You must log in or register to comment.
In my language it goes : “Alone you go faster, together you go further”.
I like that one!
It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not a weakness, that is life.
I find that this is particularly difficult for conservative, “pull yourself up from your bootstraps” types to understand. Some people think poor people, or those who have fallen into misfortune, were makers of their own tragedy. While it may sometimes be the case, I believe that more often than not, these people were just unlucky enough to born at the wrong place, at the wrong time, into the wrong family, neighbourhood, or country.
There are poor people inventing incredible things every day, but nobody around them has the power nor connections to make anything out of it. I watched a video of people who made a bike out of wood that could carry half a tonne, down an unpaved road at relatively high speeds, while metal bikes in developed countries have ratings for people under 150kg. But because those poor bike-makers were born where they were and had to toil in order to survive, day in and day out, there was never enough time for them for make their inventions a product to be produced and sold to the masses. Yet somewhere, there’s a conservative prick saying these people are lazy or aren’t smart.
First thought that came to me as well. Thank You Captain Picard…
This could have also been said by any speedrunner in a game with even a single RNG event.
If the penalty for breaking a law is a fine, that law only exists for poor people.
“It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose. That is not weakness. That is life.”
-Captain Jean-Luc Picard
I used to think of myself as a complete pacifist, but these words haven’t left my mind since I heard them:
You think you’re better than everyone else, but there you stand: the good man doing nothing. And while evil triumphs and your rigid pacifism crumbles into bloodstained dust, the only victory afforded to you is that you stuck true to your guns.
Of course this only applies to defense, never to offense (especially “preemptive defense”), but I can’t really argue against it.
Art should comfort the disturbed and disturb the comfortable.
This has influenced my entire idea of spending money:
“The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.
Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.
But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that’d still be keeping his feet dry in ten years’ time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
This was the Captain Samuel Vimes ‘Boots’ theory of socioeconomic unfairness.”
This has influenced my entire idea of spending money
How so, out of curiosity?
Buying less and buying for life as a priority when choosing purchases. It’s had a knock on effect thst I try to buy bespoke from small artisans as they tend to be higher quality and it supports small businesses rather than megacorps.
“It’s not your fault, but it is your problem.”
I honestly love and repeat this line way too much
Just because you weren’t the cause doesn’t mean it isn’t something you need to worry about/fix. I learned this one from my high school English teacher when a student was late and tried to get out of it by blaming traffic lol. The traffic was not their fault, but it ended up being their problem.
There’s a variation of this that I like better: “It’s not your fault but it is your responsibility.”
Framing it this way shifts the tone from passive to active; you have a problem, but you take responsibility. It also helps the responsible party set themself up for correcting the behavior in the future. Saying you’re late because of traffic and accepting the consequences is fine, but recognizing that you need to leave earlier to accommodate traffic is better.
I had a teacher who would ask for an explanation, not an excuse. If the explanation started to place blame on someone or something else, he’d just shake his head and say “no excuses.”
Housing can’t be both affordable and a good investment.
Variation of this: Poor people rent, that’s how they stay poor.
The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
He may or may not have known it, but he was paraphrasing a fundamental rule of the Baha’i Faith.
I’m not sure the baha’i faith knew they were quoting Douglas Adams.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it
Unfortunately, too many people have been trained to reject ideas or thoughts without first thinking them through. Many simply react to whatever word, expression, or concept triggers them without giving the rest a second thought. For example a brilliant idea can be presented online, but if one word is out of place, the usage of that word will debated instead of the idea.
Oh my god, 100% Read a post about it on r/196 a while ago, went something like “It’s important to have discussions about things like cannibalism because arguments like «it’s just gross/bad/unnatural» have been used to condemn homosexuality and the like”
I’m not saying I would murder someone to try human, but I would go to the store to try longpork
If a person said “I’ll kill myself and you can eat me afterwards” and they were eaten, what would be wrong about eating them? We eat animals every day. Humans are animals. What’s ethically wrong with eating them?
Of course, if it turned into a capitalistic venture, that would be a completely different discussion: how would you know the human meat were sourced by voluntary deaths? Once there’s money involved, things get very tricky.
Every single disease that might be present in human meat is 100% capable of infecting humans, which is not at all the case for non-human meat.
Even if you properly cook the meat, things like prions can still remain.
I suspect that’s probably one of the reasons why the tabu against cannibalism is so widespread: from a health point of view human meat is a lot more likely to make you sick than non-human meat.
Prions can exist in any meat and are incredibly difficult to destroy.
The World Health Organization recommends any of the following three procedures for the sterilization of all heat-resistant surgical instruments to ensure that they are not contaminated with prions:
- Immerse in 1N sodium hydroxide and place in a gravity-displacement autoclave at 121 °C for 30 minutes; clean; rinse in water; and then perform routine sterilization processes.
- Immerse in 1N sodium hypochlorite (20,000 parts per million available chlorine) for 1 hour; transfer instruments to water; heat in a gravity-displacement autoclave at 121 °C for 1 hour; clean; and then perform routine sterilization processes.
- Immerse in 1N sodium hydroxide or sodium hypochlorite (20,000 parts per million available chlorine) for 1 hour; remove and rinse in water, then transfer to an open pan and heat in a gravity-displacement (121 °C) or in a porous-load (134 °C) autoclave for 1 hour; clean; and then perform routine sterilization processes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prion#Sterilization
From a health point of view human meat is a lot more likely to make you sick than non-human meat
That’s a good argument. Many people seem to have a kneejerk response to eating human meat though, which I’m not sure comes from that knowledge.
I think people are mainly driver by the tabu against eating human meat rather than any kind of proper thinking about it, but the tabu itself probably came to be because people kept getting sick when they ate human meat but not when they ate other meats.
You see a lot of that kind of thing in other tabus, for example the ones against incest (inbreeding tends to produce offspring with health problems) or handling feces (because the bacteria in feces tend to cause disease much more than the bacteria in things like dirt).
That is an interesting correlation I hadn’t thought about. Thank you. You might be onto something there.
I love this! And if you find yourself afraid to even entertain an idea, perhaps you’re afraid that you’ll find it convincing and accept it. We should WANT to be convinced, because that means the different idea holds more merit than our current belief!
Hurt people hurt people.
We thought of life by analogy was a journey, was a pilgrimage, which had a serious purpose at the end. And the thing was to get to that end.
Success, or whatever it is, or maybe heaven after you’re dead.
But we missed the point the whole way along. It was a musical thing, and you were supposed to sing, or to dance, while the music was being played
– Alan Watts
“Let go, or be dragged.”
It’s simple, yet so meaningful.
Not my circus, not my monkeys.
Used this against my controlling mother, who liked to lay BS at my feet and make me think it was my responsibility to fix. When it was HER that caused the whole thing. The look on her face when I hit her with that phrase and just turned around and left was priceless.
There a LOT of things that are just flat not your problem, even if someone else tries to make it yours.
