And I found out today that all the girls he did this with were 18 and over. So the label of pedophile doesn’t even make sense to begin with.

You’re right it’s more than likely AI.

deleted by creator

There’s zero evidence to support that claim and the girls themselves even said nothing happened. The value and potential of 2 + 2 remains the same no matter whose lips it came from; knowledge is just that: knowledge, no matter its source and no matter what we’ve rendered it ever since it’s been revealed and labeled. Besides, I agree with MLK:

“In the final analysis, God does not judge us by the separate incidents or the separate mistakes that we make, but by the total bent of our lives. In the final analysis, God knows that his children are weak and they are frail. In the final analysis, what God requires is that your heart is right.”

It’s a painting I found on the Internet. Thanks.

Hmm. Interesting. Based on what you’re saying here I can’t help but humbly point you towards my more allegorical, philosophical interpretation of the story of the Garden of Eden: https://lemmy.world/post/44870805

I’d be very interested in your thoughts on it if you’re interested.

I agree, well said. Most people can work and make money, but most people can’t utilize their imagination to make something like the nuclear bomb, for example, or the theory of relativity.

I think our imaginations govern over our capacity for inner thoughts and even empathy; people with hyperphatasia tend to be significantly more compassionate in contrast. It also governs over things like fear, anxiety, and depression. My siblings would always make fun of me for being so scared of horror movies and it used to bother me, until I found out something similar would happen to Gandhi as a boy but it was regarding images of demons and the like from religious books of his time. He would suffer from “night terrors” as a result of it. It led me to understand that there’s nothing wrong with me, and I’m not necessarily a “chicken,” I just have a really big imagination and unfortunately, people who don’t couldn’t ever possibly completely understand. Leading to their arrogant assumptions to take over and boom, you’re just a “baby.” Ugh.

Very well said! I’m going to be checking out that book you referenced, thanks for that. Consider my community if you’re looking for more: https://lemmy.world/c/TolstoysSchoolofLove

I’m not saying that’s the case to begin with. Tolstoy in particular has a lot of stigma surrounding him due to a lot of his philosophy consisting so much of Christianity.

You think I could write this well? Thanks, it’s flattering that people find his writing and mine even remotely comparable.

I never said math isn’t subjective, but as I stated in my post, we’ve always been able to find degrees of objectivity within the sea of subjectivity that lies within our knowledge of anything.

I’m afraid the world is more subjective than you feared.

Please consider reading before commenting as this comment doesn’t make any sense and only serves as evidence that you didn’t bother reading before you did so. Thanks.

That would still make it infallible even if we’re the ones who designed it. But in my opinion, we didn’t design it, we simply revealed it by our unique ability to give life to the knowledge of math here on Earth.

And what you said about morality being an intersubjective phenomenon is essentially what I said already, but in a way that’s more difficult for the most amount of people to understand.

But what determines what one feels as right? It’s wildly subjective so therefore we would need something to dial it in, so to speak; something we can all gather around and consider the most accurate way in deciding what is right or wrong within the veritable ocean that is our unique capacity and ability for morality. This is where the Golden Rule comes in, as its laid the foundation for western laws for some time now and only continues to do so. What better foundation for laws to be built upon then this simple precept? It’s far superior then some King or aristocracy deciding what is right or wrong based purely on their opinion and authority.

Why does it depend on morality not being evolutionarily driven?

My point is, when the world is drowning in such people

Are you saying the world is presently drowning in such people, or if it were to be drowning in such people?

the problem is hardly that no-one has spread “the great principle” loudly or far-enough.

It’s hands down the biggest problem; knowledge needs to be gained so therefore, someone needs to be willing to teach it. Once upon a time the value of selflessness, love, and it’s logic was no where near as assimilated within the hearts of men until people like Socrates or Jesus inspired others to even consider rising above what we would otherwise be more inherently drawn to if not for the knowledge of their influence: hate and selfishness.

My mother, her mother, my step-mother, mother-in-law and my wife’s aunts aren’t “exceptionally bad saints”, they are performing a role society has inculcated in people for generations. Even my wife seems to think self-care stops at hygeine, going to the gym and not letting her job get in the way of family events, and I had to beg her for years on the latter.

Idk, obviously I can’t say for sure but I’m getting the impression you may be over exaggerating due to your obvious bias.

When you couldn’t even “grasp” the content of my first comment

I could grasp it just fine, but I wasn’t clear on it as you write and explain things in a way that didn’t make it easy to understand initially, so I wanted to make sure I knew exactly what you were talking about first before giving a response.

I do things the “saints” in my live are afraid to do, both for safety and “what will people think of me?” reasons, like pick-up hitch-hikers, give money, food(upon request) and free rides to pan-handlers

Ah, so it’s ego that clouds your judgement. How do you know for a fact these people in particular you’re referring to, who don’t represent all the good hearted people everywhere as a whole, don’t do anything like those you listed? Based on what evidence? Could arrogance and hate be leading you your assumptions to become fact without genuinely knowing for sure?

its that they deserve better

Who deserves better?

never said altruism was bad, or that the people I’ve described are “the problem”, but YOU are presumably not one of them.

My post isn’t about altruism at all. I’m sorry you got that impression. And the people you’re referring to are the farthest thing from the epidemic you’re dressing it up as.

I never said altruism was bad

I agree. But you definitely heavily implied it.

Au contraire, yours is a message they love to listen-to, so wouldn’t it be nice if you could sprinkle in a word about self-care and treating one’s-self on occassion?

Absolutely not. They get enough of that from the hypocrisy [the acting] of their contemporaries so it’s a miracle they’re even willing to be selfless to its extremes to begin with. Besides, to what degree are these people just really depressed? And you’re not capable of seeing it due to your contempt for them and hate for the perspective I’m putting down. I’m not saying this for a fact, I’d obviously have no idea, just a suggestion. I would say however that in order to most efficiently love others, one must love themselves; the more one loves themself, the more effectively and more willing they are to love others. That said, I agree with the ancient Greeks: “Nothing too much (in excess)” - the second of three maxims chosen to be inscribed into the entrance of the temple of Apollo where the Oracle of Delphi resided in Ancient Greece.

… but no, let’s go six comments-deep and spend dozens of paragraphs refuting anyone who does mention those things as if that person were preaching the word of Xenu or, shudders, prosperity gospel.

Well to be fair the first two was me trying to make clear what you were initially trying to get across. And I’ll go as many comments as you need, friend. It sounds frustrating and idk what it’s like to have a family that’s apparently selfless to the point where it becomes a problem. I’d agree with you on that by the way, altruism can go sour provided people who haven’t been educated on the topic of selflessness get a hold of it. Or maybe these people are simply capable of seeing something you can’t due to their experiences in life. Idk, that’s what led me to the edge of selflessness myself, gaining the knowledge of the experience of the hate, evil, and selfishness that still flourishes throughout the world. Once you get a good taste of it for yourself it’s tough to look away from the value and potential of the only cure: love and selflessness.

And don’t forget Hinduism, Stoicism, Jainism, and Taoism; and I’m sure plenty others.

I don’t agree with the woman part. I think that’s just evidence of man’s imperfect hands getting a hold of these influences — of a heaven (an afterlife) and a God of some kind. Like the wildly unnecessary incest in Genesis 19:30 for example, that’s only there because the Hebrews wanted to invent an origin story for their enemies — that they were born from incest.

Moral-anxiety & moral-learning are more of mothering than of male persuits, like hunting/killing.

I disagree considering it would’ve been the males duty and responsibility to keep the family/tribe safe from threats of both humans and predators.

The “grace” that we “fell” from

Are you quoting the story? Because words and concepts like grace, the fall, and even sin aren’t anywhere to found within it.

“Saints” aren’t people that drop everything and rely on the hard work of others to sustain them. I’m sorry to hear you have a bad experience with a handful of people that take pacifism and non-violence and apply this black and white kind of perspective on them. That is, to be a pacifist one must never, under any circumstances, ever use violence. Or to be selfless to its extremes one must forgo all their possessions and expect their contemporaries to pick up after them; to sustain them.

One would only need to explain to these people that in a world where it’s either sink or swim, but we choose to swim together to some degree via things like socialism because we realize swimming individually only leaves us vulnerable and ultimately, swimming together to ease the burden for everyone as a whole is simply more efficient because that way no one drowns or is left behind due to inabilities both physically and mentally that some people are simply born with or inherit from the world’s hands getting a hold of them via trauma brought on from war or even social interactions.

So don’t blame the great principle just because imperfect people ever since don’t fully understand it and become confused by people of the past and present that lead people to think it needs to be either or — violence or non-violence; selflessness to its extremes with zero room for selfishness, and that there’s apparently no in between.

I think I see what you’re saying. Do you have personal experience with this, if you don’t mind me asking?

Counterpoint: How do you help a MISSERABLE self-less martyr? People that keep giving after they have nothing left to give and end-up dragging everyone around them down with their misery and good intentions?

What do you mean here exactly? I’m not following. Do you mind explaining?

When you grind an obvious point into infertile dirt, the obviousness of it does nothing to prevent it becoming such dirt.

I’m sorry, again I’m not sure what you are saying. Do you mind clarifying?

Very insightful. I appreciate your perspective, thanks for sharing. I’ll dive deeper into it sooner than later.