Whatās that some-thing?
Discussion
The free will of others
Depends on the person doing the surrendering doesn't it?
If "something greater" depends on the person, then it isn't actually greater. It's just subjective preference.
You're using transcendental language (greater than yourself) but grounding it in individual opinion. That collapses the very concept you're appealing to.
The question isn't whether people feel they've surrendered to something greaterā¦it's whether that "something" actually exists outside their own mind.
No. That's false logic.
You're saying there can only be one thing that is greater then the person and that all people must recognize that one thing.
That's the exact same judgmental, one size fits all thinking that you and HODL and the rest of the people who don't understand the Golden Rule have been spewing that caused this controversy in the first place.
You already admitted the issue was that HODL communicated imprecisely.
That's it. Debate over. I win.
All other discussion from you on this is moot.
That was the point and you've already stated your perspective on it.
It varies. I spent five years with a girl who I thought I could have a family with. Life and health didnāt allow that to happen and yet I grew far more from that than many parents Iāve known. Iām still only 32 and have time for a family but Iāve discovered many possible paths to continuing fulfillment in my life. There are higher forces and consciousnesses that are leading me and I donāt know for sure where Iāll end up. If the original post had only gone so far as to say that a family is the ābestā way he would have had little controversy and engagement, but at least have been much closer to the mark.
Yes, it really boils down to HODL walking back his original claim, which he's too arrogant to do.
We donāt live in a time or culture that values being non-controversial. It only feels controversial because our culture has lost touch with what it means to be human.
That's because people are dishonest and poor thinkers. If people learned how to be honest, think and communicate precisely, we wouldn't have as much controversy in the world. We are in a position now where the only way out of the global state of controversy is to engage in controversial exchange of ideas with the goal of quelling the controversy. That's EXACTLY what my research aims to do, but apparently that won't make my life happy or fulfilling. Apparently taking aim at world peace and ending religiously motivated violence is a goal not worth pursuing because I need to spend 18 years dealing with bullshit.
Sorry, but some people have bigger fish to fry.
Nurses gonna nurse. Surgeons gonna do surgery.
"And in that day men will be weary of life, and they will cease to think the universe worthy of reverent wonder and worship.
They will no longer love this world around us, this incomparable work of God, this glorious structure which he has built, this sum of good made up of many diverse forms, this instrument whereby the will of God operates in that which he has made, ungrudgingly favouring manās welfare; this combination and accumulation of all the manifold things that call forth the veneration, praise, and love of the beholder.
Darkness will be preferred to light, and death will be thought more profitable than life; no one will raise his eyes to heaven; the pious will be deemed insane, the impious wise; the madman will be thought a brave man, and the wicked will be esteemed as good.
As for the soul, and the belief that it is immortal by nature, or may hope to attain to immortality, as I have taught you, ā all this they will mock, and even persuade themselves that it is false.
No word of reverence or piety, no utterance worthy of heaven, will be heard or believed."
We can always contribute to the correction of that by valuing non-controversial contributors ourselves. I know plenty but careful where I share them as there are always people who will find them controversial if brought unwilling into contact.
That doesn't work.
Read about the paradox of tolerance and then apply that logic to controversy in lieu of tolerance and make sure to account for the present and persistent state of global controversy in which mankind finds itself mired.
Iām not trying to control lots of people. We have plenty who will engage in controversy without my help. Those few of us with the sense to stay out of useless fights have more important things to do than contributing to the noise. The soldiers would starve without the farmers and every idiot without self control and a keyboard thinks heās a warrior. We have plenty of garden laborer positions to put the idiots to better use if we could get them. Thatās not the same as burying your head in the sand and hoping it will all go away.
Iām not advocating for rage posting. Iām advocating for saying true things that make people uncomfortable because comfort has become our civilizationās fatal weakness.
The farmer feeds the soldier, sure. But if no oneās willing to defend the boundary between wheat and weeds, youāre just farming for invaders. You can tend your garden. Someone still has to name whatās trying to kill it.
And as a gardener (literal) weeds are not the issue. They are often valuable contributors to correcting the imbalances caused by destructive farming practices like killing anything thatās not the one crop you are trying to grow. Also my comment was not about No soldiers but that we have too many specialized in attacking the other and not near enough building value. A tribe that has to attack its neighbors to feed itself is not contributing to this world by creating more mouths to feed.
Iām not talking about attacking neighbors. Iām talking about defending principles that hold civilization together when the culture actively works to dissolve them.
You can permaculture your way to balance all you want. That doesnāt change the fact that some ideas are parasitic, not symbiotic. Relativism about family formation isnāt a āvaluable weed.ā Itās poison dressed as tolerance.
Building value and defending truth arenāt opposing strategies. Theyāre the same work.
How about I use a real life instance. My dad works for a rental management company. He got a service order from a house with 3 airforce guys to Tighten the screws on a couple cabinet doors. The guys of the āsmartestā branch canāt operate a screwdriver. (Or are too self entitled) I never said anything about No controversy or No soldiers, but a different balance that is not leaving so many necessary jobs unfilled. We have more than enough people saying āthe sky is blueā which is what saying āwe need to have babies to keep the population upā is. If you really think that most people donāt know that then youāve fallen for a psyop. People know and some canāt, some have other purposes, and some donāt care. Most of the last donāt need to reproduce or need the powers that be to stop sabotaging the economy/culture so they can see it being reasonably achievable for them.
PS itās not men that donāt want to have kids. They donāt want to fight the brainwashing of the women they can get on top of all the other challenges. Few men would choose their video games over a decent woman who wants kids.
Your airforce story proves my point. Weāve raised a generation so incompetent they canāt tighten screws. Thatās not a labor shortage. Thatās a formation failure.
āWe need babiesā isnāt obvious anymore. Birth rates are collapsing. The culture celebrates childlessness as liberation. If it were common knowledge, we wouldnāt be watching demographic suicide in real time.
Most opting out arenāt facing insurmountable obstacles. Theyāre facing a culture that made comfort more appealing than continuation.
Your PS is half right. But āI donāt want to fight female brainwashingā is still a choice. Your grandfathers fought actual wars.
Waiting for perfect conditions before building families is how you get extinction with air conditioning.
The Amish are doubling in population every 20 Years. We have other cultural groups that also have high birth rates that are also competent. There are more than 8,000,000,000 people on this planet and still growing. Extinction š we are going through a phase where parts of the culture which are not heading in a sustainable direction are having a birth rate change. We donāt need the population to grow forever. Again I will state that I am still hoping to have a family myself, but we need other things too. In order for the population of the US and Canada to return to pre European estimated population we would have to loose 97% of the population. We were no where near extinct thenā¦
The point is that zero controversy is a no go.
Virtue is couched between two extremes which are vices.