#61 ·
lonegardener said:"Quote:"
I'm with you on that. 😍 There’s no such thing as a true, 100% nihilist.
Honestly, it doesn’t matter how you look at it. If you view it as a continuum—sort of like a spectrum of gray tones where you might start calling a specific shade "black" even though true black is just an idealized concept—then you could argue something similar applies to nihilism.
For instance, someone might be 90% of a nihilist—though hitting that full 100% mark is basically impossible. 😬If you were actually trying to establish a "Nihilist Party," you’d probably cap the membership at maybe 60% nihilists—though I'm just throwing numbers out there. It might not even make sense, though. It’s like calling a color "black" when it’s really just a very dark charcoal. You could technically get away with it, but does it really make sense to call an obviously grayish shade "black"? Not really, does it? 🤣
Therefore, calling a political party "nihilistic" is a total contradiction in terms. Q.E.D. ☕ 🤣
"Quote:"I don't have anything. 🤷 Honestly, we aren't even close to being at a level of technological advancement where we can start fantasizing about a scenario like that. If you lean too hard into those ideas, you run the risk of thinking like the ancient Greeks. It sounds lovely to just stroll around philosophizing while slaves handle all the grueling physical labor, doesn't it? But let's be real—do you actually believe anyone would find "self-fulfillment" working as a sanitation worker? And more importantly, who exactly is going to clean up our cities if there isn't anyone willing to do the dirty work?
I can't quite wrap my head around what you mean by that. Could you clarify? kaže:
I have this feeling that if every single person on this planet actually went out and pursued their true calling—doing exactly what they were meant to be best at—the world would just spontaneously combust. 🤔 Don't you have it?
If some kind of artificial intelligence actually stepped up and relieved people of those soul-crushing, undignified jobs, then maybe we could finally start fantasizing about a global renaissance and true self-actualization.
Oh, really?! I mean, look at Kenneth Matheny, the President of Orkin—he’s found his calling as a pest control specialist, specifically focusing on one particular niche: cockroaches.
http://drcockroach.com/home.html
There are just certain people who get a kick out of exterminating bugs... and I suppose there are also those with a manic obsession with cleanliness, though they probably don't get many chances to express that. 😂
Technological progress isn't really the issue here; the issue is that if nobody were forced to do jobs they hated, or if people could just work for what they actually think their time is worth, then profit wouldn't exist. Profit is born from necessity—from that situation where a worker has to slash their rates just to survive or pay off some debt to a bank, or when they're forced to do things they despise just to stay afloat, which ultimately drives down the value of labor for everyone else. It essentially crowds out the people whom nature actually designed to perform those specific tasks, dragging down their earning potential in the process.
Besides, if we didn't have people dedicated to cleaning up after us, we’d probably just get used to living in a bit more filth. Maybe there’d be plagues, sure, but that would certainly solve the overpopulation problem. Not that it matters much; from the perspective of eternity, it's pretty negligible. If people actually cared about others dying from disease, they might start cleaning because it bothers them personally. But even then, they wouldn't be doing it for a paycheck, or to buy some useless gadget, or to service a mortgage; they’d do it because they actually give a damn about human life. That would give work actual purpose instead of making it feel alienated. But the first thing you're taught nowadays is that "money is neutral." And honestly, that's the whole problem with money being neutral. It’s a problem precisely because it is neutral, whereas humans aren't supposed to be neutral—or at least shouldn't be—when it comes to human suffering and other things that should naturally move us, yet we ignore them all for the sake of a buck.☕
OT: The limits of human understanding seem to be set incredibly low. People can be conditioned like hamsters to run endlessly on a wheel, powering someone else's machine, yet they can't seem to self-organize to just tell that person to shove it. Why? 1) Because they can't see the hand pulling the strings, and they're mentally limited to only attacking what's right in front of them. It doesn't occur to them to, say, collectively refuse to work on principle, which would collapse the banks and the entire system instantly. Instead, most would rather see some lunatic plant a bomb in a bank branch and blow it to hell, knowing the insurance will cover the damage and eventually pass the cost onto the public anyway. 2) Because people are just too greedy and small-minded; they obsess over tiny scraps instead of standing up for fundamental principles. They’re acting like hamsters or squirrels hoarding nuts in a hollow tree because of some genetic programming, completely oblivious to the fact that they don't need nearly that much food and that eating it all might actually rot their teeth.