Headache 1 : Every non-dictators should be happy that there are political oppositions and embrace them, not fight for just one point of view. Otherwise they're making themselves hypocrites.
Headache 2 : Then how will a non-dictator defend oneself from a dictator?
Headache 3 : Evolution is a dictatorship. Parenting is a dictatorship. Does that mean the dictatorship is the right thing?
Headache 4 : Since when what evolution does was the right thing?
Headache 3 : It keeps us alive.
Headache 4 : Then explain mass extinctions.
Headache 3 : Since when death was a wrong thing?
Headache 4 : Dumbing themselves to death is not a right thing.
Headache 5 : What's right or wrong?
Headache 6 : What is happiness? Whatever we decide it is. Culturally, politically or evolutionarily, it's all the same and it's always changing.
Headache 4 : So a dictatorship is a right thing?
Headache 6 : Under right circumstances by the right means, it can be.
Headache 1 : Not in the 21st century's humanity.
Headache 6 : And you're dictating what non-dictators should do to not be the hypocrites. Your argument is invalid.
Headache 1 : So, people shouldn't be happy and embrace the other concepts?
Headache 7 : Is having an opinion wrong, because I can never say what is right without saying what can be right is wrong?
May 6, 2015
Compassion Is Fortitude, NOT Weakness
Some, especially the fictional-simplified villains and many of the real life individuals indirectly, say that the Compassion is a weakness. And they say it the way that is very sound. And I haven't hear a lot of equally sound counter arguments beside a good punch in the face.
So here's my counter.
Compassion can build alliance. It can build trust. And trust and compassion together can disarm a weapon that was pointed toward me or even turn it to the opposite way. And once it's done, it is formidable. The only one who can't be affected this way are the unfeeling or un-influenceable entities or objects. And as far as I know, such thing doesn't exist on this planet.
There is a downside of compassion and it is a major one, is that 99% of the time the messages aren't delivered the way it was suppose to be, due to the most lifeforms evolutionary path that made every living things very defensive and suspicious toward any familiar things that can potentially harm them so they can accomplish their self preservation, and our limited methods to send those messages (we all know any known existing languages aren't perfect, not without making everyone a hybrid-mind which means 0% individuality). While the message of the opposite action, such as attacking somebody with a lethal weapon, tend to hit the heart of a person directly.
But that 'downside' can be resolved with enough amount of compassion and doing it right.
Calling it a 'weakness' is not a strength. It's just an unintelligence and an impatience.
So cheer up and be nice. :)
So here's my counter.
Compassion can build alliance. It can build trust. And trust and compassion together can disarm a weapon that was pointed toward me or even turn it to the opposite way. And once it's done, it is formidable. The only one who can't be affected this way are the unfeeling or un-influenceable entities or objects. And as far as I know, such thing doesn't exist on this planet.
There is a downside of compassion and it is a major one, is that 99% of the time the messages aren't delivered the way it was suppose to be, due to the most lifeforms evolutionary path that made every living things very defensive and suspicious toward any familiar things that can potentially harm them so they can accomplish their self preservation, and our limited methods to send those messages (we all know any known existing languages aren't perfect, not without making everyone a hybrid-mind which means 0% individuality). While the message of the opposite action, such as attacking somebody with a lethal weapon, tend to hit the heart of a person directly.
But that 'downside' can be resolved with enough amount of compassion and doing it right.
Calling it a 'weakness' is not a strength. It's just an unintelligence and an impatience.
So cheer up and be nice. :)
Apr 23, 2015
Rich or Poor = Better or Worse?
Which is worse : rich people drink and gamble themselves to death, or poor people drink and gamble themselves to death?
Which is better : rich people helping people, or poor people helping people?
Certainly different ups and downs, emotionally in a perspective. But overall, I'm having a question for how much of this 'wealth' has anything to do with anybody's quality of life 'till death.
I was told, soon the richest 1% of the population will have 99% of the world's economy. But does even bothering with those numbers makes me a materialistic person as much as a guy who's sad because he's poor or rich because he's obsessed?
People do what they do to themselves the same, rich or poor. So perhaps the question is, 'what are they're doing to everything else beside themselves?'
Well, in the nature, it is very common (if not always) for a bigger entities, by their scale, to disregard the other entities of much smaller scales, and obliviously so. Like a mold to an elephant. And the people with a lot of money tend to scale their influences pretty largely. And if humanity do our things well, it is quite imaginable to see the storm of the humanity with the population of over a trillion. And the more population we have the lower the individual's quality of life is going to go down, except for the few people who controls the advantage of it to grow themselves bigger, like an elephant to a mold. Unfortunately for the equality of the people plus their dreams and desires, energy don't appear out of a thin air. It transforms. This 'happiness by physical' got to go somewhere. And so far, today there's about 7 billion people, and it's doing what it's meant to be.
So far, I don't see anything 'unnatural' about any of these.
Many of us has been asking 'why are you like this?' to the economy or the people who controls most of it. But maybe we should point that question to the nature, since this not-unnatural phenomenon troubles many people.
But thing is, we are the nature.
And even in a smaller scale than a nature, most of the people who has problems with the 1% of the population dominating the world's economy are the same people who's paying them to be that way by merely just flowing without a doable solution for the majority.
And the paradoxical thing about this is that, if majority agrees that alternative solution, the guy with that solution becomes that 1% that he hated.
Nothing but the throne can be changed this way.
But what do we do to ourselves if we are the problems that we see, the problems that's not without the upsides?
Well, this one's my answer :
To the people who likes money, welcome to the world! Everything you can touch can be yours if you have enough pens and papers since those are the most powerful tools this apex species on the planet is using today.
To everyone else, you don't need things to be touchable to be yours, meaning the whole universe is at your disposal and it's infinitely sharable. So why bother with those tiny 'worldly' beings? Remember, they're like demons. They can't see you unless you see them.
And yes, rich people will be the ones with the controls with what happens to everything as far as any one of us can see. And some people don't like their lives being controlled by the others. But when it gets to a scale that big, isn't that just about the same as how we're already being controlled by the nature such as our evolutions or the gravity? Most people aren't upset about those. So why should this?
Which is better : rich people helping people, or poor people helping people?
Certainly different ups and downs, emotionally in a perspective. But overall, I'm having a question for how much of this 'wealth' has anything to do with anybody's quality of life 'till death.
I was told, soon the richest 1% of the population will have 99% of the world's economy. But does even bothering with those numbers makes me a materialistic person as much as a guy who's sad because he's poor or rich because he's obsessed?
People do what they do to themselves the same, rich or poor. So perhaps the question is, 'what are they're doing to everything else beside themselves?'
Well, in the nature, it is very common (if not always) for a bigger entities, by their scale, to disregard the other entities of much smaller scales, and obliviously so. Like a mold to an elephant. And the people with a lot of money tend to scale their influences pretty largely. And if humanity do our things well, it is quite imaginable to see the storm of the humanity with the population of over a trillion. And the more population we have the lower the individual's quality of life is going to go down, except for the few people who controls the advantage of it to grow themselves bigger, like an elephant to a mold. Unfortunately for the equality of the people plus their dreams and desires, energy don't appear out of a thin air. It transforms. This 'happiness by physical' got to go somewhere. And so far, today there's about 7 billion people, and it's doing what it's meant to be.
So far, I don't see anything 'unnatural' about any of these.
Many of us has been asking 'why are you like this?' to the economy or the people who controls most of it. But maybe we should point that question to the nature, since this not-unnatural phenomenon troubles many people.
But thing is, we are the nature.
And even in a smaller scale than a nature, most of the people who has problems with the 1% of the population dominating the world's economy are the same people who's paying them to be that way by merely just flowing without a doable solution for the majority.
And the paradoxical thing about this is that, if majority agrees that alternative solution, the guy with that solution becomes that 1% that he hated.
Nothing but the throne can be changed this way.
But what do we do to ourselves if we are the problems that we see, the problems that's not without the upsides?
Well, this one's my answer :
To the people who likes money, welcome to the world! Everything you can touch can be yours if you have enough pens and papers since those are the most powerful tools this apex species on the planet is using today.
To everyone else, you don't need things to be touchable to be yours, meaning the whole universe is at your disposal and it's infinitely sharable. So why bother with those tiny 'worldly' beings? Remember, they're like demons. They can't see you unless you see them.
And yes, rich people will be the ones with the controls with what happens to everything as far as any one of us can see. And some people don't like their lives being controlled by the others. But when it gets to a scale that big, isn't that just about the same as how we're already being controlled by the nature such as our evolutions or the gravity? Most people aren't upset about those. So why should this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)