PDA

View Full Version : Off-Topic: Discussion on Generosity



NaryaDL0re
08-22-2013, 11:23 AM
Generosity

Before I state my own experience with the topic I d like to ask a question.

@hex_colin Why are you generous ?

Obviously this question doesnt have to be answered, but I have strong feelings
about this topic and rather have an answer first before I add my own views
to this conversation.
I ll still gladly give my input in case colin kindly declines to answer though.

hex_colin
08-22-2013, 11:32 AM
Generosity

Before I state my own experience with the topic I d like to ask a question.

@hex_colin Why are you generous ?

Obviously this question doesnt have to be answered, but I have strong feelings
about this topic and rather have an answer first before I add my own views
to this conversation.
I ll still gladly give my input in case colin kindly declines to answer though.

Long story... Here's the TL;DR version...

We had nothing when I was growing up. I'm one of 5 kids and it was only my father at home, and he couldn't work because he had 5 kids to look after. So, I'm acutely aware of how it feels to want stuff (experiences, things, etc.), but not having the resources to get them.

I've worked pretty hard, and been reasonably successful in my career. I've found myself in a position to help out occasionally. For a myriad of reasons, I'm also really into the idea of Hex. I'm happy I've been able to combine the 2 and help grow the community, even if only a little.

NaryaDL0re
08-22-2013, 11:59 AM
Thx for answering such a personal question.

So:

For me it has acutally been quite the opposite.
I ve found myself in a pretty well funded family. Not quite rich, but never really short
of anything I actively wanted either.
Given the circumstances for a long time giving and sharing was just natural for me and
I never second guessed it. It were only rare occasions and later on when I started living
on my own, that I found opportunities to find out whether or not it was easy for me to share
without the comfort of abundance. To my satisfactions it never was hard for me.

Given my deeply skeptical and through this later on cynical nature, I did wonder though,
why I should share and why it came easy to me in the first place, even without the explanation
of abundance.

All in all it is my believe that Humans are at their core entirely selfcentered.
I still believe it is often correct and mutually beneficial to share and show generosity.
What I do dislike though, is any delusional notion of altruism.

I hate it when people glorify generosity as something special or selfless.

Not that the people shouldnt be glad and gratefull. They just shouldnt pretend
that the person giving to them hasnt acted in their own selfinterest.
Just as someone who rapes you against your will would.

Its just a matter of circumstances whether the desire of your fellow men synergizes
with your own (someone is empathic and enjoys your joy), or it doesnt (someone
wants to do something with you that you dont enjoy).


Its helpful to tell your fellow men that hex_colin seems to be a guy that
not only managed to aquire money in this world, but also feels delight
in giving to the less fortunate/skilled.
Its a beautifull trait that almost in itself lays the foundation for sympathy.

But its just one of many possible characteristics a men has.
Its not more important or rare than high intelligence, solid believes,
synergistic hobbies or emotional stability. (etc etc etc)


The reason I m bitching about this in the first place is the following:

I believe we actually HURT the commoness of generosity and empathy,
if we glorify and selectively praise these attributes.

What I mean by this is, it should be common behavior among people
to share in their wealth and enjoy the happyness of their kin.

We alienate ourselfs from this perspective continiuosly... because
we make it out to be something rare.
And that leads people to the assumption that its ok to ne be generous,
because thats something for white knights, religious people and rich.

It distracts from the fact that its MUTUALLY BENIFICIAL to be "generous".

Dont make it out to be something hard and painfull that only specific people can manage.

Make sure you tell of your experience and mention the implicitness
with which hex_colin did what he did, fully knowing that it serves his own interests.


Maybe this is too idealistic for most people in this forum or even confusing.
But among the many damaging habits that inhabit our culture, this glorification
of generosity is one that always bugs me.

I m generous, I like sharing and giving away. Because I m happy to do it.
Because of my own selfish goals. Not because I need some moral excuses
or feel better about myself. Not to accomodate some cultural conventions.
I share because its beneficial for myself.

And only if we start to view it that way, will more people start to follow in our steps.

Gwaer
08-22-2013, 12:06 PM
It's not an idealistic or confusing post. It's just wrong. Generosity is a rarer and rarer trait. It should be praised and glorified each and every time you see it, rather than none at all.

NaryaDL0re
08-22-2013, 12:11 PM
than you say its better to make those few people that are generous
feel more comfortable and further increase the missconception of the word,
rather than ever having a shot at a society in which generosity is natural and understood.

EDIT: "generosity" isnt rare btw. Everyone and their mom donates to some
stupid excuse for a better consciousness. Africa, Animals, Rainforests, you name it.
People that actually enjoy the act of sharing rather than appeasing some
cultural convention or moral obligation... they are rare.
But they shouldnt be praised... they should be explained.
So people actually have reason other than glory than follow their example.

People will never do something for long unless you convincingly explain
to them why its in their own best interest to do so.

This thread just emotionally forces people to "appease some ideal" rather
than explaining to them why its actually beneficial for them to do so.

Gwaer
08-22-2013, 12:15 PM
More, that when you encourage the people who are generous you reinforce in other people that being generous is a good thing, and they should be encouraged to do it when they can. That's kind of the point of the OP.

De-valuing it further by not calling out cases of it provides no incentive for people deciding to go that route. Honestly, generosity is not the best trait to cultivate in a society that it is not the norm, people that step outside that box, and help anyway inspire others to do the same.

NaryaDL0re
08-22-2013, 12:27 PM
Friends just arrived so I ll have to take a break from this discussion.
I ll be back on the morrow and leave this last comment for the time being.

I think you missunderstand human psychology.

Glorifiying someting in our modern society doesnt encourage it, it enforces it.
Do you ALWAYS stop at red when you cross the street? no? well thats because
somewhere along the road you ve discovered that its not beneficial for you to do
what society tells you to do at all times.

Most people rationalize that most moral advocations are tools to manipulate the
masses. And given our religious backround its a sensible thing to assume.

Again: If you want people to do something. Tell them HOW and WHY its good for THEM.
Dont tell them "look this great guy(idiot), he gave me 2K, you should totally do it too, its awesome".
People will just assume you praise them so they further damage themselves to your benefit.


EDIT: ffs, please read what you replay to.

I specifically stated that you SHOULD share your great experiences.
You just shouldnt randomly praise it, but explain the great nature
of it and how it actually was in his own best interest to do so.

Gwaer
08-22-2013, 12:32 PM
A skinner box has been proven time and time again to be the most successful way to get people to do anything. That right there invalidates literally everything you've just said.

Furthermore, Colin never asked for any recognition. We say the things we say because we feel impressed to do so. What he has done for this community is staggering, each and every person at the Dinner when cory gave his speech that I've talked to has said they felt the exact same way. I want everyone to know what a great guy Colin is. You're warped sense of psychology and what is right doesn't belong here in my opinion.

Jinuyr
08-22-2013, 01:42 PM
What Colin has done for us was no strings attached. I'm not obligated to thank him or recognize him, but I do it because of the kind person he is and the good efforts he's made for our Hex community.

Additionally, we should not derail the good intentions of BossHoss in this thread.

gohan661
08-22-2013, 03:57 PM
This is merely a thread for the OP to fish for glory and to brown nose the community. Honest to god if you did something like this at your workplace or uni or whatever you'd be ignored/beaten up. And i'm inclined to believe you'd deserve it.

NaryaDL0re
08-22-2013, 04:01 PM
Explaining why and how something works in your favor is a skinner box shortcut for human beings...
We can just skip most of the repetition by recognizing the benefit of certain behaviour.
Throwing someone some gratitude isnt an effective way to condition them, and even less inspire others.

I dont want to seem mean or aggressive here, but again:
Please read before you post oO. Never did I state or imply that colin had anything to do with
the posts that have been made to glorify his behaviour. He is just a great guy.

All I did was criticize the way gratitude was phrased and shown because of the
reasons I explained earlier.

Also, nothing I said shouldve made the impression that I m not valuing colins
deeds and personality. On the contrary I praised it myself.

I m also afraid that this conversation has a pretty low standard since blunt
statements without any effort to show your thought process or reasoning, neglecting
to fully read my posts and responding accordingly... lets just say you dont leave
the impression of having any interest in the "correct" point of view or truth in this matter.
(which is not to say that I have access to the truth, you just dont add anything with substance)


Anyhow, as in the past any attempt at a reasonable discussion on a sensitive matter
gets smacked down on these forums.

What good does a "generous" community do, when its full of superficial and pretentious
dudes handshaking each other on their awesomeness, all the while being completely
ignorant/repellent towards any form of criticism that isnt pompously phrased to their liking.

I m hyped for Hex, and I think this community is your slightly above average TCG community.
Which besides competition has a very healthy amount of intelligence and empathy.
But these forums? Between all the helpfull and motivated sites, wikis, forums, guilds... it reeks
of glorification, self-important people trying to distinguish themselves and hide their elitism under
sheets of fake modesty and casualness. Most of them so effective that they manage to decieve themselves.

And given how this is the only community hex has so far and the positive nature of many
ideas and projects, crypto cannot help but automatically feed the trollish behaviour that
hides between this "great communty" we have.



If anyone still reads this and hasnt understood it by now:
I like this thread, I like hex_colin, I love hex and most of what this community does is great.

But if this community repeatedly fails to conduct meaningful discussions once
critique arrises at sensible topics... than it still falls short of what I would call a good community.
(And yes, this seems like a big generalization and is in fact a hyperbole, but derives from
more than just the observations inside this one thread.)

Skirovik
08-22-2013, 07:26 PM
This is merely a thread for the OP to fish for glory and to brown nose the community. Honest to god if you did something like this at your workplace or uni or whatever you'd be ignored/beaten up. And i'm inclined to believe you'd deserve it.

Firstly... wow..!

Secondly, the OP was about ANOTHER person and not themselves.

Thirdly, thank god for the ignore option. I have never ignored so many people in a forum in my life. Some of the people here are just... I mean... Do you even live in the real world? You're worse than NaryDL0re.

gohan661
08-22-2013, 11:11 PM
Firstly... wow..!

Secondly, the OP was about ANOTHER person and not themselves.

Thirdly, thank god for the ignore option. I have never ignored so many people in a forum in my life. Some of the people here are just... I mean... Do you even live in the real world? You're worse than NaryDL0re.

How can someone get so butthurt when I wasent even talking to them? If this is the community that Hex attracts it won't last long

Gulbech
08-22-2013, 11:18 PM
Thx for answering such a personal question.
I hate it when people glorify generosity as something special or selfless.

Not that the people shouldnt be glad and gratefull. They just shouldnt pretend
that the person giving to them hasnt acted in their own selfinterest.
Just as someone who rapes you against your will would.



This whole discussion is about a philosofical standpoint. You can argue that all human acts are selfish. Because nomatter what you do, you will always do it to get something yourself, either to feel better about yourself or get attention from others. Therefore you really cant be generous because you want something for yourself too.

I dont agree on that standpoint, i think some people really wants to do better and help other. Everything else would be cynical and would be a sad world to live in. Why do some people become visit friends on elder home, why does some people help for free in school, feed the homeless or maybe be a sports trainer for free like i am? I really hope most people wants to help other, and give them a good time, not just so they feel better themself.

You can argue some rich people, just do it to show off for their friends. But when most people offer their help and time to help other people i think it is generousity and what Colin is doing is also great generosity in my oppinion.

Best regard
Gulbech

Gulbech
08-22-2013, 11:21 PM
How can someone get so butthurt when I wasent even talking to them? If this is the community that Hex attracts it won't last long

I completly disagree, i have never seen so frindly a community. Most people in this forum are friendly and give great feedback to the game.
Also a lot of people who wants to help others, just look at the backer slacker giveaway in the new player thread. Lots of people who wants to give away to the community.

NaryaDL0re
08-23-2013, 04:13 AM
@Skirovik

Thats just plain and simple beauty.

Now matter how wrong I could be, or how missplaced my tone could be,
how bad a choice of words I might have used...

What was made clear without doubt by me, is that the "greater good" is directly within my interests.
All I have written so far, serves the purpose of enriching me and the people on this board.

How on earth can you condemn me as a person without even the slightest
try to reach a conclusion? How insanely ignorant must one be, to judge on this
small sample size without any personal involvement?


Obviously gohan661 ignores quite a few facts in this thread himself
(like the aformentioned independence of the thread from hex_colin).
However his feelings on this thread are but a spark of what I tried to
convey earlier.

No matter how heartfelt this thread is, it will always leave room for
skeptical interpretation... looking like a pretentious charade of pricks.

Its not on you guys to say "well people ought to see our tears and honesty through the internet".
You are responsible to present your opinion in a way that is unambiguous if possible.

So one last time: this thread doesnt serve its intended purpose.
The way it is phrased and presented leaves loads of negative impact.
Right now this thread will reach mostly dependent sheep that crave
for social sympathy and approval...
Well, all you create are a few more people that for a couple of weeks/months
will try to live a better life and follow some abstract ideal because they hope it
will make them feel better or be more appreciated by their fellow men.

What you dont create however, are people that understand the benefits of
generosity and empathy and will for the rest of their life look out for opportunities
to share and enjoy themselves together with other people.


I believe hex_colin is awesome, I believe this thread is honest and well meant.
But I also argue (and I m open for debate), that this thread is a short-lived facade by accident.

gohan661
08-23-2013, 06:56 AM
Mate I ignored most of the thread tbh lol. And i'm not nearly as eloquent as yourself. I was not referring to hex_colin but the guy who's giving away the king tier and all that jazz

Jbizzi
08-23-2013, 08:39 AM
@Skirovik

Thats just plain and simple beauty.

Now matter how wrong I could be, or how missplaced my tone could be,
how bad a choice of words I might have used...

What was made clear without doubt by me, is that the "greater good" is directly within my interests.
All I have written so far, serves the purpose of enriching me and the people on this board.

How on earth can you condemn me as a person without even the slightest
try to reach a conclusion? How insanely ignorant must one be, to judge on this
small sample size without any personal involvement?


Obviously gohan661 ignores quite a few facts in this thread himself
(like the aformentioned independence of the thread from hex_colin).
However his feelings on this thread are but a spark of what I tried to
convey earlier.

No matter how heartfelt this thread is, it will always leave room for
skeptical interpretation... looking like a pretentious charade of pricks.

Its not on you guys to say "well people ought to see our tears and honesty through the internet".
You are responsible to present your opinion in a way that is unambiguous if possible.

So one last time: this thread doesnt serve its intended purpose.
The way it is phrased and presented leaves loads of negative impact.
Right now this thread will reach mostly dependent sheep that crave
for social sympathy and approval...
Well, all you create are a few more people that for a couple of weeks/months
will try to live a better life and follow some abstract ideal because they hope it
will make them feel better or be more appreciated by their fellow men.

What you dont create however, are people that understand the benefits of
generosity and empathy and will for the rest of their life look out for opportunities
to share and enjoy themselves together with other people.


I believe hex_colin is awesome, I believe this thread is honest and well meant.
But I also argue (and I m open for debate), that this thread is a short-lived facade by accident.

Holy hell,

I hope that you are a writer/poet/etc. because outside of your eloquent phrasing and ample use of synonyms, your thoughts lend nothing to the community you are naively defending.

I will not argue your stance on acts of generosity as you are clearly a pessimist, but I will ask you to let it go. Regardless of the intentions, BossHoss is merely trying to grow the community in a way that HE feels is appropriate. If people latch on to the prospect, then he and the community are successful. If they don't, the community grows in a different direction.

Your words mean nothing if the population feels otherwise. Let them make their own decisions rather than confusing them with your secondary educational remarks.

I mean don't get me wrong... I like the smell of my own farts too.

RobHaven
08-23-2013, 08:51 AM
1) I've read several papers about how altruism - as it's defined - can not exist. And it's true. But there's a difference between "dictionary" definition and "accepted" definition. Typically, any time that someone puts themselves out significantly with little more than "I feel good about" in return, it's more than okay to classify that as altruism.

2) NaryaDLOre: A lot of what you're saying is creeping toward the redistribution of wealth. It's a system that has been tried several times, and it failed many times.

3) I have a novel of a post coming up, but it's something near and dear to my heart. Give it a chance before writing it off.

Gwaer
08-23-2013, 08:56 AM
Can't we make a different thread for discussing the finer points of generosity rather than derailing bosshoss' thread?

BossHoss
08-23-2013, 09:06 AM
Can't we make a different thread for discussing the finer points of generosity rather than derailing bosshoss' thread?

I actually do not think this is a derail at all. They are all valid points and our discussion on the topic helps waterdown "glorification" in my opinion.

I will follow up with a novel... stay tuned!

NaryaDL0re
08-23-2013, 10:19 AM
@Jbizzi

Actually I have a rather optimistic view on our social possibilities and try to convey that.
Would you mind pointing me towards the individuel statements of mine that lead you
to your assumption? I d like to avoid further confusion on this topic in the future.

Also, *DANGER* exaggeration inc *DANGER*, what you are basically saying is:

It doesnt matter if the priest is telling bullshit, as long as he feels its appropriate and
the population believes in burning females, than its just they way we roll.
Dont you dare tell the priest that his idea might be well intended, but ill thought through!

I hope you get my point between these cynical lines.
Just because he wants to do good and attempts it, shouldnt discourage me
to voice concerns of my own.

@RobHaven
1.) agreed, I would argue though, that we should challange exactly that "accepted definition".
There are reasons for most "dictionary" definitions, and in this case the "accepted" one
leads to loads of damaging assumptions that distract from the benefits of generosity
instead of illuminating them.

2.) On the contrary... Empathy has genetical and conditional limits!
I would never give another person 50% of what I own, even if they have nothing.
The value/happyness of "sharing" has diminishing returns... it stops being worth it
at a certain threshold that depends on many factors.

I dont strife for some warped idea of communism!
I strife for a healthy and synergistic form of capitalism.

3.) I ll be glad to give it my best shot in reading it thoroughly and answering constructively.

@BossHoss, same for you, I m eager to get this conversation into a more productive scale.

EDIT: havent read the last post yet, because of the site being down. going to read it now.

Read the story of RobHaven, great read though I hoped for a discussion =).
Its something beautiful that happened to you two, I d still argue that everything
she did was in her own best interest, without devaluing the act itself.

BossHoss
08-23-2013, 10:28 AM
Tl;dr I deserve to be punched in the face but in the meantime have fun and enjoy a chance at a giveaway interacting with the community.

But for those that care to read, here ya go...

First of all I apologize for not being an “active” member of this debate as I am currently away and out of reception but I return to digital reality briefly each day. Therefore my responses will unfortunately be longwinded.

It is an age old argument that a truly altruistic act is not possible because it can be argued that an intrinsic reward of personal gratification is always involved. In fact it is no surprise that what I may be doing with this thread may be perceived as psychological egoism. While I may know within myself what my true intentions are, it is the perception that is difficult to be mirrored when the range of individual perception upon the masses is vast. I can argue until I am blue in the face (I guess in this case my fingers are blistered?) on what my true intentions are but someone will always differ in opinion and find a way for an act of good to be classified as egoism and not generosity.

I began this thread for a multitude of reasons with the foremost being an answer to why I felt the way I did. That right there is an argument for psychological egoism. Or is it? Do intrinsic rewards qualify as benefits? Queue side rant: During GenCon I was walking down the street and approached by a homeless man asking for money to buy a sandwich. Wreaked of weed... cmon man really? So I invited him to lunch with me at Panera Bread across the street. We sat down and I ate with a perfect stranger... Was this created as a feeling of direct reciprocity as a recipient of a good deed? No but it definitely helped. I am a giver by nature and what Colin did for me reminded me of who I am. I was not looking for company, I was not looking for recognition and I was not looking for an opportunity. I was presented with an opportunity and I acted. This side rant can now be taken as egoism based solely on the fact I have publicized a good deed to prove a point... oops whatever. I know my intentions in that moment and perception can spin it in whatever direction it likes.

@NaryaDL0re I can wholeheartedly agree that I also am bugged by the glorification of generosity. But where is the line? When and how does awareness become glorification? What is the intrinsic foundation of a “greater good”?

It should (In my opinion) most definitely be common behavior but here within lies a problem. Before something can become common it at some point must be rare. Ex. Countermagic is a common when Hex is released. Producers will for a short time have countermagic in their collection and out of the masses it is essentially rare. Producers will possess this while everyone else does not. Is it glorification to recognize that a producer possesses this, or is it awareness in spreading the word that what one man may possess can also be so easily attainable by everyone else? Therefore what may be perceived as glorification can undoubtedly become common. But in due time...

I was “directly” affected by the generous act but also got to lay witness, firsthand, to the “indirect” effect it may have had on so many people. I find it interesting how human behaviour works.

Ex. 1 I get punched in the face. Ouch, WTF! Who did that? I want to punch them back. Why do I feel this way? Why do the bystanders instantly separate into two groups? Some want to help punch me in the face and others want to help me punch back.
Ex.2 I get given something valuable. Sweet! I can`t believe it. Who did that? I want to give them something back. Why do I feel this way? Why do bystanders instantly separate into two groups? Some want to help give me more valuable things and others want to help me give back.

Judging by the two examples I know what kind of person I want to be, what kind of people I want to be surrounded by, and what kind of world I want to live in. There is no denying the fact that there will always be some overlap (Why is he giving that away? I can`t stand that, I want to punch him in the face!)

NaryaDL0re
08-23-2013, 12:10 PM
Great post, not the best sound to noice ratio but neither are my own posts, so who am I to point the Finger...

1.) The Question of "Altruism".

Does money have self-serving value? food? sex? power? I argue that no, they do not.
Happyness is the only thing in human nature that can convincingly be argued to be self-serving.
Everything we do, strife for or act towards in any way, leads to the pursuit of happyness, which
in case of generosity happens to be the most common intrinsic benefit.

So yes, I argue that helping a homeless person isnt any less selfish than raping a child.
These two acts differentiate in many ways, but not in their goal, making yourself happy.
EDIT: my girlfriend pointed out that I should point out that this wouldnt make me happy...

Its important to understand that I DO NOT argue that every "altruistic" act serves
some materialistic ulterior motive... many people help for no other reason than the
happyness they gain from the joy they percieve and share on their fellow men.
And other people do similiar acts for entire different reasons.

What I argue again is this: ultimately everything we do, servers only one singular purpose.
Making us feel better(equaling: making us feel less worse if that makes sense in english.)

But what does this mean for human nature and society? doesnt this mean everything we do
is worth the same?

I m going to make this as short as possible for the sake of argument, but the topic is VERY
rich and deep to delve into...

Once we realize our inevitable self-centeredness, what does this mean? Well first of we need
a few new perspectives to value our own and other peoples behaviour because the conventional
morals no longer apply.
How do I start to differntiate good from bad, if no matter what I do, I do it to make me feel better?

You adept to the new fundation of behavior and value everything according to your own personal needs.

But wouldnt that mean everyone starts to steal/rape/kill and only do whats best for them? Nope!
Thats were mankind started actually, but we ve developed beyond that point.
Not because of miraculous morals, gods, angels or empathy though...

Why did we stoped killing each other everywhere? Because it stopped being lucrative... simple isnt it?

The reason families, clans, citys, cultures developed is simple = its more beneficial for everyone involved. People realized that splitting task, gaining expertise, working together... made them happier (and live longer) than fighting each other.

This was a VERY tiring and slow process that took many parts of the world different amounts of time, some places havent passed that point even today. And the sobering and saddening part is: we have grown apart again, because with technology and democracy, unity and teamwork is slowly losing value again, forcing people to tend towards antisocial behaviours... anyhow...

To stop this here: Even once your realize you only live to fullfil your own needs, you still might find, that cooparating with other people, going so far as to thrive in empathy and sharing your own wealth to the point of generosity... actually serves your own selfish needs in a beautifull and simplistic way.

TL: DR = people have been selfish from the moment our consciousness hit a certain threshold...
yet somehow we still managed to form mutually beneficial relationships...
thats NOT because of God or some wired morals or the meaning of life...
its because its the more profitable and intelligent way to live.
Only if we realize and explain that, will the majority act in their own best interest...
because frankly... most people on this planet lack the intelligence/creativity/education
to deduce this from their own observations.

2.) Awareness and Glorification.

Actually I dont think these two relate to each other via "a line" that can be crossed.
Its a simple question of phrasing and content of ones statements that makes the difference.

Stating that someone is an inspireing and awesome person for being generous is missleading.
because its doesnt explain the benefit of his behaviour for himself, it just praises it...

Stating that someone is an empathic person that likes to share and is therefore and amongst
other attributes a nice person to have contact with...
Well that still makes that person out to be an awesome guy. But doesnt mystify his behaviour
or glorify it in some misleading sense of selfishness that alienates and confuses most people.
It simply states that he is a person that benefits from your happyness and is therefore more
inclined to act according to your own interests. Which is awesome for the both of you!


This whole dilemma derives from our religious backround:
History lesson time:

In older times, the intelligent people at the top of society had either one of two problems.

1.) they were unempathic asses, and needed a tool to make the stupid masses behave in their interest.

2.) they were empathic guys, and neede a tool to make the stupid masses behave in their own best interest.

sadly, both of these came to the same conclusion. Religion. Find some abstract idea that people can
relate to and deduce their desired behaviour from that, preferribly in some form of metaphors or commandments.

So what happened is that for thousands of years, our psychology is based around the assumption that
some virtual scale of "good vs bad" exists that we are judged by, either from god or society.

Well hate to tell you guys, but it doesnt exists. All that has ever happened on this planet since
weve been here is mankind acting in their own best interest. And at some point pretending to do
rain dances became big bad ass churches. Anyhow...


TL: DR= We are conditioned to judge our own and other peoples value via a scale that doesnt exist.
And that leads to confusing and counterproductive statements like glorifying someones generosity.

Once we realize that generosity isnt good because of some abstract judgment...
but because its actually often a mutually beneficial thing to do... just in itself...
than people will gladly start to share with their fellow men without feeling cheated or forced.
(of course again, sharing has deminishing returns, I m not proposing sharing everything
or with everyone. Just that its beneficial more often than most people realize)

Jbizzi
08-23-2013, 12:41 PM
@Jbizzi

Actually I have a rather optimistic view on our social possibilities and try to convey that.
Would you mind pointing me towards the individuel statements of mine that lead you
to your assumption? I d like to avoid further confusion on this topic in the future.

Also, *DANGER* exaggeration inc *DANGER*, what you are basically saying is:

It doesnt matter if the priest is telling bullshit, as long as he feels its appropriate and
the population believes in burning females, than its just they way we roll.
Dont you dare tell the priest that his idea might be well intended, but ill thought through!

I hope you get my point between these cynical lines.
Just because he wants to do good and attempts it, shouldnt discourage me
to voice concerns of my own.

Absolutely, thank you for clearing that up.

Your point is that you take yourself way to seriously. In fact, you go to great lengths to prove that you have an extended vocabulary and therefore, should be taken more seriously.

Optimism would suggest that you take the post at face value, an honest attempt to "pay it forward" rather than the much more cynical approach you have devolved this post toward. I think you have a very broad view of the word.

As I am not a religious (theological) person, I find your anecdote humorous, though I do not agree with the extreme parallel you are drawing in order to draw comparisons to BossHoss' attempt at generosity and your own definitions of that word as well.

Like I said before and as others have pointed out, please just let it go or start your own thread on the meanings and nuances of generosity, I would be happy to argue there with you as well though I doubt I will.

I just thought the OP was doing a nice thing that shouldn't be scrutinized beyond reason (re: at all) unless he was breaking some sort of rule (re: not your rules).

NaryaDL0re
08-23-2013, 01:27 PM
@Jbizzi

Thx for your view.
1.) I dont use words with the intentions you name, but I can see how it might look so.
Coming from Germany and being an avid lover of pholosophy and debate I dont get
to practice my english all that often. My use of words derives from my desire to broaden
my capabilities to use the english language... because in my humble opinion I suck at english.
I m aware of the risk I take, because the stile I m using when I write works better in german
than it does in english, it comes across much less pretentious...
But I cant get better at it without trying to get closer to the "correct"... amount of "eloquence"...

2.) we seem to have another misunderstanding than... because I wholeheartedly bevlieve the OP.
I do in fact think that the OP himself and hex_colin are empathic and sensible people that
enjoy giving to others...

What I dont agree with though, is the way it is portrayed and communicated.
Everyone can read my thoughts on this matter if he takes his time to read the thread.

3.) the religious metaphor is meant for your argument, not for the OPs post.
What I meant to show is that just because someone intends good, doesnt mean
he cant achieve good in a better way, or even worse is accidentily doing bad instead.

We should always be open for perfection and constructive critique... especially when it
concerns sensible and important topics.

4.) only 1 other person has asked me to leave this discussion be and the OP himself
stated that he doesnt share that whish and would rather continue this debate.
If more people find it out of place I dont mind to arbitrarily move this discussion though ...

5.) in my Opinion the OP tried and intended to do a nice thing, managed to do so partially,
but could have done better.
There is no rule the OP breaks....

But given how this thread is ABOUT giving and making the best out of our lives...
I thought it sensible to add my view on how this discussion might be detrimental
towards its own goal if not treated carefully with....

HyenaNipples
08-23-2013, 09:39 PM
This is weirdest thread I have ever seen.

Mr.Funsocks
08-24-2013, 12:20 AM
This is weirdest thread I have ever seen.

Definitely...

Also, any philosophical discussion of the basis of moral virtue inevitably just makes me roll my eyes. It's just some weird byproduct of a misappropriated evolutionary urge. Kin-based altruism (your genes get a percentage of your kins' reproductive success based on your relatedness, which allows altruism to be an evolutionarily viable strategy) lead to tight-knit social groups that reinforced it to a selfless degree in humans, then eventually it got warped at society got bigger, and now lends itself to reproductive success due to people liking it. Meh. We're sacks of chemicals that react funnily. Generosity makes us feel good, and engenders greater success for the species. And makes others feel good. Enough reason to give kudos. Deeper analysis just leads to realizing conciousness is a made-up word. As are all other words >_>

Anyway, Rob - I'm with you on the mental disorder ;) Trust me, it's a lot rougher to come out the other side WITHOUT someone there for the bad parts... And hey, if you ever need someone to lament the joys of living with a demon in your head, lemme know!

NaryaDL0re
08-24-2013, 01:04 AM
@Mr.Funsocks
Do I have to assume than that you propose some deluded form of nihilism
that decieves itself barely enough to stay functional?

Such a universal and condescending statements as yours might be polarizing
as is... but being constructive would require... the proposal of a better alternative?

Unless you say we should use logic wherever we feel comfortable with it and it works
and never ever try to innovate those things we do not yet comprehend.
In which case we wouldve never gotten here in the first place....

EDIT: Btw, it might be important to explicitly state that I 100% agree on
your "decuction" on morals. If you read what I wrote so far, you ll see
so yourself.
However your "indifference" and incoherent train of thought after that...
Well lets just say the later half of your first paragraph isnt "bulletproof".

Mr.Funsocks
08-24-2013, 01:32 AM
@Mr.Funsocks
Do I have to assume than that you propose some deluded form of nihilism
that decieves itself barely enough to stay functional?

What? No, I'm saying philosophers are silly, and trying to seek "meaning" of brains, using brains. Brains that are cobbled together by chance into some quirky emergent property called "conciousness" that we don't even understand. It's a pointless discussion. Do good, be nice, get over it.

NaryaDL0re
08-24-2013, 02:32 AM
EDIT: I just realized we officially digressed... we should return to generosity if possible.


Again, you propose that I use my brain to deduce financial investements, driving my car, etc.
But not to deduce whether or not these things are worth the effort in the first place?

How do you even function without any axiom to deduce your entire decisionmaking from?

Again, its per definition incoherent and flawed logic to live life without some defined axiom.
And chaos has often enough proved unreasonable and impossible to choose as an axiom.
Therefore some deduced basis must be found for all things we do in life, unless we want to stay
headless chicken hurting ourselfs and others in our process of running across this world.

I m not even saying its "right" or "wrong" to be a headless chicken...
but in my personal opinion on the world happyness is a good thing.
In fact, its the only "good" thing and everything that leads to it is thereby defined as "good",
while everything that brings pain/takes away happyness is "bad".
Funnily enough most people I come across agree with that sentiment.

But if we agree that happyness is the best/only good thing in life... than
why do people have such problems in defining an acommodating system that
maximizes ones own personal happyness?

Hiding behind the "we dont understand", "there is nothing to be found", phrases
ist just for fear, lazyness and stupidity reasons.

TL . DR:

Is there meaning in life? nope.
Does that mean we shouldnt go through the trouble of proving this statements as
best as we can and afterwards establish the best possible options that are left? NO...

In the end life just "is". And we all follow the same rules. But higher understanding of
these rules leads to more happyness which per observation is all we humans care about...

So yes, my life is meaningless and without value... just like anyone elses.
But I m happier. And for all I observed in this world, thats the only thing we care about.

Kates
08-26-2013, 02:44 PM
I have bitten my tongue long enough regarding the degeneration of this thread. I reply with no quotes because there is simply too much being said that I take issue with.

@NaryaDL0re you are entitled to your opinion regarding human behavior and psychology. I'm trying very hard to ignore the condescension literally dripping from your posts. I don't take issue with the fact that you list intelligence among the human traits that should be valued alongside of generosity. This does, however, lead me to assume that you particularly value it and, furthermore, consider yourself to be one in possession of this trait. Also, I'm sure we all appreciate that you consider us to be slightly above average forum users. Thanks, dude.

You are not being condemned. People are hitting you with criticisms in the same manner in which you are hitting them. That's how a debate works.

What I take issue with, and what genuinely disappoints me is that I legitimately looked forward to reading the posts in this thread. At its origin I had no way of knowing I, myself, would be a topic in this thread. I know Rob (obviously) and know exactly how difficult it was for him to share all of that with you.

You have criticized others for judging you based on the content of your posts. How dare you presume to know the motivations of my actions. I don't know if generosity is necessarily the right word for them, honestly. At the time, someone needed me, and I answered that call. It really was that simple. I do not say this to pat myself on the back, but simply to inform. I legitimately did not know the importance of my actions to Rob until he courageously shared his story. If he hadn't there's still every chance I wouldn't know. But would that change anything? Does the fact that I know change anything or what it meant to him? It doesn't. I didn't/don't know if Rob could or would do the same for me, but that doesn't matter either. If I was still completely ignorant of his gratitude I would answer that call again in a heartbeat.

We lead by example. I agree, whole-heartedly with you that generosity should be more commonplace, but it isn't. Trust me, I spend a fair amount of time in Philadelphia. If the net result of praising generous acts is more generous acts then what is the real harm? I understand (very well) the concept of altruism and the problems that lie therein. From my perspective (and in this case I think it is the only one that matters) I'm again unsure of the fact that what I did was generous, but NECESSARY: required of me as the human being I consider myself to be. A real, three-dimensional human being, that is, not a case study in a textbook.

NaryaDL0re
08-27-2013, 12:49 PM
EDIT: How can I help?

1.)Dont make posts as long as this... ever...

2.)Whenever you have the "someone is wrong on the internet"-feeling...slap yourself.

One last post, hurray everyone, and I wont bother you anymore on this topic.
The reason for this being the last of my posts is because the chance of my posts
actually inspiring healthy deduction/reflection dont add up high enough to be worth my
time. Being on the topic of generosity, it doenst help nearly as much to give something
to someone. A child wouldnt do good with a gun, and neither would a hunter with a lolipop.
(most of the time).

Anyhow...

@Kates

1.) I m not "entitled" to anything. First of all "rights" are another damaging concept that
spread incoherent thoughtprocesses and secondly I m not from the states, the EU
phrases these things a little more appropriate, though still pretentiously universal...

2.) I m honestly sorry for being the condescending prick I am ... for myself even more than for you.
On the other hand your "critique" shows the absolute lack of interest in coherent thought.
How about we put 1 and 1 together?
2.1) I m intelligent. Many things I say might be wrong, or mean, or other things. But by definition
what I m writing in this thread leaves almost no doubt, that the person behind it qulifies as
"intelligent".
2.2) I m empathic. Several times have I stated that I enjoy sharing and giving because I am capable
of enjoying other peoples joy, also known as empathy.

But what does this mean oO? Well given these 2 easy observations... WHY the FACK am I condescending?
It doesnt make sense right? so either I m an incoherent idiot that cannot think... which is possible but
given the content of my posts increasingly unlikely....
or...??? or???
Well the second most likely explanation seems to be that I have become condescending...
Not for the sake of annoying other people or hurting them, which seemingly doesnt fit my nature...
Which leaves?
Coping... because I can no longer bear to discuss these topics without this cynical approach, except
with a handfull of truely inspiring individuals.

So yeah... sorry for being mean. I mean it =).

3.) Intelligenz. oO? yeah, well without getting into too much detail here (bother everyone of you)...
I can have very satisfying relationships with people that arent intelligent...
For example one night stands. Or a grandpa I help over the street to make him smile.

However... for meaningful and deeper relationships... yeah... sry 95% of the stuff I like to do
either requires or profits a lot from things like understanding, deduction, creativity, innovation...
We are inside a tcg forum... how many people here like to play Magic with mentally handycapped
people that through the cards around the room and yell?? .... I thought so.

Also I m not the strongest man. Biology forces me to glorify it, because its most likely why
my personal ancestors survived... =)

4.) I know I m not being condemned by everyone here. If you carefully read the appropriate post
you will find that I responded to a specific person which didnt bring any "critique" outside of
ad hominem trash...

Still waiting for actual challange to the thoughtprocesses I ve proposed so far...

5.) Sry if this thread digressed in a way uncomfortable or disappointing for you.
But you ll be glad to read that you guys have reached a critical mass that convinced
me to leave you alone with these topics =)?

6.) People have no other source outside my posts.... how the hell should they judge me otherwise?
I criticize people for either deliberately or stupidly ignoring half or more of my posts, referring to
even less and digressing in ad hominem statements without foundation...
I would love for someone to take his time and put down a well phrased, thourough and coherent
answer/critique to the entirety of what I posted so far... but either everyone is incapable or
cant be bothered.

7.) I dare to presume to know the "rough" motivations for your actions... why?
Because I also dare to know the cause behind an apple falling to the ground... gravity.
And just like everything else in this beautiful universe, your actions can be roughly estimated.
Nowhere did I state that I had enough information about you to specificaly know why you
did it though!!

8.) "at the time, someone needed me, and I answered that call. It really was that simple.?"

I suppose the apple hung in midair and fell to the ground... it really was that simple...
no gravity involved...

Just to make myself a little more obnoxious:
Are you attractive? Because if so... I need you right now... guess you didnt hear the call loud enough.

Sry but such blatantly unfounded statements are about as true as political speeches,
I physically pains me to read such claims.

9.) We lead by example + explanation. Monkey see monkey do only goes so far...

10.) I explained multiple times where the "harm" lies...
christianity saved thousands of lifes, gave people hope, united people... etc.
Would you say there was no harm?
Would you argue that it didnt had insanely damaging effects on your perspectives
and values?

Religion is estimated to have slown us down for more than 200-1500 years of evolution...
Just because people were so used to the idea of being in the middle of the universe...

Dont pretend like "doing some good" cant possibly backfire.

11.) Ah yeah... the reason I take my time to make this post is because my stupid
desire to help people wont let me sleep without at least giving you another chance
to understand the nature of my posts.
I wont read this thread anyfurther since not knowing such an ignorant post exists
will protect me from the urge to reply and set it streight.
Probably necessary anyways, given how I still hate how people emphasize their stories...

TL.DR = I wont bother anyone with these topics anymore, I m sorry where I offended or hurt.

RobHaven
08-28-2013, 09:49 AM
U geyes, I m smartest and sophisticatedest poster on fourems.

I know this was a shiny object dangling in the water, and I realize I'm a sucker for thinking I should bite it...but I'm obviously of sub-par intelligence and incapable of not engaging someone so high up on their horse. I'm knowingly and willingly violating the Code of Conduct because my comprehension is of such limited ability that I'm incapable of registering the consequences. This will be a personal attack, and I will be attacking with constraint but without apology.

First and foremost, I don't think you understand what intelligence is. It is damn near indisputable that you are not clearly "by definition" intelligent because of your posts. I would actually argue the opposite; your posts have shown a lack of understanding for economics, psychology, and sociology. Your self-awareness is startlingly non-existent and your arrogance is nauseating...and I don't even know where to start about how presumptuous you are.
If you need to tell people you're intelligent, there's a pretty good chance you don't have it in the quantities you think you do. I do consider myself to be an intelligent person, and I often feel I'm the smartest person in the room wherever I go; as narcissistic as I am, I never feel the need to declare (let alone crow about) my superiority over others. I just quietly, smugly judge them from a corner.

Second, I can't challenge your position because it's all predicated on assumptions that are [at best] misguided and [at worst] woefully ignorant. If anything you had posited contained even a bare minimum amount of logic, I would be willing to discuss the matter with you. Currently, your position begins and ends with a circuitous, fallacious set of personal beliefs about the inherent nature of mankind, and it's sprinkled with a few straw men. The only point you made with any validity is that man is genetically limited in the ability to give because of the instinct to survive...but even that point wasn't well made. When you can lay out some factual, logical arguments in a concise manner, I'll do my best to not ignore them.

Third, see what I did therr? I jammed a few big words into my post so people would see how intelligent I am. That's all it takes to clearly demonstrate intelligence, right? By definition, you can see that I'm an intelligent person because most of the words I've chosen contain many syllables and took more than a couple of minutes to find in the thesaurus. Understanding your audience and effectively communicating with them isn't even remotely close to being as clear an indicator of intelligence as half-baked ideas and novel-length condemnations of the actions of others. But I guess I can see how you would think rebutting ad hominem attacks with your own ad hominem attacks might demonstrate your cerebral dominance. The fact that I'm fighting fire with fire is without a doubt both immature and (personally) incredibly gratifying.

Finally, let's get to the real issue I have. It delights me to know that you're going to lead a miserable life. We all have a jaded view of humanity, but not everyone gets the distinct pleasure of being so empty that they think good deeds are misplaced. What Colin did was incredible. He had, so he gave. That's more than I can say for myself and - I'm willing to assume - more than you can say for yourself. What Kate did was grounds for endless praise. Neither of them did it for the kudos or accolades; both of them did it because they felt it was the right thing to do. [I]Good people do good things. You may not have any first hand experience with this concept, and that doesn't bother me because you reap what you sow. However, to trivialize the acts of those who selflessly give is beyond reprehensible - it is downright repugnant. I'm not above being vindictive; I'm more than willing to let you know I hope the worst of things life has to offer come your way.

If I thought there was even the most remote of chances that you will ever know a woman's touch, I'd take issue with you asking Kate to answer your call. As it stands, that's likely the closest you've come (or will come) to being near a woman without paying for it. I'll let your comments go uncontested so they can serve as a constant reminder to how lonely you are and will be.


This is likely to be my final post. Even if I don't take a ban for it, I'm far too easily goaded into personal attacks; it's probably better for the community if I leave my negativity at home. Since I can't part with it, I'll just stay home next to it (and, as is likely to be the case, bask in it). For those few of you I actually have any sort of desire to meet (ShadowElf, Gwaer, Colin, etc) - I hope to see you in game. Narya, I hope I see you at HexFest so I can judge you in person. It'll make me feel better about myself.

NaryaDL0re
08-28-2013, 11:03 AM
Since your "PM" asked me to read it, I guess you would like a replay as well?

Well, let me ask one quick thing. Why waste all that time and effort to make
claims, statements and other ad hominem bs...

When instead you could help me or other people in actually disproving my propositions?

EDIT: just to motivate you... it would (probably) put me in deep anguish to see you
elaborating on why exactly my individual statements or conclusions are just soooo wrong.

EDIT2: (last one).
"Good people do good things."

Did you read the apple metaphor? Did your teachers tell you...
2 is 2, because 2 is 2. Or did they teach you 1+1=2?

EDIT 3: (haha I lied). Someone apparently thought this discussion has a future...
well if anyone cares to actually "add" to the discussion I might be happy
to reply =).

Kami
08-28-2013, 11:25 AM
In an effort to salvage the previous thread, I've moved the 'discussion' here.

NaryaDL0re
08-28-2013, 11:26 AM
Ohhh... why not delete it than? If there is no hope to "salvage" this thread? be coherent!

DarkSeverance
08-28-2013, 06:25 PM
Not even sure why I am responding except I found oddly peculiar and I was like, Philosophy now that is something I can discuss about.


Generosity"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."


All in all it is my believe that Humans are at their core entirely self centered.Humans, which also includes you, despite all intentions are indeed self-centered. There is no experience you have had that you were not at the absolute center of. The world as you experience it is right there in front of you, or behind you, to the left or right of you, on your TV, or your monitor, or whatever. Other people’s thoughts and feelings have to be communicated to you somehow, but your own are so immediate, urgent, real.

However that doesn't mean that people aren't generous and won't do something without expecting anything in return just because people are self centered.


I hate it when people glorify generosity as something special or selfless.By having this discussion you, yourself, are elevating generosity as you see it. You are giving it a value and making it something special beyond simply what it is. You are becoming what you say you hate. If it isn't something special then why do you even care or why does it bother you at all.


I believe we actually HURT the commoness of generosity and empathy, if we glorify and selectively praise these attributes.Generosity is only defined by the person receiving it and the person giving it. From a third-point of view we can come to the opinion if something is considered generous but we can't really give it value. The value is only truly determined and defined by the two people involved.

I'm driving down the road and I see a car pulled over to the side of the road. It looks like they have a flat tire. It is pouring down rain. I am late to work and can't stop. I hope they are adult enough to come up with a solution on their own. I am being selfish.

I'm driving down the road and I see a car pulled over to the side of the road. It looks like they have a flat tire. It is pouring down rain. I am not late for work but not really sure if I want to stop to help. I am being selfish.

I'm driving down the road and I see a car pulled over to the side of the road. It looks like they have a flat tire. It is pouring down rain. It happens to be a good looking woman. I decide to pull over. I am still being selfish and sexist not that anything would come of it. She may think I'm legitimately helping her or that I'm trying to pick her up. Other people involved would most likely think I definitely stopped because she was good looking.

I'm driving down the road and I see a car pulled over to the side of the road. It looks like they have a flat tire. It is pouring down rain. I decide to pull over because I know what it is like being in that situation, having been in that situation. They can think I'm being generous. I may be, but I can also be hoping that if this happens to me someone will stop to help me as well if the situation was reversed. However it doesn't change that the act itself was generous. I didn't ask for anything in return or expect anything.

My house is on fire and I'm being saved by a fireman. The fireman although he does get paid and it is his job isn't expecting anything in return. However to say that putting his own life on the line to save mine isn't generous and that I shouldn't even do something as simple as saying 'Thank You' is a disservice. And by saying that 'Thank You' or even attempting to pay them back, give them a gift or tell others of how my life was saved by him/her it doesn't devalue or somehow elevate them above anyone else. It doesn't make something less or more generous.

All these things can be picked apart and assigned how they were generous, selfish, etc. It is easy to look at a situation from outside being involved and not understand the motivations of others involved. Even when involved as people we often make mistakes and misinterpret things. Almost anything in life, even as something simple as breathing can be broken down to be selfish.


IDont make it out to be something hard and painfull that only specific people can manage.You are the only one who is coming to this conclusion. People are generous everyday, not just with Hex but with everything. Most people however tend to be too self-centered to realize it. Or instead want to cloud it over by creating a discussion designed to smoke screen someone elses personal agenda.


But they shouldnt be praised... they should be explained.Generosity doesn't need to be explained. The only reason to explain it is to elevate those people above others or their actions above someone elses. By explaining it you are doing more harm that simple praise. By justifying and explaining it you are turning "Generosity" into something else.

vickrpg
08-28-2013, 07:51 PM
NaryaDL0re, I feel your pain, I really do.
I have read every post in both these threads (I am a bit of a masochist, you see) and In my own pursuit of intellectual discussion have, in the past also received backlash from a community. but after a long time spent thinking, and studying the English language more in depth, I came to learn that those attacks on me, and my inability to have an intellectual logical discussion were entirely my own fault.

First, text leaves out a lot in communication. people tend to infer the worst, regardless of your intention to imply it. And trust me, if you go back to even your first posts, They are laden with easily inferred insults to the community and individual members, this turns people off from discussing logically with you. Even innocuous comments like my above "I'm a masochist like that" jape, can easily be read and interpreted as "your opinions are painful and I do not respect them," when in fact they were meant in jest. People who disagree and are intelligent are fearful of being insulted in the same way, or at having to decipher your meaning through the layers of aggressive implications. Simply put, the way you are typing your messages is not, and has not been, mutually beneficial for anyone to engage you.

Whether I agree with your underlying philosophy, or not, at this point is irrelevant. but let us assume, for the sake of discourse, that it is true.

People cannot act in a selfless way.

Great. So? Let me share with you some other valid truths of human nature.

People do not like being attacked with words.
People do not like having their entire morality system attacked.
People do not like to have discussions when they are implicitly or explicitly called unintelligent and unable to respond.

if you want intellectual discourse, the first thing you need to learn is "空気を読む" To read the room. Understand and respect the people and the community you are talking to and they will respond in kind.

I hope this helps, as I am doing this for entirely selfish reasons. I don't want to see this kind of aggression, whether intended or not, in posts in a community I am proud to be part of.

NaryaDL0re
08-29-2013, 05:07 AM
@vickrpg

I enoyed reading this well meant and constructive post.

My explanation will most likely bore / dissapoint you, but at least explain my behaviour
in a perhaps "better" way than, "oh I was too stupid to realize my mistake".

You see I spent around half my life, a little over 12 years now, pursueing first truth
and a little later on more pragmaticaly the optimal process of aquiring the most happynes per time.

And of all the things that hurt, bored, annoyed or otherwise pained me... the biggest
distraction, the biggest loss of time and energy... always and with loads of spare distance...
is the language barrier.

I m not talking about different languages in the common sense, I mean the same
things you described in your post...

People being such slaves to their own pitiful and deranged emotions, that they are
incapable of seeing and admitting the truth, make their own coherent deductions,
phrase assumptions on strong foundations and all around partake in contructive
and concise communication.

And dont get me wrong, emotions are wonderful and the center of our goal (happyness).

I think the quickest way to get this point across is an example.

Do you know how I want a complete stranger to react when I look him in the eye and say:
"You look like shit!"

Depending on their situation an appropriate response would be:
"For what purpose did you tell me that? Is it an observation you made and an honest attempt
to help me have a better understanding of my own appearence? Are you just mad/angry at sth/smn
else and trying to vent your anger and I happen to give you a nice target? Please help me
understand what I can do for you and what you want to do for me, so we can efficiently either
benefit from each other or just go our ways."

THATS communication I can get behind... thats contructive, simple, efficient, effective.

Now the problem is, you are telling me (correctly so) that life isnt that beautiful and simple yet.
Right now you need to estimate the deranged emotional level someone is at, the scale on which
it might move depending on what you say, the way he/she is conditioned so far, so you can
make educated guesses about the contents that would shift his/her comfort in a certain way.

Right now you need more than a facking diploma in social psychology and communication,
so you have the abilities required to actually protect yourself and your fellow men from dozens
of missunderstandings and hurt feelings, so you can manipulate the conversation in a way that
is satisfying for both parties...

Or you can take the common shortcut and be the most tolerant, ignorant, incoherent morals
sucking idiot ever... "good people do good things"... yeah... if you can buy that, I believe you
can just be nice to everyone at all times, for no better reason than "mama said so"...
Which is how most people try to solve this communication "problem"...
which in the end is just an individual problem of emotional control and verbal comprehension.

I guess the world needs enough of such people... because otherwise my shoes wouldnt
be as cheap and my food and millions of other products that require a functioning pyramid
of retards to be abused by the top percent of the world.

anyhow...

TL.DR : In conclusion. You are right, if I wanted the people to "just understand me".
In that case I should carefully consider my tone and approach to fit the needs
of those I try to communicate with.
But thats not going to satisfy me... I can do that everywhere with everyone...
What I try from time to time, again and again...
Is forcing people to show emotional and intellectual greatness by making it
deliberatly hard for them to like me and/or agree with me.

Because in the end I dont search for people that are just "intelligent" or
I can "just" have a nice time with. What I m really interested in are universally
inspiring people that have the potential to become lifelong friends and
partners. And my standards on the front are ... a little high...

So yeah, I assume this might be even more condescending that you feared but...
I could talk to people the way they need me to. I do that everyday... with my boss,
with my parents, with other students... and I hate/detest it.

It doesnt filter all the small fry... not nearly as good as my method does.

Because a composed person, with deep knowledge and understanding of this world
will see the truth in my words, no matter how cynical, condescending or obnoxious
I phrase them...
on the contrary, such a person will gain nothing but entertainment by the humor and
irony involved in all those "stressful" things I wrote.
(and I know this works, because in 12 years of searching, between thousands of people
I actually managed to find 2 people of this caliber via this method)

EDIT: I couldve wroten most of my posts in a way that people wouldve licked it out of my hands as inspiring food for thought. But where lies the good in that? Yes I honestly like to make other people happy. I also enjoy teaching and being appriciated as most humanbeings do. What I enjoy even more though, is the chance at finding actuall enhancements for my life in form of great people. And those I do not find by abiding the conventional attitudes that are required to be respected and understood in this community.

I know this post is very recurring and misses a clear structure.
Its what happens if I just instantly write everything I think without
pausing at all to structure or phrase it. They way I write 99% of the time.

vickrpg
08-29-2013, 06:00 AM
On the contrary, you do not bore or disappoint me at all, your response was much as i had expected. You read my words, you analyzed my phrasing and you decided it was well thought out and well meaning, and then decided to ignore every point of advice, and discard it , in favor of your own way of thinking. I would have done the same, and have in the past, but I have learned to evolve and adapt.

When I had the problem conversing with most people, and cannot find a single person (with rare exceptions) around me to match my intellect, my eloquence, or my vocabulary, I came to a realization. Scientifically and logically, I was repeating the same experiment with the same results, and what was the common denominator? the one constant in every conversation I had? Me. The problem wasn't that I was so smart I spoke above everyone else, the problem was that I was not enjoyable to talk to and people at or above my level of discourse simply avoided me.

Using high handed language and throwing around needles insults, compliments to yourself and your negative opinions is not a good filter for intelligence, but it is a good filter for people, like you and I, who have problems with social rules and this "Communication Barrier"

We owe it to ourselves to learn this complex set of rules for social interaction, instead of dismissing it as "Tolerant, ignorant, incoherent, or morally idiotic." Yes it's hard, yes it's a pain, a challenge. Challenges are something that we as intellectuals should relish, not sulk because we can't do it easily. Be logical. Be scientific. Take up the challenge.

The reason we do so is not because "mamma said so" but because if you want to be part of a social community, you should follow the rules of said community. Not for some altruistic moral reasons or because god or the giant spaghetti monster said so, but because, as you said, we have evolved to learn that it is mutually beneficial to do so. The type of communication you describe would allow us to bypass a lot of the headaches that come with social interaction, and it is efficient, but it is not as mutually beneficial as you think. Feelings exist. Chemical reactions that cause us to not be perfectly logical robots, and even these social rules we dread have evolved for productivity and mutual benefit.

As far as being on-topic goes, since I enjoy this conversation, but also wish to adhere to the rules and regulations of the forums, I agree with some of your ideas, but you are not communicating them effectively. (Evidence, most people who read your post came out with no understanding. the common denominator isn't people's intellect levels, it's the post they are reading)

Everything people do is selfish. Generosity itself is selfish because it makes us feel good.
Those are truths only by dictionary definitions. What people were trying to communicate as a rebuttal (or at least one of them), is that a hard, dictionary definition is irrelevant to the perception of said truth.

if all you get is a direct link between feeling good and making others feel good, that can be safely perceived as selfless, and special, and there is nothing wrong (within social rules) in exalting this behavior.

in the example you posted earlier, you compared it to rape (another sure way to not win any points with people)

Raping somone makes you feel good, but it also violates the rights of another person. (given as societal rules of morality, which are not to be dismissed in a conversation of perception. not given by god, but agreed upon.) It also gives you a direct, physiological response, and a negative one to another person. It is generally agreed that this is not a good thing. And I'm not claiming you said it was, I get your extremely hyperbolic metaphor, but i'm trying to make a point.

We encourage and praise behavior that we want repeated, and punish behavior that we do not. Words like "Good" and "Great" and "Moral" are not always their dictionary definition. The socially understood definition, the intrinsic meaning are FAR more important than technicalities for communicative purposes.

Yes, "Good People do good things" can be parsed as a regurgitation of societal rules, but when you look at the intrinsic meaning, the words behind the words, you should really see it as follows:
"People who do not wish to suffer the consequences of society and enjoy the feelings that come with doing generous acts towards others do not want to have any SECONDARY rewards other than their own feelings of enjoyment, thus they do generous things so they can feel them" but that's a mouthful and doesn't sound as pretty. People like pretty things, add that to your list of truths.

As another side note, since you obviously enjoy constructive criticisms, and I enjoy the sound of my own voice (keyboard clicks?) I have one more comment that I will envelop in personal experience, to soften third party readers, I know you don't require this, but here it is anyway.
I'm not a native English speaker either. Shocker, I know. but I challenge anyone to find any mistakes in my grammar and spelling that were not intentional: such as starting sentences with conjunctions to make my posts feel more like conversation. I have studies English as it is written and spoken to the point of obsession, and I have a pet peeve that I can no longer keep silent:
Happiness. not Happyness. Please. Red underlines are your friends, listen to them. I am not pointing this out to seem superior, or to devalue your opinions (which I find fascinating, but misguided) but because I seriously want to pull out my red sharpie and go through your posts. Actually, I want to do so with everyone's posts, but I understand most people would take offence to that.

keroko
08-29-2013, 07:31 AM
generosity must be coupled with capability to be generous. these are elements of control.

NaryaDL0re
08-29-2013, 07:39 AM
Huray, nice talk.

(First of all, I dont get any red underlines... I m correcting any mistake I spot naturally.
And I reread my posts a couple times. All the mistakes that are left will stay there sadly.
I m sorry if this inconveniences you.)

Fore space and health reasons (my arms are injured) I ll try to not get too depp on this one.

Your line of thought concerning the common demoninator seems sound at first glance. But:
There is what I call the "fishermans friends"-Problem. (Dont know if you get the refference,
its basically advertisement that states "if they are too strong, you are too weak.)

Perspective shifts depending on expectations in life, and with it does "guilt"/"responsibility".

If I decide its correct for me to expect certain behavior from others, and they dont provide...
per definition they are at fault. At least from where I decided to stand on this matter.

Naturally they couldve decided to not expect these requirements from themselves.
Therefore making me the culprit and at fault per definition. At least from where they stand.

So given the subjectivity of expectancies, it is indeed possible for 2 factions to both be
right or wrong at the same time. This usually leads to a conflict of interests.

You thoughtprocess is inherently correct, but the execution is flawed.
There are multiple possibilities on why your repeated experiments failed.
One is that you failed, the other is that indeed the rest of the world failed.

Now there is one split between people that is very important for me in life.
There are those that rely heavily on experience and those that rely on theory
to make their decisions in life.
Actually the theorists also started being dependend on experience obviously,
but somewhere along their lifes aquired a critical mass of prove that things
can be explained and predicted so well, that whatever you can deduce and
assume is of much higher value for your decisionmaking than whatever you
can feel or experience a couple of times.

Theorists understand, just because something worked, it doesnt mean you did correct.
They are also aware that just because something is supposed it work,
it doesnt mean it always will. (not because life isnt always logical, but we are fallible)
But they know that the only coherent way to live, is trust in what you can deduce.

Why am I stating all the assumptions? Well your deduction suggests are strong
tendency towards results (experience).
I already explained that 1. I found people with my method, even though it took ages.
and 2. The correct people have no problem to enjoy talking to me =).
3. interestingly enough, I m also a much nicer person once people have shown their ability
to remain composed and focused.

Where did I imply that I would evade challanges? My entire life is aimed at perfection.
Its just that 1. I m already capable to play the social game (and I agree its a necessary skill)
and 2. I told you why and when I deliberately ignore the social conventions....

Same goes for your statements of me not communicating effectively...
I made clear that my goal lies in meeting people with certain attributes...
actually communicating the contents of my posts with everyone is a bonus at best.


As for "definitions".... I already answered this point along the lines, but I ll do so again.
Definitions are there for a reason... if social conventions or cultural movements lead to
change in the meaning of a certain word or phrase... than the definition must be updated.

No matter how you put it though... its completely detrimental to the clarity of communication
when you leave loads of content as "implied only". Its reasonable for humor and poetry...
but people should be aware of the tradeoff that you take everytime you do NOT specifically
state something.

You need to be more coherent... when you say

that a hard, dictionary definition is irrelevant to the perception of said truth.
So (here it comes) when I rape someone, but my perception of said truth is
that I "made mutual love with someone" ... that the important thing is my perception?
And not the definition that will get me in jail? and protect other citizens?

Its complete nonsense to glorify personal perception as an excuse for lazy phrasing.
If you want to state something... state it in an appropriate and clear way, and dont
hide behind "but I meant it this way, so what I actually said is meaningless".

No one cares what you THINK, or FEEL, as long as you cant make these things transparent.
Its not our job to interpret the shat out of every sentence, just so we can hope to make some sense.


if all you get is a direct link between feeling good and making others feel good, that can be safely perceived as selfless, and special,

No, just no. That is not how language works nor coherent thought.
That is like saying if all you get is a direct link between feeling bad and shitting in your pants
than it can be safely percieved as awesome and poetic.
These are just random words mumbled together without any reason.

The only safing grace in your phrasing is the word "percieved", which I cant argue against
because anyone can percieve almost anything... but you say "safely percieved" which implies
some degree of truth... which is just wrong and you dont bother to justify your claim either.
(in case you look for my explanations why I disagree, they are already in this thread).

Raping doesnt need to have detrimental effects on the rapists though. Sociopaths for
example suffer no such consequences. I dont know for what purpose exactly you tried
to discredit my tasteful example but it still holds.
Yes its forbidden for good reason, like a multitude of other things...
it doesnt change the fact that it is as selfless as giving a homeless person food.

Again, intrinsic meanings are pointless without definitions to support them and
the necessary amount of experience with people to make educated guesses about
whatever they may or not imply.
And I explained a multitude of times now why the glorification of generosity leads
to more harm than good. Nowhere did I claim that it doesnt do good...

You argument is even worse actually, because its exactly the intrinsic meaning that is
so damaging. The perspectives that lead to our entire "evaluation and judging" are flawed.
Our morals are built on sand... they are far from optimized for the most mutual benifit.


Yes, "Good People do good things" can be parsed as a regurgitation of societal rules, but when you look at the intrinsic meaning, the words behind the words, you should really see it as follows:
"People who do not wish to suffer the consequences of society and enjoy the feelings that come with doing generous acts towards others do not want to have any SECONDARY rewards other than their own feelings of enjoyment, thus they do generous things so they can feel them" but that's a mouthful and doesn't sound as pretty. People like pretty things, add that to your list of truths.

You basically give a decent example of what a good statement could have been...
and than declare it too bothersome and justify the sad reality by claiming itrs "pretty"?
In this degenerated world of thousand different believes, emotions, cultures, etc etc ...
you think its unnecessary to elaborate such moral claims because its so easy and
intuitive to intepret his true intentions?
Thats absolute BS and you know it. There is no way in hell that
"good people do good stuff" should be interpeted anywhere close to what you proposed.
Youd have to be a blind and deef optimist in this world to ever assume such an implication...
Even more so since what people stated at other points, directly contradicts your proposal.
So in actuallity all you did was pick a line, interpret it in the most sanctious way possible and
ignore the entire context around the phrase you chose.

vickrpg
08-29-2013, 08:45 AM
I like you, you're unique. Sincerely, no sarcasm.
But, there you go, throwing around misspelled insults and fallacies, but you do have some fair points. I'll get to those in a second.
You do make one point I did not communicate as effectively as I could have. I will clarify, but I will not respond to everything on a point by point, because if I agree, the redundancy is not necessary. I tried to adjust my way of speech for not only you, but the entire community as a whole, and that is where I minced my words.

You have a very "I" or "Me" centered point of view. There is nothing inherently incorrect about it, but it does cause people to disagree. But what choice do we have? The human experience IS I centered, most people just ask that you try to see other's perspective.
It is FAR more likely that if it is 1000000 vs 1 opinion, the 1 opinion is mistaken. I did not intend to state that it is a guaranteed mistake, but that as the 1, you should consider the possibility and adjust your actions for your own benefit.

My comment about avoiding the challenge came from these statements:

THAT'S communication I can get behind... that's constructive, simple, efficient, effective.

Now the problem is, you are telling me (correctly so) that life isn't that beautiful and simple yet.
Right now you need to estimate the deranged emotional level someone is at, the scale on which
it might move depending on what you say, the way he/she is conditioned so far, so you can
make educated guesses about the contents that would shift his/her comfort in a certain way.

Right now you need more than a f*cking diploma in social psychology and communication,
so you have the abilities required to actually protect yourself and your fellow men from dozens
of misunderstandings and hurt feelings, so you can manipulate the conversation in a way that
is satisfying for both parties...

Or you can take the common shortcut and be the most tolerant, ignorant, incoherent morals
sucking idiot ever... "good people do good things"... yeah... if you can buy that, I believe you
can just be nice to everyone at all times, for no better reason than "mama said so"...
Which is how most people try to solve this communication "problem"...
which in the end is just an individual problem of emotional control and verbal comprehension.(I fixed your spelling and apostrophes, Sorry, habit)
Which Strongly implies that you believe it would be easier to avoid the interaction than to deal with it on a daily basis. It served, not so much as an accusation of cowardice, but as an attempt to goad you into being nicer.


1. I found people with my method, even though it took ages.
and 2. The correct people have no problem to enjoy talking to me =).
By your own admittance, these people are rare, few, and far between. I don't propose that you will not find any, I admitted that there are exceptions. What I present to you is the possibility that there are actually quite a large number of people who are capable of keeping up with, and enjoying talking to you, sharing your opinions and spirited debate. But many of them are turned off by your manner, and that you are actually hurting your cause more than helping it. As much as I enjoy typing and reading long messages and even debating with you, my own adherence to social rules and personal evolution have given me a distaste for the WAY you express your Ideas. I can put said distaste aside, because I remember doing the same thing.

When I spoke of perception, a very deep topic that I can debate for hours, I was not speaking of individual perception, but societal perception. Human "macro" perception, not micro perception.
If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody perceived it, or any of it's after effects, did it fall? Yes. but it's irrelevant.
Reality is X. Perception is Y. X is irrelevant if not connected to Y.

So (here it comes) when I rape someone, but my perception of said truth is
that I "made mutual love with someone" ... that the important thing is my perception?
And not the definition that will get me in jail? and protect other citizens?
No, It's not your perception. Did anyone perceive your rape? during, or after? the effects? then guess what, You are NOT going to jail! and you are, Effectively, not a rapist. Reality says you are, but nobody knows, so you are not. no consequences.
Let's reverse both situations.
You DIDN'T rape anyone. but many people lie, and you are perceived as a rapist. You are very likely going to jail, and you are a rapist, you are treated as one, and you suffer the punishment of one, you might even start believing you are one. Reality becomes irrelevant when it comes to effects.

In conflicts where X and Y disagree, Y determines the effects more often than X.
Reality MAY have some influence, but it is our perception and the perception of others that actually determines what effects happen.

This is when I mentioned dictionary definitions, and I fall into this trap CONSTANTLY. Even now, in my self proclaimed evolved state, I keep putting stock in dictionary definitions, that don't matter as much. as how people read them.
to take examples from other recent posts, griefing, Synesthesia, Auction House, Guild, Free Deck, Troll, Whatever.
It doesn't matter when you choose your words by exact definition, people will assign misused definitions, accepted colloquialisms and their own personal spin. And since we are people, we do the same.


With practice, you can get very good at learning how the average person who follows social norms, and does not have our communication "problem" would read a sentence. I would love to get community feedback to prove it, but I don't think many others are reading this thread at the moment.

There is no way in hell that
"good people do good stuff" should be interpreted anywhere close to what you proposed.
Seriously, ask others in the forum, THAT is exactly how most people read it! People who are not hung up on efficiency and semantics, that is. People who can read *between* the lines do so.

If people understand what you are saying, then obviously, you said it in a way that can be understood. your words and definitions become correct. They evolve, like we do, and must.


No, just no. That is not how language works nor coherent thought.
That is like saying if all you get is a direct link between feeling bad and shitting in your pants
than it can be safely perceived as awesome and poetic.
These are just random words mumbled together without any reason.
Yes, just yes. It is exactly how language works, it is NOT coherent thought. It is laden with emotion. You (and to some extent, me) have already expressed a disconnect from the way most people communicate, but guess what: this is it! It's inefficient and open to interpretation, difference of experience and misunderstanding. It's faulty, and it is the perfect tool for a faulty species of insane, self-important mutated apes.

I got a little bit really off topic there for a while, I hope you enjoyed the read.

and I hope your arm feels better. =)

Edit: Fixed unintended typo.

Facilier
08-29-2013, 09:13 AM
I will take this opportunity to preface my post with an apology for not reading all of NaryaDL0re's replies, but I am finding the presentation of opinions as facts and the author's ongoing claims of intelligence (which are directly contradicted by the rambling, shallow posts, filled with too-many words like some kind of mass grave intended to stop people looking through the contents) at best tiresome.

My main purpose here is to help you with your desperate need of some book learning, child.

I - Praising actions such as altruism is not only functionally different, but more effective than praising personal traits, as per the American Psychological Association study below:

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/xge-ofp-brummelman.pdf

The TL:DR (which is something that should stay under 5 paragraphs) is that praise for effort helps behaviour persist, even in the face of failure.

II - The University of Wisconsin-Madison ran a longitudinal study with more than a legion of participants over decades with the results showing that altruistic behaviour makes people happier:

http://www.news.wisc.edu/21983

Now you can drag out some argument that this is exactly your point that people do everything for selfish reasons to make themselves happy, that matters very little to the recipients, who are being helped with no demand or expectation of reciprocity. We can just be thankful to somebody like hex_colin (or even Gwaer, regardless of my personal dislike for many of that person's posts) for making the choice to derive their happiness from also making others happy, rather than renting two chicks in Amsterdam or whatever. And guess what? Science says that celebrating this behaviour encourages it.

III - Humans can easily languish in selfishness. But the great thing is that it doesn't take much to rise us up from this base state. The APA put together a study on "paying it forward", which showed that people will pass on equal treatment even in anonymous situations rather than slip into selfish behaviour.

http://www.adrianfward.com/2012-Gray_Ward_Norton-Paying_it_Forward.pdf

The study did show that generosity does not necessarily gets paid forward, but the core finding that we are more prone to fairness than selfishness is a great statement about the human condition.

Overall, NaryaDL0re, I reckon you could seriously benefit from presenting your opinions and the reasons for them, to compare them with the opinions of others, rather than preaching some "absolute truth" for which you have no support than your handful of years on this planet.

Get some humility to go with all that pride, and people might even write songs about it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uS1Ha3cF0Yk

Captain_Obvious
08-29-2013, 09:43 AM
I'm not a native English speaker either. Shocker, I know. but I challenge anyone to find any mistakes in my grammar and spelling that were not intentional: such as starting sentences with conjunctions to make my posts feel more like conversation. I have studies English as it is written and spoken to the point of obsession, and I have a pet peeve that I can no longer keep silent:
Happiness. not Happyness. Please. Red underlines are your friends, listen to them. I am not pointing this out to seem superior, or to devalue your opinions (which I find fascinating, but misguided) but because I seriously want to pull out my red sharpie and go through your posts. Actually, I want to do so with everyone's posts, but I understand most people would take offence to that.

~I was just out for a run and thought I might point out the obvious~

vickrpg
08-29-2013, 09:56 AM
that were not intentional
Good job! You found my joke. Prodygi beat you to it via PM though =D

And as far as recommended reading, for a lighter fare, I suggest this book:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_As_She_Is_Spoke
Much lighter, but funnier read. =D

Gulbech
08-29-2013, 10:04 AM
I will take this opportunity to preface my post with an apology for not reading all of NaryaDL0re's replies, but I am finding the presentation of opinions as facts and the author's ongoing claims of intelligence (which are directly contradicted by the rambling, shallow posts, filled with too-many words like some kind of mass grave intended to stop people looking through the contents) at best tiresome.

My main purpose here is to help you with your desperate need of some book learning, child.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uS1Ha3cF0Yk

Thank you, finally somebody who not claim to be smart, but somehow back it up.

People who need to tell everybody else they are intelligent, rarely are. My other friends who also have a master degree or PHD, dont use alot of long and complicated words or sentences when they try to have a conversation or prove a simple point. - Anything else is just trying to show off, and it is actually just pathetic.

Best regard
Gulbech

Captain_Obvious
08-29-2013, 10:05 AM
Good job! You found my joke. Prodygi beat you to it via PM though =D

And as far as recommended reading, for a lighter fare, I suggest this book:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_As_She_Is_Spoke
Much lighter, but funnier read. =D

Sounds like a great read... I will have to pick that up

NaryaDL0re
08-29-2013, 10:18 AM
I m not entirely sure what you mean by "me/I" centric point of view.
Especially since I have spent my entire life changing perspectives and
understanding the differences between historical ages, cultures and social groups.
That doesnt work well without the capacity to "switch views"...

Anyhow: I didnt reach you with my theory vs experience metaphor it seems.

100 000 against 1 opinion doesnt matter, as long as the 1 person has a coherent concept.
Even without overused examples like galileo and the church its simple to prove.

Do you know how many people in this world are criminal? Steal, murder and rape?
If you would acutally argue that "whatever more people do/think is correct" ... well
just educate yourself a little about whats happening on this globe and you ll have loads
of inspiration.

The quality of a source always has to be assessed and taken into consideration.
And the quality derives from either/and experience and theory.

If a theory is sound... it doesnt matter how many people dont get it...
Im always open for critique and debate. I ve changed my mind hundreds of
times in my life, sometimes because other people inspired or enlightend me,
most of the time because my own reflective mindset found flaws in my concepts.

By no means do I dare to presume that I have all the answers.
But no one in recent memory has actually proven me wrong... which leaves me no choice
but to believe in the only thing I ve got.
I consider my own fallibillity every day. I need to because otherwise I would do even
more mistakes than I inevitably do anyways.

Its not for the sake of avoiding hardship. Its because its healthier long term.

I believe your entire view on peception to be twisted and dangerous. Here is why:

Why do you think mankind strifes to grasp reality? Get a deeper understanding of
they how, when and where of our sorroundings?
Because it gives us power. Knowledge and understanding are power... because it enables
our organism to experience concepts like future, past, balance, good, bad, etc etc etc.

Its because the more our Y (perception) as an individual as well as a society matches
the X (reality) ... the better and more accurate our predictions and deductions become.
Enabling us to make better decisions and reap the rewards in form of comfort, safety
and other things that ultimately all lead to happynes.

How do you leave the apartment? Through the door or the window on the 6th floor?
Why dont you use the window? Because your perception as well as the perception
of most of our race is, that if you drop from that height, you die; and it usually isnt
in your interest to die.

If our perception would be that you wont die... it still wouldnt change the fact that you would.
Just like the perception of someone being a rapist, doesnt make him a rapist.
What it does, is make him someone percieved as a rapist, which leads to its own consequences.

Would you like to live in a world where people are casually judging people guilty
without sufficiant prove? There are still places in this world and a few hundred years ago
it was common to judge people on a whim, their heritage, appearence, age, or other
insignificant factors that had nothing to do with the charge...
Would you like to evolve backwards? Or keep on pursuing a better understanding and
a healthier perception as a whole, so we can make better educated decisions?


And just to help you with the misunderstanding thats within your train of thought.

A lesson on languages. You can define meaning. for example A = Apple B = Bananna
And you can define semantics. for example "You may not write "AppleBananna""
(I wont explain the rule here because this stuff gets very broad very quick).

What you can NOT define however are actual logical relations.

You cannot say: A = Apple, B = Bananna, A = B.
Language only terms things and sets up rules for phrasing.
It doesnt change what or how reality truely is.

So you are right when you say the consequences are very important.
And the consequences of being a rapist are usually less severe than being labeled
or rather percieved as such. That doenst change reality though.
When people percieve you as a rapist, that is exactly what you are:
A person percieved as a rapist. Thats language. That sentence holds true.
Every person that calls you a rapist, actually lies per definition... even if they
are not aware of the fact that they lie... they still lie.

Just as it was a lie that the earth is the middle of the universe... it was a lie.
No matter how many people said, percieved or believed it.
It was still responsible for most of our actions... but it wasnt the truth.

So... I understand your pragmatism in "consequences are what matters"... I agree.
I argue that the consequences of valuing perceptions over reality are bad, very bad...
its makes you make loads of mistakes and overlook opportunities and dangers.
Its a good attribute for the masses though, because it makes them easier to
manipulate.

I stated over and over btw, that I deem myself capable of reading between the lines
and having a good estimate on peoples verbal needs.
What I also state though, was my true purpose of these posts...
Which you ignore and ignore and ignore...
I dont want everyone to understand me, I dont want to be liked, accepted...
And there are loads of better places for stimulating conversation.
If I want intellectual satisfaction there are hundreds of better methods.

I from time to time, take my chance to post oberservations or assumptions in a
VERY controversial manner... to look for people that are capable and willing to
see the truth inside and enjoy the phrasing... because only people with very specific
conditioning do so.


And please dont take the example above with the window lightly.

Reality is, it is the only thing that is. Perception is part of reality...
it cant change it... it can only either be close or far away from grasping it.

And mankind has shown for thousands of years... its healthier to
be close to truth 99% of the time.
People throughout history have percieved many things... many people to be idiots.
Many ideas to be great. People have been wrong and people have been right.

Perception is mighty. One of the strongest forces on our planet are Macro-perceptions.
But that doenst mean its correct or healthy to lose track of reality and justify
inappropriate behaviour.
When the entire world percieves people to happily go to god when they jump out of a window
it still wont be healthy or advisable to do it.

And just because almost everyone in these forum percieves the way that generosity
is treated to be beneficial... doenst make it so.


Language "works" is a difficult thing to define...

I can does mind if possible or not. Does this sentence "work"?
Does no sentence work that isnt 100% correct? obviously not.
Where is the line and why?
Apples are exactly like bananas. Well this sentence is 100% correct right? right?
Just because you "can" "legally" say something doesnt make it true, or desirable.

Language is only a tool. And as a tool is only as powerful and helpful as the
hand that guides it and the goal it tries to achieve.

Stating falsehoods, making arbitrary claims for the sake of missunderstood emotions.
These are not the signs of capable hands or a well designed goal.

I use language for the sake of achieving the highest amount of happynes possible in my life.

And when I see people behave in a way that I assume to be hurtful and shortsighted...
it is in my nature to state that observation, sometimes condescending and obnoxious and
sometimes very careful and considerate.

vickrpg
08-29-2013, 10:37 AM
Thank you, finally somebody who not claim to be smart, but somehow back it up.
::Shrugs::
When you speak to wolves, you bear teeth.
When you speak to peacocks, you show your tail feathers.
When you speak to blow-fish, you puff up.
When you speak to Chocobo, you Wark, or Kweh.

I don't make it a habit to show my tail feathers to wolves.

I agree with your quote entirely. ^_^

EDIT: Didn't see your reply Narya, Editing to avoid double post.
Okay, here we go again, I actually should be getting some work done, but this is actually fun for me.

Apples are exactly like bananas. They are delicious, fruity and I love them.
see that? I just used exactly incorrectly, and everyone knew what I meant.

I wouldn't dare argue that you don't die if you jump out the window, or that the world isn't round.
I argue that if nobody perceives your death or absence, Your death is irrelevant.
That if nobody acts as though the world is round, effectively it wasn't. Not actually, effectively.
"But if you sail around the world, you'd see."
yes, but nobody did, so it they didn't. They acted as if the world was flat, and effectively BY THEIR BEHAVIOR, it was. the world didn't effectively become round until it war perceived as round. but yes, I agree, it is a good thing to try to bring perception closer to reality, but it is like chasing perfection. The closer we get, the more re realize how far we are.

I really need to get some work done, I'll continue later.



I don't want everyone to understand me, I don't want to be liked, accepted...
And there are loads of better places for stimulating conversation.
If I want intellectual satisfaction there are hundreds of better methods
This. Problem is, I like it when the community gets along, most of us do. I also want to include you in this community, so I try to help.

::Hugs::
(>'.')><('.'<)

NaryaDL0re
08-29-2013, 10:44 AM
@Facilier

This will be rather short because I have to indeed mostly point out things I already said earlier.

1.) I use many words because I write 100% of what I think. Without rephrasing most of the time
and therefor without consideration for length or conciseness. I just write, directly after reading
the post of the person I reply to.

I know this is hurtful for the quality of my posts, yet it comes at the benefit of not taking any
mental toll. It should be mentioned that I dont believe the "content" to suffer, but the presentation.

2.) I did not propose to praise traits instead of actions. I proposed to explain why
an action is supposed to be praised, rather than just leaving that part up for
antiquated presumptions.

Studies also showed that deeper understanding of rewards and punishment has
a high and healthy impact on the conditioning.
But I ll leave it as a shallow statement because this post doesnt serve the purpose
of proving sth.

3.) There is no "altruistic" behavior, unless you pretend that happynes is not a "good"
that people get in return for their behaviour, which I pointed out earlier is a little
pointless, since 100% of our actions are aimed at an increase of our happynes.

I never said that mutually beneficial behaviour isnt great or shouldnt be encouraged...

4.) Again, there is no "rise up from that state".
What we can raise from is the stupidity and shortsightedness that leads to
corrupted behavior.
People that help other people havent gotten "better" on some magic scale...
They have become more educated in calculating whats in their own best interest.
And while doing so also increased the reasons to like them.

5.) one of the main problems is, that all those studies are bound to give
twisted results, because the tested population acts according to our
flawed system of moral conventions.

6.) everyone should preach "truth", because if they dont believe their own believes
to be "true" than why the hell should they act according to them?

Its another very incoherent design... putting "tolerance" on par with...
"everyone is entitled to their own opinion, therefore I shouldnt presume mine to be better".

If I dont hink my opinion is better, than why should I act on it?
Which opinion should I trust, if all have equal value? The entire concept
is impossible to live by. At least as long as you are halfaware of what you are doing.

7.) I m a really humble guy given the right perspective. For example the universe as a
whole to name just a very overused example.
There are loads of exercises, sports and mental masteries whoms mere observation
humbles me. There is so much that can be imagined and achieved depending on ones
specialization... its impossible to be humble if you have an open mind.
However that wont change my attitude towards this community so far ^^.

Prodygi
08-29-2013, 10:44 AM
Good job! You found my joke. Prodygi beat you to it via PM though =D

And as far as recommended reading, for a lighter fare, I suggest this book:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_As_She_Is_Spoke
Much lighter, but funnier read. =D

I kinda wanted to stay anonymous, thus the PM. Now that I'm in the light.....
You spelt "where" as "whee" somewhee.

NaryaDL0re
08-29-2013, 10:48 AM
::Shrugs::
When you speak to wolves, you bear teeth.
When you speak to peacocks, you show your tail feathers.
When you speak to blow-fish, you puff up.
When you speak to Chocobo, you Wark, or Kweh.

I don't make it a habit to show my tail feathers to wolves.

I agree with your quote entirely. ^_^

That metaphor is all nice and well =).
It stops working though, once you show your feathers to unknown
animals just to see who is a peacock.

EDIT: (rephrasing)

EDIT 2:

The reason I phrased : Apples are exactly(!) as bananas.
wasnt obvious enough?

Let me rephrase than. "Apples are identical to bananas in every possible way."
This sentence should violate enough rules of logic for you to accept
it not only false, but unhelpful (without the context of this paragraph).
(Also I never said that you couldnt create a context for my other sentence.
but the people whoms language I critisized didnt give such an appropriate
context... you seem to misunderstand this part of our debate as a
challange between the both of us... but I never blamed your phrasing...)

And again... you are correct that what matters is what has effect.
However you already agreed that understanding of our sorroundings
does help a lot... soo...?
My argument was, that it has a bad effect if we grow accustomed
and encourage false perceptions.

Not being able to achieve perfection was never a viable argument
against the pursuit of perfection. The entire concept ist based around
the "direction" and "orientation"... not the "goal".
No one who understands perfection and claims to seek it believes he
will find it.

But I m very tired of people not trying because they cant
comprehend the benefits of pursuing something that you
will never reach.


I understood our conflict of interests. I m searching for certain people
at times, and at other times I just want to contribute meaningful
to the community. (see the old sexualization thread)
And the searching part conflicts with your desire for a casual atmosphere.

As always it saddens me to reach a conclusion where a conflict of
interests is most likely inevitable... but seeing as I dont want to be
banned from this "hunting ground", it lies within my best interests
to ultimately add enough value to this community.

So I might not be your biggest ally, but I ll make sure not to become
so much of an enemy that I can no longer utilize these forums =).
And looking at our conservation... I believe that you actually relish this
encounter more than you believe it to be harmful =).

therefore:
::Hugs::
(>'.')><('.'<)

vickrpg
08-29-2013, 11:02 AM
You spelt "where" as "whee" somewhee.

Whee! Thanks, that was not intended. If I find it, I'll fix it.
b('.')

Sorry about breaking anonymity... the light is fun, you should come out to play more often!

houjix
08-29-2013, 11:16 AM
::Shrugs::
When you speak to wolves, you bear teeth.


What kind of teeth should I carry, grizzly or black? :)

vickrpg
08-29-2013, 11:25 AM
What kind of teeth should I carry, grizzly or black? :)
Polar if you can manage it. Koala would be impressive too.
Impeccable pun.


So I might not be your biggest ally,
Actually, due to my low post count and the percentage of them directed at you or replied by you, You actually might be my biggest ally... Well, Shadowelf likes to comment directly at me too, but I think you've got the numbers.

Disagreements will not phase me, usually.

No hate. v(^.^)

Kates
09-03-2013, 06:42 AM
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130902162716.htm

The title of the articles is "Generosity Leads to Evolutionary Success, Biologists Show"

This research was performed by a professor of mine and is currently in press. I'd be interested to know what you think of it.

felmare
09-03-2013, 07:50 AM
such an akward thread. cant we just say thanks collin and do our part to the community and help others around us?

Deepdigger
09-03-2013, 08:30 AM
We need more info on HEX please. Where is this is all leading to otherwise. Lets start a thread on questioning life :)
Give us more info!!!

Xtopher
09-03-2013, 11:31 AM
Most everyone is generous in some way, be it with money, time, empathy, forgiveness, whatever. Once you actually know and like someone, being generous toward that person is second nature. In addition, there's something in it for us, because the expectation is that generosity will be repaid. So there's a large degree of self-interest in generosity (which isn't a bad thing) and as humans we've become "wired" for that behavior.

Contrast that with charity, which is usually a transaction that happens between strangers. The giver typically has no real expectation of getting anything from the person he was charitable toward. It's more a question of morality for the charitable person than one of self-interest, as with generosity.