On a quiet night in tropical Darwin I sit down to pasta and red wine for a read of the latest thoughts of humanity. As soon as I saw “conspiracy” mentioned I knew I was onto something. I’ve been writing stories for a while now and never in my wildest imagination could I have come up with such bizarre ideas. Then I thought about religion. Now there’s an idea worthy of a Booker Prize. The diversity of opinions here is as narrow as the gap in my front teeth. I don’t mind that. People are entitled, so I’ve heard. And that’s where the problem starts. No one ever suggested that having an opinion made it truthful or factual. And in saying that, I would offer the option of changing one’s mind from time to time. I’ve heard all this stuff before, in differing forms and aimed at alternative political structure. Yet I’m still here, content in my lot, facing the turmoil of living, deciding who I support and who I buy from, drive my car, work for a living, avoid my family, trust in the ways of natural forces and outcomes. I look at how we see each other as humans and am somewhat puzzled. “Divide and conquer” comes to mind. Them against us, men against women, black against white, rich against poor, tall against short. Whatever! Yet, when standing at the urinal of life, I don’t see the size of the next man’s dick and think he’s less or more than I. He’s just having a pee. If I was to ask the next person on the street how life is for them, and they told me, my next question would be: “And how’s that working for you?”. We’ve all got visions of grandeur. The person on the train is looking down at the others walking while the person driving the Mercedes is looking down on everyone, until he passes the bloke with the Porsche. fortunately, I don’t have an obligation to solve everyone’s troubles. Nor do I have the urge to fight for a cause, stand up for the rights of others, go to a rally, declare my sexual preferences, find my heritage, or get a bigger house. Nor do I care much about the opinions of others: until they start talking bullshit like it’s real. Truth for some is as flexible as a wheat field in a storm. Some think they know it and they don’t. Some know the truth and lie. The rest are just plumb ignorant and just guess. Me? I’m waiting. I’ll look at the data and work with the best of the best, yet still remain open to possibilities when new information comes forth. Now, I going back to my pasta. It’s getting cold. let’s hope the world doesn’t come to an end before I get to the wine.
I wonder if the Jews of pre-Hitler ate pasta? Or the Mexicans in the 60's before they were given one new peso for one hundred of their old ones. Or...
Mary, you’ve got me. That comment far exceeds my intellect. I’ll leave you to whatever it is I obviously don’t fathom.
It's a village in Wales. It was in a film I saw. Cannot recall it's title or who was in it, but the name stuck.
Really There is so much information out there, essentially being force-fed to those in western industrial societies in the same manner as geese being cultivated for their livers, that it becomes necessary to learn to triage news for its impact, or potential impact, on you and your loved ones. This is simply to allow you to concentrate your efforts on topics of personal importance, the rest being trivial to your continued existence. The "circuses" part of "bread and circuses". So you simply ignore a lot of news stories that show up on forums like these, and which are are passionately debated for no good reason that I can see. It amounts to squandering energy that might be better used to solve problems that may affect you. So really, you do as you suggest: really spend some time analyzing and evaluating those emerging issues that are important to your continued life. You just do the best you can, using objectivity not so much for fairness, but for accuracy. And all this takes a while. ...and you *still* never know for sure. Oh, yeah. You have to constantly test your body of knowledge (worldview) as new information comes in. Nothing, except for belief in your ability to analyze/evaluate, is beyond re-examination.
So your " analyzing and evaluating others is any different? Or do you think you're in Rome participating in 'Bread and Circuses'' type of subject?. We all have our likes and dislikes of topics.
Wise words, Mitchell. I read any social media and news with a cautious but curious mind. Once Ive decided what is worthy of note or investigation, the rest is sent to the bin. Then I must consider which of those deemed worthy of investigation is going to influence my thoughts, knowledge, relationships with others and my place in society. Then there are the moral and ethical considerations. My opinions on matters is based on what steps I might take in advancing my understanding, whats reliable, what has changed i need to adjust, will it get my leg over. That last one was from my old man: "Have your opinions but only hang on to those which get you a free meal and your leg over" I rather adhere to S I Hayakawa when he suggested it would be in our favour if we didnt die with the same prejudices we were born with. Being a scientist its sometimes difficult to explain to others how I can be so reliant on data yet so uncertain about all things. Especially when there seems to be considerable numbers thinking the polar opposite.
Some prejudices are good for us. Some people will blow you away while you're standing there psychoanalyzing them. You must have had a charmed life in a civilized environment. Most of my life was like that, but some of it was not so pampered. I remember multi-millionaire Selene Dion saying, " let them touch them things", easy for her since she lived in a modern-day fortress, and it was our things they were after.
That's OK. Been there, done that! I was replying to Tom, explaining how I cut thru the mess of information that comes my way. I used the impersonal "you", not meaning to address anyone in particular. I could have used "one" instead of "you" and it would have maybe been clearer.
Yes, and while one lives in a society, they'll run into others who share one's morals and ethics, but it seems to me that all morals and ethics are subjective, really. I mean, for those who want to insist that the concept of race is purely a social construct, and does not exist independent of human consciousness, they'd need to be ready to apply this same logic to morality and ethics. Hah! One of my sigfiles I stole from a Groucho Marx quote: "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...well, I have others."