under circumstances that are logically identical to that? I don't think so. Most real-life situations aren't nearly as trivial as the example you're using. In the real world, life almost always presents a set of pros and cons. The actual problem arises when you're unable to weigh those conflicting sides against each other. In the examples you provided, there is only a "pro" and absolutely no "con." There's no hesitation and no doubt, so naturally, there isn't a problem to solve.

Ronald Rogers27 said:I don't have the time or space to reply to everything you wrote, but I'll try to give you some answers...

You think so? Let’s bet money that if you sit on a hot stove burner and someone cranks it to max, you’re going to jump off almost instantly—or your skin is gonna sizzle. We can also bet that if a crazed guy with a club starts charging at you, you WON'T just stay calm. You’ll react—you'll grab a rock, duck, run, or scramble toward someone else. You'll know exactly how to meet that need, because if you don't, things are going to get ugly, fast.😲

Well, the outlook isn't great. But maybe you could take a second to remember how you ended up in this mess? And why were you careless enough to let it happen in the first place?

If I were stuck in the desert, I'd start thinking. Where am I? Exactly where am I located? Can I figure out North, South, East, or West by looking at the shadows and the sun? What does the terrain look like—is it nothing but sand dunes for miles, or is there something different on the horizon? Are there birds nearby? If so, what kind? Is there any wildlife—snakes, lizards, scorpions—that I could use for food? Are there cacti, and if so, how can I get moisture out of them? I'd focus on conserving energy, finding shade to hide from the sun, and moving at night while resting during the day...

Like you see, it's not nothing; I've got plenty of ideas. I definitely wouldn't act like a headless chicken (I wouldn't just run around aimlessly or dig holes in the sand for no reason). I'd do exactly what I just described. 👍

Ronald Rogers27

I’ve been doing a lot of thinking lately... seriously, a lot. So, tell me—are you absolutely certain this all comes down to my own negligence? Why couldn't you consider that this might just be a string of bad luck, something completely out of my control? Is there some unwritten rule I'm missing here? That a person is always, inherently, the architect of their own misfortune?

Ronald Rogers27 said:I don't have the time or space to reply to everything you wrote, but I'll try to give you some answers...

You think so? Let’s bet money that if you sit on a hot stove burner and someone cranks it to max, you’re going to jump off almost instantly—or your skin is gonna sizzle. We can also bet that if a crazed guy with a club starts charging at you, you WON'T just stay calm. You’ll react—you'll grab a rock, duck, run, or scramble toward someone else. You'll know exactly how to meet that need, because if you don't, things are going to get ugly, fast.😲

Well, the outlook isn't great. But maybe you could take a second to remember how you ended up in this mess? And why were you careless enough to let it happen in the first place?

If I were stuck in the desert, I'd start thinking. Where am I? Exactly where am I located? Can I figure out North, South, East, or West by looking at the shadows and the sun? What does the terrain look like—is it nothing but sand dunes for miles, or is there something different on the horizon? Are there birds nearby? If so, what kind? Is there any wildlife—snakes, lizards, scorpions—that I could use for food? Are there cacti, and if so, how can I get moisture out of them? I'd focus on conserving energy, finding shade to hide from the sun, and moving at night while resting during the day...

Like you see, it's not nothing; I've got plenty of ideas. I definitely wouldn't act like a headless chicken (I wouldn't just run around aimlessly or dig holes in the sand for no reason). I'd do exactly what I just described. 👍

Ronald Rogers27

Spot on—that’s pretty much how I’d approach it too. But let’s broaden the perspective a bit. Imagine you wake up naked in the middle of the Mojave Desert, and next to you is a canteen of water that you estimate will last about five days. You realize you’re a rational being, but you also notice you have total amnesia. You don't even know your own name, let alone how you ended up out there. Was someone placed here intentionally? Is this some kind of experiment? Did a natural disaster strike? There are simply no answers.

Now, regarding those mechanisms you described above. To be honest, I'm not an expert on the actual survival odds deep in the desert... whether one can actually find water the way you suggest. Maybe there aren't any cacti anywhere, maybe there isn't any other life... anyway, that's beside the point. The whole thing hinges on those five days; the desert is just a mental image. You KNOW that five days is roughly the window you have left. Pick whatever imagery works for you; if the desert doesn't fit, imagine you're drifting in the middle of the Pacific with no way to desalinate the water, and no rain is coming for at least five days. It really doesn't matter.

If you haven't caught my drift yet—though it seems obvious to me—I am clearly describing that existential state of "thrownness into the world." For me personally, it triggers the exact feeling Jean-Paul Sartre captured in Nausea. You could argue that I'm "reducing" reality or ignoring "important" details, but I don't see it that way. Someone could look at this desert scenario and say, "It's not all bad; you could collect grains of sand and marvel at their shapes; you could doodle art in the dunes; you could watch the stunning shades of blue in the sky shift throughout the day; when night falls, you could gaze at the stars and wonder if there's life on other planets," and so on. Of course, one can always find a distraction, no argument there... I certainly always find some way to keep myself busy, even if it's just writing nonsense on a forum 😬

Sandra Parker3 said:Exactly.
And saying "live and let live" actually implies that you should bother considering a value system that isn't yours—meaning you adjust your own behavior to account for someone else's totally different definition of harm.

In practice, it's not actually that hard; you usually find you can pull off that little mental gymnastic quite easily if you actually give a damn.😁

Do you honestly believe that?

From where I'm sitting, looking at the broader sweep of civilization, I suspect it's a bit more complicated than you're making it out to be...

redmarlin3 said:Every single fix seems to just spawn a whole new set of headaches, doesn't it? It’s like we’re constantly running on a treadmill, sweating through our shirts just to stay in the exact same spot... why even bother sometimes? You solve one issue, and suddenly three more pop up out of nowhere, staring you right in the face. It makes you wonder if there's actually such a thing as progress, or if we're just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic... 😈 😁

I’ve got a real soft spot for the Declaration of Human Rights... 😍 She’s supposed to be "universal." Right. As if...

If we’re really going to go down this road and start relativizing everything, then fine... I guess we should probably stop and question whether every single breath we take or step we move is causing harm to someone else first. Might as well be thorough about it, right?

We really ought to be looking at every single case on an individual basis. We need to nail down exactly where the line is drawn when it comes to infringing on someone else's freedom and personal integrity... and then figure out how we're actually supposed to respond to that.

Paper can handle just about anything... especially a pile of beautiful wishes.

redmarlin3 said:Every single fix seems to just spawn a whole new set of headaches, doesn't it? It’s like we’re constantly running on a treadmill, sweating through our shirts just to stay in the exact same spot... why even bother sometimes? You solve one issue, and suddenly three more pop up out of nowhere, staring you right in the face. It makes you wonder if there's actually such a thing as progress, or if we're just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic... 😈 😁

I’ve got a real soft spot for the Declaration of Human Rights... 😍 She’s supposed to be "universal." Right. As if...

If we’re really going to go down this road and start relativizing everything, then fine... I guess we should probably stop and question whether every single breath we take or step we move is causing harm to someone else first. Might as well be thorough about it, right?

We really ought to be looking at every single case on an individual basis. We need to nail down exactly where the line is drawn when it comes to infringing on someone else's freedom and personal integrity... and then figure out how we're actually supposed to respond to that.

Of course. In fact, I think we're actually on the same page... except I'm not the one practicing relativism here. I'm simply observing the current reality, whether people like it or not. Isn't it a plain fact that conflicting value systems are floating all around us? Look, this isn't about my personal opinion; it's just an observation you can see everywhere. The very existence of these different value systems means that everyone defines "harm" differently. No declaration can erase that truth. In fact, one could argue that any attempt to force a "universal" value system onto everyone is itself a fundamental violation of the right to define what one values!

So, what is an indecisive person like me supposed to do? Set my own boundaries and criteria? Align myself with the system that impresses me most? Or just go with whatever seems to be the most popular? How do you handle it?

redmarlin3 said:My whole philosophy starts with a simple premise: you should be free to do whatever you want, provided you aren't hurting anyone else in the process.

For instance, if I say I’m fine with gay marriage or Pride parades—which I am—it’s because I don't see how living that way harms a single soul. But when someone starts making a massive scene protesting those rights, it sends a signal to me. It suggests they might eventually end up standing in the middle of Central Park with a Molotov cocktail in their hand, looking to cause actual harm. And when it comes to people like that... well, I have zero tolerance. That's where the line gets drawn.

😈 This is one of those very common ways people oversimplify things that are actually quite complex...

In the real world, that just doesn't work. First off, there is no universal definition of what constitutes "harming" someone. Everyone has their own set of values, and what one person considers harmful, another might see as perfectly fine. Beyond that, it’s rarely a matter of avoiding harm altogether—it’s usually about deciding how much "minimal" harm is acceptable based on someone else's highly subjective criteria.

So, while the "live and let live" principle sounds incredibly easy and even cool, in practice, it ends up meaning whatever anyone wants it to mean, depending entirely on how they choose to define their own rules.

James Lee77 said:I mean, that’s kind of the whole point of being that aggressive, right? You basically just manufacture an enemy so you have a reason to keep acting like a fighter. I guess it's all about justifying your own existence.
I mean, what’s even the point of having combat skills if you don't have an actual opponent to face? It’s like this Manichaean standoff where neither side is willing to budge even an inch. Honestly, it's kind of perfect for fighters like that. I guess if either side actually won, it would just end up destroying both of them anyway. 😉
So, I guess you could say aggressive atheists and religious zealots are basically just feeding off each other at this point. 🤷

It’s like this Famous Person is a perfect example of how the "antifa" crowd and the far-right extremists in America just end up creating each other. It's a total loop, honestly. They both feed off the same drama, and meanwhile, the rest of the normal world—the people who don't need either side's nonsense—is just left watching. I guess it's just one big cycle of manufactured outrage. Nemanja:

I don't know, man, why is that crowd so obsessed with this whole red versus black thing? It’s like the ultimate American grudge match, right? They act like it's this massive, built-in rivalry that defines everything else we fight about in society. I guess they just see every single social conflict through that one specific lens, but I don't know, maybe it's just how they're wired.

Look, this has been explained a million times around here, and honestly, the answer hasn't changed: they’re just fueling that whole conflict. They lean on this fake ideological divide between the left and the right as their core lie, mostly because it’s how they keep their grip on power. It makes them feel indispensable. I guess as long as they can point to an extremist threat on one side, they can claim they're the only thing standing in the way. As long as there's a perceived threat from the far left, Thompson will always have an audience to sing about legends like Juriti and Boban.
That’s exactly why they keep backing Thompson. He’s basically the reason they even exist—it’s this whole vicious cycle. You’ve got Sony Music dropping insane amounts of money for his concert at Yankee Stadium; then next season, they'll probably have Mark headlining the main square in D.C. Even NBC will air some watered-down footage of the show—this notorious fake where they totally gloss over the fact that the first two rows at Yankee Stadium were packed with people in those extremist hats. It all serves the same purpose, though. It’s just a way to play the "anti-fascist" card. They want to snatch away that crucial liberal-democratic argument from anyone who actually gets it—you know, the idea that modern America isn't built on an anti-fascist foundation, but on an anti-totalitarian one. That's the real paradigm: condemning both sides of totalitarianism, whether it's the far-left or the far-right.

Look, if things were different—if this country wasn't so split down the middle between two massive, outdated ideological evils from the last century, or just totally torn apart by two parties clinging to those old traditions—then maybe we’d see something else. If both sides were actually sidelined for once, and there was finally some breathing room for actual civic politics to exist in its full democratic glory, then this whole generation would be in trouble. I mean, most people in this generation basically view America like Noah's Ark, mostly because they’ve been caught in the crossfire and scrutinized by both the left and the right. Honestly, if you even consider the difference between those two sides, it's pretty much just one big, messy political amalgam. Their real fear isn't just a few symbolic condemnations of some old-school communists who are long gone; it's about delegitimizing an entire political mindset. It's about preventing America from ever truly moving past the shadow of the mid-1940s and finally stepping away from that old-world totalitarian vibe into the modern, liberal democratic world of the West. That's the real fear.

and also

RED & BLACK

One of those things that just keeps looping in our society is this whole "Red vs. Black" conflict—it’s basically this massive ideological fantasy that defines the American landscape. It's fundamental because people try to frame it as the main event, like every single social issue can be boiled down to this one fight. I guess my take on why this keeps happening is twofold. On one hand, maybe it’s just how the American political establishment stays in power. Like, as long as there’s a threat of far-right extremism, they need an anti-fascist buffer to justify their spot. And as long as any old spark of old-school partisan zeal remains, Thompson probably feels like he’s still got a reason to write songs, if nothing else. But on the other hand, by constantly obsessing over these two extreme leftovers from the past, it kills any chance of a real centrist or civic movement ever taking root. These old ghosts basically hog the entire political field, leaving zero room for anyone who actually wants to talk about civic issues. Honestly, it feels like they're being intentionally suffocated. They basically create themselves out of necessity—one side needs the other just to prove they still matter. What I'm really wondering is, can we even call out this fantasy? When you realize there isn't even a real "civic class" left—not just socially, but even as an informed political force—because its space has been totally hijacked by this endless grudge match that gets forced on us as the only reality in the country, how do you even debunk it? How do you go beyond just talking about it and actually shut it down politically?
...
So, here’s my question: How do we break this illusion? This lie that structures all of American reality and forces this Red vs. Black dialectic on us as our only destiny since 1941? I mean, sure, you could say "just vote," but that's not what I'm getting at. The real problem is that most Americans actually know that the old battle between the far-left and the far-right isn't the defining contradiction of our country anymore, yet everyone acts like it still is!
...
The whole Left versus Right thing—or the social versus national divide, or the old partisan battles—those should really just be descriptive terms. They shouldn't be treated as these absolute, essential truths. Since the difference between the big parties is actually pretty tiny and mostly driven by outside pressures—which, let's face it, is the main driver in American politics—they just project all that anger onto the past. It makes it look like we're still fighting communists versus fascists, even though we all know deep down that neither group exists like that anymore. Those old labels are just projections used to fill the void where actual meaningful conflict should be. It's really just two different groups fighting for special treatment in society. Since there’s no real principled difference between them, they just dress it up as a continuation of that old-school antagonism.

Well... the real issue is that the "sane majority" tends to manufacture its own different—yet strangely similar—kinds of friction. This whole thing with partisans and fascists is just our local flavor, but the underlying pattern is universal.

Ronald Rogers27 said:Look, I’m totally with you. If I could afford to be lazy, I’d be lazy. If I could be selfish, I’d be incredibly selfish. I’d have 33 girlfriends if I could... 😂

But the thing is, I CAN'T. To survive this desperation—I actually wrote about this two months ago in my philosophy class, where we had two prompts describing my struggles in the American *gladiator* arena—I had to adapt aggressively. Life is fundamentally unfair. But to stay alive, I simply don't have the luxury of being self-pitying or selfish. I can't waste energy threatening the winners after I lose a fight, because I need every ounce of strength for the next battle. Besides, those winners can come back and take my head off, or at least put me in a cage...

What I'm getting at is this: you become unselfish out of necessity. You build emotional depth out of necessity. You learn how life works out of necessity. Necessity forces selfless behavior and a real understanding of your own limits...

The end result? I'm actually pretty happy with myself. Necessity forced me to level up. It pushed me to grow mentally and physically over the years just so I COULD endure the brutal fight against American alligators that show no mercy... So, through sheer necessity, I reached a level that satisfies me...

(And necessity taught me a lot of life lessons, most importantly, that *everything changes except the stones*) 🤣
_______

So you say you're unhappy because you're selfish? Well, clearly you have the capacity for it, but try framing the problem differently: *strip away* your defenses and just be selfish. Then you'll see how people really react to you. It's not just that you're unhappy because society rejects you; it's that, implicitly, people don't actually like you. They just hide it to serve their own interests, but you feel it, and that's why you're feeling this dissatisfaction. People don't just accept selfishness as normal.

If you take away everyone's selfish motives, some people will throw your selfishness right back in your face, while most will just avoid you. I mean, who wants a selfish *friend* when they're already dealing with enough problems in this harsh world?

(Necessity changes things, but you aren't under any forced pressure—others are, because they depend on you. That's why this will just end in your endless frustration) 🤷

Ronald Rogers27

😲 It has always fascinated me about you guys from the "Eastern Bloc" (don't take that the wrong way)—you seem to have this capacity for being brutally honest with yourselves. How does that song go from *Better Call Saul*?

I want life, a better life
to grab it like a tiger
life isn't child's play
I want more, I want even better
I want it all, come what may
but what's the point if I don't belong to that breed
because life demands better people.

Now, as far as I'm concerned—it's possible that I've actually been somewhat privileged, as you suggest. I haven't (yet 😲) ever been in a situation where I had to fight tooth and nail just to stay alive. But then again, that's relative. I don't believe you were forced to move to the USA solely for basic survival. You can live on bread and water... you don't necessarily need ice cream... or enough hot water so you aren't worrying about the utility bill. To me, I'd rather be a guy living on the streets than live the kind of life you're describing ("tooth and nail"). I realize this might sound like I'm acting like a spoiled, pampered mama's boy—and maybe I am giving off that impression—but if you knew my actual living conditions, how I live, my actual needs, and my relationship with luxury or comfort, I don't think you'd still think that.

Ronald Rogers27 said:Look, I’m totally with you. If I could afford to be lazy, I’d be lazy. If I could be selfish, I’d be incredibly selfish. I’d have 33 girlfriends if I could... 😂

But the thing is, I CAN'T. To survive this desperation—I actually wrote about this two months ago in my philosophy class, where we had two prompts describing my struggles in the American *gladiator* arena—I had to adapt aggressively. Life is fundamentally unfair. But to stay alive, I simply don't have the luxury of being self-pitying or selfish. I can't waste energy threatening the winners after I lose a fight, because I need every ounce of strength for the next battle. Besides, those winners can come back and take my head off, or at least put me in a cage...

What I'm getting at is this: you become unselfish out of necessity. You build emotional depth out of necessity. You learn how life works out of necessity. Necessity forces selfless behavior and a real understanding of your own limits...

The end result? I'm actually pretty happy with myself. Necessity forced me to level up. It pushed me to grow mentally and physically over the years just so I COULD endure the brutal fight against American alligators that show no mercy... So, through sheer necessity, I reached a level that satisfies me...

(And necessity taught me a lot of life lessons, most importantly, that *everything changes except the stones*) 🤣
_______

So you say you're unhappy because you're selfish? Well, clearly you have the capacity for it, but try framing the problem differently: *strip away* your defenses and just be selfish. Then you'll see how people really react to you. It's not just that you're unhappy because society rejects you; it's that, implicitly, people don't actually like you. They just hide it to serve their own interests, but you feel it, and that's why you're feeling this dissatisfaction. People don't just accept selfishness as normal.

If you take away everyone's selfish motives, some people will throw your selfishness right back in your face, while most will just avoid you. I mean, who wants a selfish *friend* when they're already dealing with enough problems in this harsh world?

(Necessity changes things, but you aren't under any forced pressure—others are, because they depend on you. That's why this will just end in your endless frustration) 🤷

Ronald Rogers27

No, that isn't unselfishness... I don't accept that kind of "unselfishness," and I don't believe any amount of necessity would force me into it.

Ronald Rogers27 said:Look, I’m totally with you. If I could afford to be lazy, I’d be lazy. If I could be selfish, I’d be incredibly selfish. I’d have 33 girlfriends if I could... 😂

But the thing is, I CAN'T. To survive this desperation—I actually wrote about this two months ago in my philosophy class, where we had two prompts describing my struggles in the American *gladiator* arena—I had to adapt aggressively. Life is fundamentally unfair. But to stay alive, I simply don't have the luxury of being self-pitying or selfish. I can't waste energy threatening the winners after I lose a fight, because I need every ounce of strength for the next battle. Besides, those winners can come back and take my head off, or at least put me in a cage...

What I'm getting at is this: you become unselfish out of necessity. You build emotional depth out of necessity. You learn how life works out of necessity. Necessity forces selfless behavior and a real understanding of your own limits...

The end result? I'm actually pretty happy with myself. Necessity forced me to level up. It pushed me to grow mentally and physically over the years just so I COULD endure the brutal fight against American alligators that show no mercy... So, through sheer necessity, I reached a level that satisfies me...

(And necessity taught me a lot of life lessons, most importantly, that *everything changes except the stones*) 🤣
_______

So you say you're unhappy because you're selfish? Well, clearly you have the capacity for it, but try framing the problem differently: *strip away* your defenses and just be selfish. Then you'll see how people really react to you. It's not just that you're unhappy because society rejects you; it's that, implicitly, people don't actually like you. They just hide it to serve their own interests, but you feel it, and that's why you're feeling this dissatisfaction. People don't just accept selfishness as normal.

If you take away everyone's selfish motives, some people will throw your selfishness right back in your face, while most will just avoid you. I mean, who wants a selfish *friend* when they're already dealing with enough problems in this harsh world?

(Necessity changes things, but you aren't under any forced pressure—others are, because they depend on you. That's why this will just end in your endless frustration) 🤷

Ronald Rogers27

How will they react? Probably not well. It’s similar to how I feel about that "selflessness" born out of necessity that you mentioned—it just doesn't sit right with me. To be honest, I have no appreciation for "selflessness" when it's driven by impulse, let alone when it's forced by circumstance.

Ronald Rogers27 said:Look, I’m totally with you. If I could afford to be lazy, I’d be lazy. If I could be selfish, I’d be incredibly selfish. I’d have 33 girlfriends if I could... 😂

But the thing is, I CAN'T. To survive this desperation—I actually wrote about this two months ago in my philosophy class, where we had two prompts describing my struggles in the American *gladiator* arena—I had to adapt aggressively. Life is fundamentally unfair. But to stay alive, I simply don't have the luxury of being self-pitying or selfish. I can't waste energy threatening the winners after I lose a fight, because I need every ounce of strength for the next battle. Besides, those winners can come back and take my head off, or at least put me in a cage...

What I'm getting at is this: you become unselfish out of necessity. You build emotional depth out of necessity. You learn how life works out of necessity. Necessity forces selfless behavior and a real understanding of your own limits...

The end result? I'm actually pretty happy with myself. Necessity forced me to level up. It pushed me to grow mentally and physically over the years just so I COULD endure the brutal fight against American alligators that show no mercy... So, through sheer necessity, I reached a level that satisfies me...

(And necessity taught me a lot of life lessons, most importantly, that *everything changes except the stones*) 🤣
_______

So you say you're unhappy because you're selfish? Well, clearly you have the capacity for it, but try framing the problem differently: *strip away* your defenses and just be selfish. Then you'll see how people really react to you. It's not just that you're unhappy because society rejects you; it's that, implicitly, people don't actually like you. They just hide it to serve their own interests, but you feel it, and that's why you're feeling this dissatisfaction. People don't just accept selfishness as normal.

If you take away everyone's selfish motives, some people will throw your selfishness right back in your face, while most will just avoid you. I mean, who wants a selfish *friend* when they're already dealing with enough problems in this harsh world?

(Necessity changes things, but you aren't under any forced pressure—others are, because they depend on you. That's why this will just end in your endless frustration) 🤷

Ronald Rogers27

Well, you make a fair point—who actually needs a selfish "friend"? I’d frame it differently: who really needs an "unselfish" friend out of pure necessity? What's the real difference there? Because if that "unselfish" friend happens to find themselves in a position where they no longer *need* anything from you, they'll likely turn selfish pretty quickly. Wouldn't you agree?

If you frame it like that, friendship becomes an impossibility. It turns into either a massive ego trip or nothing more than raw necessity—or, if you’re being generous, just a transaction. At that point, friendship is basically a contract where both sides trade assets just to get something else in return. And the moment one side can't pay up anymore, the whole obligation vanishes like it never existed. Is that really all there is to it? Are you saying that sheer desperation is what forced you to accept a situation like that?

Ronald Rogers27 said:Look, I’m totally with you. If I could afford to be lazy, I’d be lazy. If I could be selfish, I’d be incredibly selfish. I’d have 33 girlfriends if I could... 😂

But the thing is, I CAN'T. To survive this desperation—I actually wrote about this two months ago in my philosophy class, where we had two prompts describing my struggles in the American *gladiator* arena—I had to adapt aggressively. Life is fundamentally unfair. But to stay alive, I simply don't have the luxury of being self-pitying or selfish. I can't waste energy threatening the winners after I lose a fight, because I need every ounce of strength for the next battle. Besides, those winners can come back and take my head off, or at least put me in a cage...

What I'm getting at is this: you become unselfish out of necessity. You build emotional depth out of necessity. You learn how life works out of necessity. Necessity forces selfless behavior and a real understanding of your own limits...

The end result? I'm actually pretty happy with myself. Necessity forced me to level up. It pushed me to grow mentally and physically over the years just so I COULD endure the brutal fight against American alligators that show no mercy... So, through sheer necessity, I reached a level that satisfies me...

(And necessity taught me a lot of life lessons, most importantly, that *everything changes except the stones*) 🤣
_______

So you say you're unhappy because you're selfish? Well, clearly you have the capacity for it, but try framing the problem differently: *strip away* your defenses and just be selfish. Then you'll see how people really react to you. It's not just that you're unhappy because society rejects you; it's that, implicitly, people don't actually like you. They just hide it to serve their own interests, but you feel it, and that's why you're feeling this dissatisfaction. People don't just accept selfishness as normal.

If you take away everyone's selfish motives, some people will throw your selfishness right back in your face, while most will just avoid you. I mean, who wants a selfish *friend* when they're already dealing with enough problems in this harsh world?

(Necessity changes things, but you aren't under any forced pressure—others are, because they depend on you. That's why this will just end in your endless frustration) 🤷

Ronald Rogers27

Ha—I think you're right about that. But honestly, I don't think I’d be any happier even if I did have a massive circle of friends just out of necessity. There's no real fulfillment in being "friends" with people simply because it serves an ego trip or a business deal. To be truthful, I'm pretty sure I'd still be just as unhappy.

Basically, you keep bringing up "necessity" like it’s the only thing that matters. But look at it this way: when someone is being impaled on a stake, they certainly feel a "necessity" to get off it, right? My point is, simply feeling a need doesn't define anything if there isn't a clear course of action available to actually fix the situation. The same goes for me. I don't believe life's pressures will ever force my hand, mostly because I won't necessarily know *how* to satisfy those demands. Think of it like this: imagine I'm stranded in the middle of the Mojave Desert with almost no water left. Once that last drop is gone, I might fall into total despair—but since there isn't a single source of water for miles, what exactly is that desperation going to force me to do? What would you do if you were alone in the desert without water? Would you start digging frantically in the sand, hoping against hope that you'd find a spring? Would you just start running in a random direction, praying it leads you out of the dunes? Or would you do something else entirely?

Ronald Rogers27 said:Look, if you’re really saying you can't find a way to be happy with yourself, that points to a few different issues...

Numero uno: You're being too selfish. You think the whole world revolves around you, so you don't see any reason to change. That leads to the conclusion that you *don't need* to change because you're living a pretty comfortable life just the way you are. You're privileged. People accept you because they benefit from the status quo—you're high enough up the ladder that they let you stay exactly where you are without lifting a finger.

Numero duo: A person should strive for something else entirely—some kind of meaningful work or a craft to master. If you don't have that drive, it means you're spoiled. You're expecting the world to bend to your skills rather than bending your skills to meet the needs of the world.

The bottom line: In the movie "gladiator," you're basically playing the role of "Commodus." Just map that movie onto your own life, and you'll have a perfect description of the very problem you're asking us to solve... 🤷

Ronald Rogers27

I'm not following... if I'm comfortable, privileged, financially stable, and feel no pressure to change—what exactly is bothering me, in your view? Why can't I simply accept the fact that I'm selfish, or rather, just be who I am?

Ronald Rogers27 said:Look, if you’re really saying you can't find a way to be happy with yourself, that points to a few different issues...

Numero uno: You're being too selfish. You think the whole world revolves around you, so you don't see any reason to change. That leads to the conclusion that you *don't need* to change because you're living a pretty comfortable life just the way you are. You're privileged. People accept you because they benefit from the status quo—you're high enough up the ladder that they let you stay exactly where you are without lifting a finger.

Numero duo: A person should strive for something else entirely—some kind of meaningful work or a craft to master. If you don't have that drive, it means you're spoiled. You're expecting the world to bend to your skills rather than bending your skills to meet the needs of the world.

The bottom line: In the movie "gladiator," you're basically playing the role of "Commodus." Just map that movie onto your own life, and you'll have a perfect description of the very problem you're asking us to solve... 🤷

Ronald Rogers27

Let me guess—you're a fan of Star Trek? 🙂
Constant improvement, hmm... meaningful work, hmm... meaningful to whom? Improving oneself sounds great if you're some high-level expert in your field (or say, the captain of a starship with 1,100 crew members 😍); but can a sanitation worker "improve" within their specific role? 😕 Furthermore, how does a person actually become spoiled? What are the mechanisms behind it? To be honest, I do notice something in myself that might fit that description (regarding what you said about adaptation... yes, I am quite unadaptable, actually)—but I'm curious about how that process happens.

Ronald Rogers27 said:Look, if you’re really saying you can't find a way to be happy with yourself, that points to a few different issues...

Numero uno: You're being too selfish. You think the whole world revolves around you, so you don't see any reason to change. That leads to the conclusion that you *don't need* to change because you're living a pretty comfortable life just the way you are. You're privileged. People accept you because they benefit from the status quo—you're high enough up the ladder that they let you stay exactly where you are without lifting a finger.

Numero duo: A person should strive for something else entirely—some kind of meaningful work or a craft to master. If you don't have that drive, it means you're spoiled. You're expecting the world to bend to your skills rather than bending your skills to meet the needs of the world.

The bottom line: In the movie "gladiator," you're basically playing the role of "Commodus." Just map that movie onto your own life, and you'll have a perfect description of the very problem you're asking us to solve... 🤷

Ronald Rogers27

_nobody_ elaborate—how exactly did you arrive at that comparison? 😬

Ronald Rogers27 said:That's a dead giveaway that you aren't happy with yourself. You're frustrated because you feel weak in certain areas, and those weaknesses are driving you crazy since you can't seem to get a grip on them.

You need to sit down, look yourself straight in the eye in a mental mirror, and pinpoint exactly where you're losing control. Once you do that, perform some damage control. Then, after a bit of time passes, sit down and have another heart-to-heart with yourself. From there, you take corrective action to regain ironclad control over your mind and body.

You have to keep working on yourself, moving in a spiral that leads toward one central point: Progress. That’s the only way to reach a state where you'll feel relatively satisfied with who you are. 👍

(relatively satisfied...) 🙂

Ronald Rogers27

Exactly.

Ronald Rogers27 said:That's a dead giveaway that you aren't happy with yourself. You're frustrated because you feel weak in certain areas, and those weaknesses are driving you crazy since you can't seem to get a grip on them.

You need to sit down, look yourself straight in the eye in a mental mirror, and pinpoint exactly where you're losing control. Once you do that, perform some damage control. Then, after a bit of time passes, sit down and have another heart-to-heart with yourself. From there, you take corrective action to regain ironclad control over your mind and body.

You have to keep working on yourself, moving in a spiral that leads toward one central point: Progress. That’s the only way to reach a state where you'll feel relatively satisfied with who you are. 👍

(relatively satisfied...) 🙂

Ronald Rogers27

Ahem... the diagnosis was spot on, but the therapy is—as usual—much more problematic. Would I want to be satisfied with myself? Well, on some level, definitely... however, the issue is that I can't even imagine it. You see, I can't wrap my head around who I would need to be or what I would need to do to actually reach that satisfaction. So, I don't see any clear course of action. Besides, I can't help but think it might be impossible. If you do something solely to satisfy yourself, then by some paradoxical logic, you can never truly achieve it. Honestly, a person should strive for something entirely selfless, and then perhaps, as a side effect, find satisfaction. But that kind of self-satisfaction is something you should try to hammer out of your head—except such things have a nasty habit of rooting themselves deeper the harder you strike them. I get the impression that the more I think about being unselfish, the more selfishly wretched I become. The question is whether I'll ever break free from this loop.

Amanda Roberts21 said:1. I know. I've lived it.
2. You can't.
3. Your center is you—your own consciousness, that raw sense of "I am." The periphery is merely the mind identifying itself with whatever your senses happen to touch. The first part is always constant; the second is in a state of perpetual flux.

Not quite. Things like this go beyond simple firsthand experience. You can learn about obvious, direct facts through experience—but for claims like these, experience alone isn't enough. You need deep reflection and intense self-analysis. In short, you need the mind, which is exactly what you claim is peripheral and constantly shifting.

Amanda Roberts21 said:1. I know. I've lived it.
2. You can't.
3. Your center is you—your own consciousness, that raw sense of "I am." The periphery is merely the mind identifying itself with whatever your senses happen to touch. The first part is always constant; the second is in a state of perpetual flux.

taf lak

Amanda Roberts21 said:1. I know. I've lived it.
2. You can't.
3. Your center is you—your own consciousness, that raw sense of "I am." The periphery is merely the mind identifying itself with whatever your senses happen to touch. The first part is always constant; the second is in a state of perpetual flux.

Hmm, I am... truth be told, I am—at least for now. But this idea of a "periphery" suggests to me that this might not be a permanent state. Today I am; tomorrow? Who knows?

In essence, yes, that's right... I am. That core would have to be unchangeable for it to hold the significance you're giving it. And things are only truly unchangeable if they are eternal. To be honest, I'm not sure which scares me more: eternity or mortality. 😱

Charles Thomas70 said:lonegardener, I wonder if you grew up in an environment like this—with a father who constantly lectured everyone, and still does, and a mother who thought, and still thinks, that her kid is the smartest and most wonderful person on the planet?

Is there such a thing as a "different" kind of family? 😲 🤣

All jokes aside... seriously though, I think you could find traces of what he’s talking about pretty much anywhere, whether it's subtle or glaringly obvious. At least, that's my take on it. 😲

Samuel Miller21 said:I find myself deeply frustrated by these reflexive behaviors of mine—those moments when I find myself entangling myself in matters that hold absolutely no purpose or significance, driven solely by a surge of narcissism or mere habit. In those moments, it feels as though I am trampling over everything I actually value in life. It is as if some temporary persona, shaped entirely by my environment and completely disconnected from my true self, takes control, causing me to speak or think things that don't matter to me in the slightest.
It weighs on me because these episodes are such a waste of time; they tend to cloud my vision, making me lose sight of all the beautiful, interesting, and exhilarating aspects of existence.
Ultimately, these impulses lead toward a dull mire of exhausted ideas that are endlessly recycled—worn out and hollow, yet always delivered with the misplaced conviction that something profound has been said. As Kundera once observed: many people, very few ideas.

To be fair, I am specifically referring to those reflexive reactions where one acts out of compulsion rather than genuine interest. Not all philosophical inquiry needs to be this way; discourse fueled by actual passion is always far more engaging and inspiring.

But what is the problem with that?
Lately, what haunts me most is the notion that we might be entirely undeterministic—that we could shift in any direction at any given moment. It isn't that I am suddenly overflowing with self-satisfaction in every aspect of my life, but rather this question: if no part of me is determined, then what am I? Am I merely a collection of characteristics that happened to coincide in time and space, and am I supposed to accept that accidental cluster as my "self"?
Just as much as the idea of absolute determinism terrifies me, so does the idea of ultimate indeterminism. Imagine if everything rested solely upon human will and choice... something so precarious, volatile, and unstable. 😲
Total indeterminism shatters my concept of an individual core. If I am defined by nothing, then I can believe in neither a purpose for my existence nor a necessity for my presence in the natural order. 🤷
Unless, of course, nature is nothing more than a statistician managing random events. 😁

Exactly... what Americans would call a "knee-jerk reaction." I just can't resist that kind of hollow philosophizing. At the end of the day, it all boils down to a handful of recurring motives circling the drain: motivation, selfishness, purpose, meaning... just endless combinations and variations of the same thing. Throw in a little politics and sociology, and wow—what a massive, messy pile of nonsense you get! 😠

Samuel Miller21 said:I find myself deeply frustrated by these reflexive behaviors of mine—those moments when I find myself entangling myself in matters that hold absolutely no purpose or significance, driven solely by a surge of narcissism or mere habit. In those moments, it feels as though I am trampling over everything I actually value in life. It is as if some temporary persona, shaped entirely by my environment and completely disconnected from my true self, takes control, causing me to speak or think things that don't matter to me in the slightest.
It weighs on me because these episodes are such a waste of time; they tend to cloud my vision, making me lose sight of all the beautiful, interesting, and exhilarating aspects of existence.
Ultimately, these impulses lead toward a dull mire of exhausted ideas that are endlessly recycled—worn out and hollow, yet always delivered with the misplaced conviction that something profound has been said. As Kundera once observed: many people, very few ideas.

To be fair, I am specifically referring to those reflexive reactions where one acts out of compulsion rather than genuine interest. Not all philosophical inquiry needs to be this way; discourse fueled by actual passion is always far more engaging and inspiring.

But what is the problem with that?
Lately, what haunts me most is the notion that we might be entirely undeterministic—that we could shift in any direction at any given moment. It isn't that I am suddenly overflowing with self-satisfaction in every aspect of my life, but rather this question: if no part of me is determined, then what am I? Am I merely a collection of characteristics that happened to coincide in time and space, and am I supposed to accept that accidental cluster as my "self"?
Just as much as the idea of absolute determinism terrifies me, so does the idea of ultimate indeterminism. Imagine if everything rested solely upon human will and choice... something so precarious, volatile, and unstable. 😲
Total indeterminism shatters my concept of an individual core. If I am defined by nothing, then I can believe in neither a purpose for my existence nor a necessity for my presence in the natural order. 🤷
Unless, of course, nature is nothing more than a statistician managing random events. 😁

Honestly, I always love the actual process of philosophizing—it’s great while it's happening—but that "after-taste" is just awful. You end up feeling like you haven't actually become any smarter, nor have you helped anyone else in the slightest. Though, I suppose if enough time passes, maybe it eventually becomes useful.

Samuel Miller21 said:I find myself deeply frustrated by these reflexive behaviors of mine—those moments when I find myself entangling myself in matters that hold absolutely no purpose or significance, driven solely by a surge of narcissism or mere habit. In those moments, it feels as though I am trampling over everything I actually value in life. It is as if some temporary persona, shaped entirely by my environment and completely disconnected from my true self, takes control, causing me to speak or think things that don't matter to me in the slightest.
It weighs on me because these episodes are such a waste of time; they tend to cloud my vision, making me lose sight of all the beautiful, interesting, and exhilarating aspects of existence.
Ultimately, these impulses lead toward a dull mire of exhausted ideas that are endlessly recycled—worn out and hollow, yet always delivered with the misplaced conviction that something profound has been said. As Kundera once observed: many people, very few ideas.

To be fair, I am specifically referring to those reflexive reactions where one acts out of compulsion rather than genuine interest. Not all philosophical inquiry needs to be this way; discourse fueled by actual passion is always far more engaging and inspiring.

But what is the problem with that?
Lately, what haunts me most is the notion that we might be entirely undeterministic—that we could shift in any direction at any given moment. It isn't that I am suddenly overflowing with self-satisfaction in every aspect of my life, but rather this question: if no part of me is determined, then what am I? Am I merely a collection of characteristics that happened to coincide in time and space, and am I supposed to accept that accidental cluster as my "self"?
Just as much as the idea of absolute determinism terrifies me, so does the idea of ultimate indeterminism. Imagine if everything rested solely upon human will and choice... something so precarious, volatile, and unstable. 😲
Total indeterminism shatters my concept of an individual core. If I am defined by nothing, then I can believe in neither a purpose for my existence nor a necessity for my presence in the natural order. 🤷
Unless, of course, nature is nothing more than a statistician managing random events. 😁

Exactly. That whole identity crisis issue 😢 ... IBM, when I remember high school, back when they had those psychology classes talking about an 'identity crisis'—it felt so ridiculous. What kind of dark crisis was that? Seriously, WTF? 🙄 😍

So, what would you say instead? Who or what are you, really?

Amanda Roberts21 said:That thing that stays CONSTANT and cannot be CHANGED
isn't the SOURCE of your frustration.

That is your CENTER.

It's the PERIPHERY that gets to you.

You don't need to fix the periphery—it’s so inherently unstable that it’ll change on its own eventually. Just make sure you don't TRUST it in the meantime.🙂

IBM.. but this sounds a bit 'too good to be true,' almost overly positive. For instance, how would you answer these:
1. Are you certain that's actually the case, or rather, how can you possibly know?
2. How do I know you truly believe that, and aren't just trying to comfort yourself by repeating it because maybe you're dealing with the exact same thing?
3. Even if I assume you know and that it really is true—in that scenario, what is my center versus my periphery, and how do I tell them apart? 😕

Carol Baker6 said:Quincy:

lonegardener Asks: Look, if we’re actually following your logic—if it’s TRUE that everything we do is driven by pure selfishness—then why on earth should I even care whether my "selfless" acts end up taking something away from someone else? I mean, think about it. If I’m fundamentally selfish, and if that’s the core principle behind every single thing we do, then honestly, it shouldn't matter one bit to me how it affects others, right? It’s just math at that point. So, based exactly on the way you're laying this out, there’s really no reason for me to go out of my way to avoid "Type 3" selfishness. The absolute worst-case scenario is that I weaken someone or, like you said, totally ruin them—but if that doesn't bother me personally, then why would I even try to avoid it? I guess it just makes sense. 🤷

Ugh, look, I really hate speaking for other people—especially those self-proclaimed geniuses out there—but honestly? I have this selfish urge to just clear the air and say my piece.
I mean, you're probably on the right track, but I think you're totally overlooking that one specific need—or maybe more like a craving—that you were just talking about a second ago. And honestly? If we’re being real here, the whole thing just seems to stem from pure selfishness again. I guess that's just how it goes sometimes.
Look, I’m gonna be real here—it’s purely out of self-interest. It's not even about being a saint or whatever. I just don't want to go around hurting people or tearing them down, mostly because it ends up backfiring on me. If I start acting like that, I just end up feeling guilty, my conscience starts eating me alive, and honestly? It's just too much of a headache. It becomes toxic for me personally, so I just don't do it. Maybe that sounds selfish, but I guess it's just how I have to handle things to stay sane.
So, I mean, honestly? There’s basically zero reason why you wouldn't just steamroll over everyone else if you don't have a problem with it personally. I guess the only thing that might actually trip you up is if you go way too far and end up getting checked—you know, like if you're actually scared of the law, or God, or some kind of cosmic justice, or whatever it is you happen to believe in.

Fair enough, I'll grant you that. Honestly, I'm the same way, but that's besides the point. You don't want to hurt or weaken others because you'd feel guilty? Fine. But why then advise others to act the same way? You aren't responsible for how some other selfish person chooses to behave. Why tell them "don't undermine others"? Why would a Sith lord care if some Jedi "weakens" someone they are supposedly helping selflessly? In what way does that actually harm the interests of the Sith?

Even if my own empathy prevents me from hurting or weakening someone, I still have no reason to worry about whether someone else does the same. If I did, wouldn't I be drifting dangerously close to being completely irrationally selfless? 😲

We could also take this from a different angle. Why would you accept the state of affairs you're describing—specifically that sense of conscience you mentioned? That clearly feels like a burden, and it's likely just the result of social conditioning. Since you're already aware of that weight, why do you accept it as necessary? Why not, for instance, train yourself to shed that ballast of socially conditioned "conscience"? Then you'd be free to be as selfish as necessary without anything holding you back. Now, that would be an interesting form of emancipation...

Jesse Harris5 said:hmmm

So, I’m jumping in here to respond to that absolute mountain of a post from APEMANTA
.
Look, I'm not trying to argue that vanity or selfishness are actually "good"—I won't go there—but I will say this: true altruism? It just doesn't exist...

...there really are only three flavors of selfishness:
1. When you do something purely for yourself and nobody else, and you're fully aware of that fact (that's what society calls plain old "selfishness").
2. When you do something for others because you genuinely get a kick out of it (this is what people call "selflessness").
3. When you do things for others, but not actually *for* them—you do it because you feel guilty and just want to ease your own conscience. This is honestly the worst kind of selfishness, because it ends up undermining people. You end up doing things for them that they really ought to be doing for themselves to grow, so by "helping," you're actually stopping them from becoming better versions of themselves!

I've spent some time analyzing my own head lately and realized I totally see what you were getting at in your post (sorry, I can't quite tell if you're a guy or a girl from your profile right now... 😁), and I definitely notice all these different types of selfishness cycling through me depending on whatever mood I'm in.

As far as I'm concerned, there isn't any other type of selfishness out there—at least not one I've stumbled upon yet—and "selflessness" (if we're being honest with ourselves for once) is basically an illusion.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I have to tell you that this is perfectly normal. It's just how things work; that's just the way the world is, and that's just how people are built.

The only thing you can really do is keep a close eye on that third category—type 3. Just try to stay mindful of it constantly, and when you catch yourself slipping into that mode, do everything in your power to pivot back to one of the other categories. If you don't, you might accidentally stunt the growth of everyone around you.

Just remember, the only way to truly understand the world is to first understand yourself.

I'm still pretty much a novice at all this, but the more I learn about myself, the more I realize that everyone else operates on this same principle—they just lie to themselves about being perfect little saints. 😁.

By engaging in this kind of "self-analysis," you're actually on the right path to stripping away the masks and seeing who you really are, which lets you show your true self to the world too. Everyone who refuses to think about this is honestly just missing out!

Etoga, enjoy the journey!!!

Interesting post... very interesting, actually. It aligns with my own thinking quite closely, though I have a few observations...

First off, regarding this Type 3 selfishness 😬—what you're describing is essentially Nietzschean philosophy. A classic example of this mindset is the logic used by the Sith in the Star Wars saga. Your thesis is that by insisting on "helping" others, you're actually weakening them, stripping away their need to find their own solutions and grow through struggle. If you want a deep dive into this, try playing Knights of the Old Republic 1 and 2. Those games are phenomenal specifically because they portray the conflict between the Jedi Order and Sith philosophy as something balanced and logical, rather than a simple black-and-white battle of good versus evil.

However, looking at this specific school of thought—the Sith lords, Nietzsche, and even the growing number of people today who are becoming more aware of what you wrote (that relentless selfishness, regardless of its form)—I have one fundamental critique. If it is TRULY the case that everything we do is driven by selfishness, then why should I care whether or not I cause someone harm by supposedly "selflessly" helping them? If I am selfish, and if that is the core principle behind everything, then I shouldn't actually care about the outcome, right? By your own logic, there is no reason to "be careful" about Type 3 selfishness. The worst-case scenario is simply that I weaken someone (or even destroy them, as you put it), but if that doesn't affect me personally, why avoid it? 🤷 Could you try analyzing what prompted you to offer that advice? What selfish need were you fulfilling by giving it? 😬

In short, I think you'll need to do a little more soul-searching regarding selfishness to resolve this paradox... if you manage to crack it, let me know, because I haven't figured it out yet. 😳

Sandra Parker3 said:Honestly, it was a completely serious response. 🙂

You basically have to start everything from scratch... if you can even figure out how to apply that to a situation where you're already stuck.
An accident only counts if you actually screw up so badly that you have to start the whole thing over from scratch.

So you end up with a few different versions of your unfinished self, and honestly, that’s just a mess.

Quincy:

lonegardener Asks: Seriously though—when someone actually undergoes a change (and I mean a deliberate choice, not just some passive thing that happens to you because life throws you a curveball), what is it *inside* us that actually drives that shift? And more importantly, can that core mechanism itself be changed? It feels like everything just stays exactly the same to me... like, even when you're actively trying to change, that core part of you driving the transformation remains untouched. Or am I just overthinking this?

I honestly can't tell if you've genuinely mixed things up here, though there's a fair chance you actually have. 🙄

I think—and I could be wrong here—that THAT shouldn't change, though I won't actually name THAT because I have my own specific way of referring to it. 🤣

Why do you even care? Are you trying to change who you are, or are you just looking to tear everything down? (Watch out, this could get dangerous.)

What expression are we talking about, pray tell? 🙂

northernangler17 said:Ugh... do you get why? Just a thought, I guess.

I know why...

I get frustrated with myself because I honestly feel like I'm brilliant, even though every single day I prove to myself that I'm actually as clueless as they come. It's strange how an intelligent person can be so hopelessly dense. 😲

I mean, I can go maybe five days without feeling the need to lecture someone, and then that's it... I can't hold out any longer. Is that some kind of obsessive-compulsive thing? Maybe an addiction? 😱

How should I put this... I realize that I don't know anything, yet somehow everything still feels crystal clear to me. 😬 And I just can't help it... the realization that I am completely unversed in so many fields of human knowledge doesn't actually instill any sense of respect or humility in me regarding the fact that other people know a massive amount about those subjects (different people knowing different things).

To be completely honest (at least on this subject, not generally 😈)—I think I first noticed this trait in other people, and it drove me absolutely crazy; then I realized I was exactly the same way. In fact, I probably get annoyed with those same people precisely because they are just like me. (It’s like those two goats fighting on a narrow ridge in one of those old fables).

I would love for someone to thoroughly prove to me that I have no idea what I'm talking about—but they'd have to do it impartially, neutrally, and with pure logic. Because if they get emotionally involved, I'll just dismiss it as their own ego trip or their own desperate need to act smart, or whatever. Just vanity, really. Vanitas vanitatum, etoga vanitas. Even when someone tries to convince me that it's perfectly fine to be vain, that it's normal and something I should just accept and make peace with... even doing that is usually driven by that same vanity, for themselves rather than for me. They say a dog doesn't bark for the sake of the village... and I see that clearly in myself. I'm the dog, and I'm not barking for the village; I'm barking for myself. And even the desire I have to bark for the village for just one day—even that is just another selfish wish. Damn. 😠 😠 😠

Thinking like this leaves me with this feeling of hopeless lack of freedom... sure, I can do whatever I want, but I can only want what I want and nothing else. When it comes to my own desires, I am totally conditioned and determined. I can't "want to want" something different than what I actually want. Well, I technically can—I'm doing it right now 😬—but then I fall into a total paradox and a logical loop that gives me a headache. Better go to sleep...

Sandra Parker3 said:getting a whole new identity

Yeah, I’ve chewed on that idea before, but eventually, it just started getting under my skin. 😍

Seriously though—when a person undergoes a change (and I mean an intentional shift, not the kind that happens to you against your will through life experience), what exactly is the part of us driving that transformation? And can THAT specific thing—whatever it may be—ever actually change?

To me, it feels like the core stays the same. Even when you're evolving, there's this underlying "self" that wants the change in the first place, and that part seems pretty fixed. Or am I totally missing the mark here?

What should I do when I'm starting to lose my cool? 😲 🤷