The modern obsession with hard flooring (in reality: laminate) is whatever. There is, however, something almost comical about surrounding a central pit with all smooth surfaces, and then choosing a hard, pointy, rectangular table as the centerpiece.
I think this soulless monochrome room could use a splash of red.
Literally gave a guy $100 once (everything in my wallet) so that he wouldn't need to keep begging in the parking lot. I was working minimum wage. Problem is, now I literally don't have enough money to do that again. Now see, maybe if the next person also did this, that might help solve the problem. Perhaps it might evolve into a community of people paying it forward and helping the brother next to them in a slowly strengthened network of support.
In other words, a much more expensive, unsustainable and unreliable version of a strong government funded social safety net.
Nah, this is probably suppose to make the poster look hypocritical, but I think the sentiment of basic life essentials still stands.
Imagine this person lives in an area where fracking, data centers, and beverage companies have stolen or destroyed access to water; then complaining about bottled water being locked up because of shoplifting.
Tooth decay can kill you eventually, but hydraulic despotism can kill you pretty quickly. The slowly boiled frog vs the one dropped immediately into the pan.
Out of curiosity, DOES the bible specifically forbid fucking dead animals? I feel like it says something about human necrophilia and bestiality but I'm not sure about BOTH at the same time. I feel like there's a Mormon-esque loophole in there somewhere.
This boogie-man makes perfect sense when viewed through the lens of zero-sum thinking. They literally view helping other people as being detrimental to their own position because it means that the people "beneath" them are now less far beneath. This makes their position feel less lofty because we've raised the floor of human suffering, thereby making them feel less advantaged and less high above that floor of human suffering by comparison.
It's not even a meme to characterize them as saying, "the suffering is the point" when they support certain inherently evil consumerist practices. They literally think that way.
Boss calling the custodian into his office "Hey, so, this is awkward but; you're actually cleaning too well. Can you do a bit less of a good job next time?"
This is almost as bad as thinking RATM was on their side. I say almost, but holy shit, how do you listen to one of their songs without comprehending or even thinking about a single line of the lyrics. Actual dementia
This is a public forum. My last post was written primarily for clarification and to provide more accurate information to future readers. I would not bother replying to misinformation if these messages were strictly private.
It's okay to disagree with someone. It's even understandable when some people want to feel 100% correct about something by endlessly playing semantics. I've seen more than my fair share of this behavior. This is nothing new to me.
However, while I can tolerate someone who is simply trying to be pedantic, I will not engage with someone acting in bad faith.
Goodbye, and thank you for providing these opportunities for me to elucidate. "That'sThose werea lot ofmany wordsyou wasted well spent." :)
Right. Forming a decision or reaching a conclusion about real-life events while basing and/or relating part of that assessment on similar fictional events, is the appeal to fiction. Fiction and non-fiction are fundamentally separate, and needs be considered separately. That distinction is important especially when making comparisons.
The lack of nuance, openness to interpretation and fundamental disconnect which an appeal to fiction inherently carries with it is a large part of what you're describing in the second part of your reply. (IE right-wing "blue pillers" with its relation to The Matrix)
People naturally desire and seek out narratives which align with their views or beliefs. This also makes it entirely too easy for them to mold or fracture parts of fictional themes to fit those beliefs while discarding parts that don't: Writers be damned. It isn't JUST intellectual dishonestly that you are observing here, as convenient as that conclusion would be. This is a basic part of human nature. It will happen every time. I promise you that right wingers are sharing this exact meme and making the same statements about us.
The classic court room example of this would be when an attorney argued that a FED, CIA, or LEO's actions were justified because they closely resembled or even exactly mirrored the actions taken by Jack Bauer in the TV series 24. Even if the events, character, and outcomes of these two scenarios (fiction vs non-fiction) were literally identical in every conceivable way: It would not then be rational, relevant, appropriate nor admissible in any way for the attorney to then pose to the jury that, "When Jack Bauer did this, you clearly understood the necessity and moral justification. But you're refusing to see it in the reality of what our Officer did" - To relate as closely as I can to the meme above.
Parable, metaphor and simile can often serve as convenient didactic tools when introducing complex messages to the otherwise uninformed. Like a professor using a cheeky pop-culture reference in the opening slide of a presentation. It's a very imperfect tool; useful, perhaps, as a narrative hook. The important divergence here is that this brief messaging then leads into the real and nuanced discussion about non-fiction or fiction and where they relate separately without conflating the two.
This is something which brief, easily sharable memes and political cartoons don't do by their nature, leaving only the fallacy.
It is wild to me that homosexuality is still a more contentious topic in this country than literal life or death policies with very real considerations of severe human suffering like the death penalty or access to euthanasia.
Cowboy Bebop was just alright.
Okay, this is exactly the kind of malicious compliance that I can get behind. Fucking legends.
The modern obsession with hard flooring (in reality: laminate) is whatever. There is, however, something almost comical about surrounding a central pit with all smooth surfaces, and then choosing a hard, pointy, rectangular table as the centerpiece.
I think this soulless monochrome room could use a splash of red.
Literally gave a guy $100 once (everything in my wallet) so that he wouldn't need to keep begging in the parking lot. I was working minimum wage. Problem is, now I literally don't have enough money to do that again. Now see, maybe if the next person also did this, that might help solve the problem. Perhaps it might evolve into a community of people paying it forward and helping the brother next to them in a slowly strengthened network of support.
In other words, a much more expensive, unsustainable and unreliable version of a strong government funded social safety net.
Nah, this is probably suppose to make the poster look hypocritical, but I think the sentiment of basic life essentials still stands.
Imagine this person lives in an area where fracking, data centers, and beverage companies have stolen or destroyed access to water; then complaining about bottled water being locked up because of shoplifting.
Tooth decay can kill you eventually, but hydraulic despotism can kill you pretty quickly. The slowly boiled frog vs the one dropped immediately into the pan.
Just needs an electric guitar and a heroin addiction and that's an 80s rock-star in the making.
Is SpongeBob freeuse? Link him the MeatCanyon video. You know the one.
Even better, when he's on deployment, other men sleep at HIS house. True UNO reverse card.
Out of curiosity, DOES the bible specifically forbid fucking dead animals? I feel like it says something about human necrophilia and bestiality but I'm not sure about BOTH at the same time. I feel like there's a Mormon-esque loophole in there somewhere.
Tell me you have never consumed any form of Chinese media without telling me.
This boogie-man makes perfect sense when viewed through the lens of zero-sum thinking. They literally view helping other people as being detrimental to their own position because it means that the people "beneath" them are now less far beneath. This makes their position feel less lofty because we've raised the floor of human suffering, thereby making them feel less advantaged and less high above that floor of human suffering by comparison.
It's not even a meme to characterize them as saying, "the suffering is the point" when they support certain inherently evil consumerist practices. They literally think that way.
Boss calling the custodian into his office "Hey, so, this is awkward but; you're actually cleaning too well. Can you do a bit less of a good job next time?"
This is almost as bad as thinking RATM was on their side. I say almost, but holy shit, how do you listen to one of their songs without comprehending or even thinking about a single line of the lyrics. Actual dementia
There's something ironic about how poorly this is written. I choose to believe that they're doing it intentionally; If only to preserve my sanity.
This is a public forum. My last post was written primarily for clarification and to provide more accurate information to future readers. I would not bother replying to misinformation if these messages were strictly private.
It's okay to disagree with someone. It's even understandable when some people want to feel 100% correct about something by endlessly playing semantics. I've seen more than my fair share of this behavior. This is nothing new to me.
However, while I can tolerate someone who is simply trying to be pedantic, I will not engage with someone acting in bad faith.
Goodbye, and thank you for providing these opportunities for me to elucidate. "
That'sThose werea lot ofmany wordsyou wastedwell spent." :)Right. Forming a decision or reaching a conclusion about real-life events while basing and/or relating part of that assessment on similar fictional events, is the appeal to fiction. Fiction and non-fiction are fundamentally separate, and needs be considered separately. That distinction is important especially when making comparisons.
The lack of nuance, openness to interpretation and fundamental disconnect which an appeal to fiction inherently carries with it is a large part of what you're describing in the second part of your reply. (IE right-wing "blue pillers" with its relation to The Matrix)
People naturally desire and seek out narratives which align with their views or beliefs. This also makes it entirely too easy for them to mold or fracture parts of fictional themes to fit those beliefs while discarding parts that don't: Writers be damned. It isn't JUST intellectual dishonestly that you are observing here, as convenient as that conclusion would be. This is a basic part of human nature. It will happen every time. I promise you that right wingers are sharing this exact meme and making the same statements about us.
The classic court room example of this would be when an attorney argued that a FED, CIA, or LEO's actions were justified because they closely resembled or even exactly mirrored the actions taken by Jack Bauer in the TV series 24. Even if the events, character, and outcomes of these two scenarios (fiction vs non-fiction) were literally identical in every conceivable way: It would not then be rational, relevant, appropriate nor admissible in any way for the attorney to then pose to the jury that, "When Jack Bauer did this, you clearly understood the necessity and moral justification. But you're refusing to see it in the reality of what our Officer did" - To relate as closely as I can to the meme above.
Parable, metaphor and simile can often serve as convenient didactic tools when introducing complex messages to the otherwise uninformed. Like a professor using a cheeky pop-culture reference in the opening slide of a presentation. It's a very imperfect tool; useful, perhaps, as a narrative hook. The important divergence here is that this brief messaging then leads into the real and nuanced discussion about non-fiction or fiction and where they relate separately without conflating the two.
This is something which brief, easily sharable memes and political cartoons don't do by their nature, leaving only the fallacy.
I get the sentiment but this is called an appeal to fiction. It really isn't sound logic
It is wild to me that homosexuality is still a more contentious topic in this country than literal life or death policies with very real considerations of severe human suffering like the death penalty or access to euthanasia.