Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If anything you can argue that since skepticism, naturalism, rationalism, atheism, empiricism tend to be associated with education and wealth, and the educated / wealthy tend to reproduce LESS, that the short term impact of the rise of the nones is apt to be natural selection in favor of the religious! The good news though is that higher education is pretty much required to thrive in the modern world, and the trend is toward effectively compulsory and free higher education, just as free and compulsory K-12 education became the norm generations ago. Education undermines religious faith, generates wealth, and so natural selection in the memesphere, if I may coin a term, is overwhelming conventional natural selection of individuals.
I probably did a poor job of articulating it....but the bold is what I was trying to get at for the distant past rather than modern times, as I agree the "pontifcators" (tm) of today tend to be more educated and thrive better than those clinging to (more) distorted, and less likely to be true, views of reality.
But you're probably right. Aside from the most extreme elements (likely suffering mental health disorders), it wouldn't have taken much for them to procreate before deciding their life wasn't meaningful enough to be bothered with coping with it.
What's sad is having to spend a majority of our one precious life at work, making our overlords even richer and more powerful in the process.
My goal in life is to (hopefully) buy my way out of wage slavery.
However, working is what produces things, builds things and makes living life better for oneself and all. Or else, we would still be living in the stone age.
So, we keep on building our own version of ant hills just like those ants. That's what we're here for.
Same here. Mordant's posts are the best on the R&S forum and I always look forward to reading them.
You guys are too kind. I value the posts of Martin, TP, Shirina, Matadora, JerZ and others too numerous to mention as well. R&S and A&A are the best I've found overall for intelligent and thought provoking conversation. I enjoy engaging even with those I very much disagree with ... and find I don't disagree with much at all with quite a few people here who are still believers.
While the rep system here is fundamentally broken and I don't necessarily agree with the ground rules ... you can't argue with success. In my experience over the past decade, nothing drains a discussion forum of life faster than being overrun by trolls and devoid of steadier hands from the over-40 crowd ... while still having the best of the younger folks in the mix. I love this place and I love you guys ;-)
The fundamental question "is life worth it" begs the question "to whom and in what context and from what perspective". Personally and subjectively, absent lots of dumb luck I would answer no. As you approach the species level and an objective assessment and a longer than human lifespan timeframe, the answer gradually becomes yes, by my lights at any rate.
I don't know that its fair to characterize as "delusional" the notion that life is awesome from any perspective. It's delusional from some, illusory from others, and reasonable from still others.
I don't think its delusional to deliberately decide not to go to certain dark places. It is simply pragmatic.
A perfect example is that I got a call from my daughter yesterday and spent the better part of an hour on the phone with her. Which should I focus on, let's see:
* As usual the conversation was 98% about her and she didn't ask one thing about what's going on with me or how I feel about it. Because she could care less.
* It was a belated father's day call and made only because my wife goosed her and put her up to it.
* Part of the conversation was about worrying developments with one of her boys.
* Despite that she continues to drop hints that life is financially difficult for her and she could really use some help, she just bought, and is actively gloating on social media about, a 3600 sq ft house which they are populating with new furniture.
Yeah, I could, and at times have, focussed on that. But I can also choose to focus on:
* She's okay and doing well, which at least I don't have to worry about.
* She's industrious, assertive, organized, and honest (about most things), unaddicted, etc.
* Her son's issues are not my problem and it's one thing at least that she's not trying to make my problem. I care about him as my grandson of course but as a grandparent its not my job to fret about his existential wellbeing.
* SHE is not my problem anymore and it doesn't matter on a day to day basis that she is a bit of a BS generator because she's a discrete 1,000 miles away.
So yes, I focus on the latter set of thoughts, and at times, average the two aspects together and decide that for me at least it's a net positive. Therefore, regarding raising her as a sunk cost, at present my daughter contributes more to my life than she subtracts from it. And she's not a real source of worry, although I'm ambivalent about some of my contact with her because she has some narcissistic tendencies that limit the quality of our relationship or how close I'd wish it to be.
The point though is that I could be in a dark funk about that call or just enjoy that I got a call from a reasonably functional child and that it went well.
Everything about life is that way. Call it delusional if you want, but I call it pragmatic to choose to pay lots more attention to positives in life than to negatives AND to have realistic expectations about what life provides. If you want to subjectively feel good, it's a choice that's open to you. It requires some work and practice admittedly but I have decided it's better in the long run than feeling like crap about life all the time.
Is it misogynistic to think/assume/declare that women are less big-picture-oriented than men? I think I could make a fact-based case that that's true, based on the relative talents of the genders.
Is it misogynistic to think/assume/declare that women are less big-picture-oriented than men? I think I could make a fact-based case that that's true, based on the relative talents of the genders.
Is it misogynistic to think/assume/declare that women are less big-picture-oriented than men? I think I could make a fact-based case that that's true, based on the relative talents of the genders.
I think you could make an argument like that, but it would be primarily anecdotal and based on the social/cultural norms that you live in and experience. And you'd probably want to start by defining big picture, as that is a vague and relative term. Because what one person considers big picture on 1 subject, may be much different than another.
To go broader than that, I think would be presuming too much on women in general, without some sound evidence or data. As there are a lot of different women in this world, and certainly there are big-picture thinking women. And you can't discount the effects that cultural repression over many generations has on any group of people. So even if you did have some way to demonstrate your hypothesis widely, it would be less likely due to them being women, and more likely due to social norms that are still propagated from previous generations.
Is it misogynistic to think/assume/declare that women are less big-picture-oriented than men? I think I could make a fact-based case that that's true, based on the relative talents of the genders.
I don't know. I would be basing that on my vast (NOT!) personal experience with women that I have been close to.
My guess is that men and women let different emotions get the better of them, and are better at maintaining a cool head and steady hand in different situations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
