Re: PSA: Reject demoralization! “That which does not kill me, makes me stronger.”
In reply to Lauda
True. Whereas here, the people who are arguing have such fundamental differences in their (mostly unexamined) premises that most of them cannot even understand that they are viewing others’ opinions through the lens of their own subjective mental models of the world.
There is a total difference of worldview between “safety first” people and “life is risk—live and die with courage” people. To see across the impassable chasm between worldviews requires an objectivity that only rare philosophical minds even have the innate ability to acquire through the considerable study which, of course, also requires a will for such an undertaking.
FYI (and I have no idea about the status of theymos’ family, which is none of my business):
If this is what you want to live by, you too should practice what you preach.
Note: It is not an universally applying rule (not to all things[1], but yes to all people). Yes, that is my mistake on matters of humour. That is my mistake, I am working on it? What are you doing? 
[1] Maybe it does, but this is a difficult discussion.
Kitty, you are mistaken about your “mistake”:
There is nothing comparable between your defence of theymos’ right to laugh...
...and others’ demands that everybody should just be huddling down in theirhomes cages wearing sackcloth and ashes right now.
I myself do go a big step further than I have seen you go: I express my unlimited contempt for superannuated children, who are wont to kick and bite when the illusion of their safe nursery-world is invaded by cruel reality. They are spreading panic which is actively harmful to the rest of us.
In reply to TwitchySeal
No, I myself most likely will not be. I am determined to never die in a hospital; and hospitals are anyway short on ventilators for people who actually want them. Consider it self-triage.
You may or may not agree with my priorities as to myself. But it is my personal decision, and one made with a far deeper personal understanding of the issues at hand than that of the usual level of “informed consent”. If I present symptoms of COVID-19, then I will lock myself in alone at home, and stay that way until I am either recovered or dead. I have prepared myself accordingly, just in case. Meanwhile, I don’t dwell on it. I have briefly alluded that someone I care about contracted COVID-19; if I am thinking about COVID-19 in my personal life, I am mostly not thinking of myself!
(She is thus far alive and kicking. It is a private matter that I do not wish further to discuss publicly, other than to express her and my deep gratitude to the few people who sent along their well-wishes, which I duly conveyed.)
I have had past experiences which assure me that my words are not idle big-talk. The Latin quotation from Seneca now writ large in my signature is not idle talk, either. Such philosophizing is useless and worthless, if one is not ready at any moment to put it to practice—as perforce can only happen in times of hardship and tragedy! Anything else is the vapouring of a cheap hypocrite.
Please express to your neighbour my condolences and well-wishes. For any decent person, fear for a loved one is indeed incomparably worse than any fear for oneself.
Nobody can pretend to understand the individual pain that your neighbour now bears for a person who is irreplaceable to her. As a practical matter, the most courageous service that she does for her loved one is to endure this, and keep putting one foot before the other—no matter what.
I once saw up-close the same excruciating process drag on (for over a year, not a few weeks) with a woman whose teenage daughter had advanced-stage cancer. In such scenarios, women usually have greater emotional endurance than men (and that is very old-fashioned wisdom, not modern “feminism”). Your neighbour will need every ounce of that strength—whether to nurture her loved one after the “hooked to a ventilator” part is over, or to assure that the memory of that person is not lost amidst tragedy. She may not be able to rouse that strength for herself—but she must, for her ill family member; and it would be a crime to sap her strength by immersing her in demoralizing “end of the world” mass-panic. —Her, and all the people worldwide who are now likewise situated.
(How does it go nowadays? “Denial, anger, depression, bargaining, acceptance.” I optimize out the first four steps—as is not only realistic but necessary, when the object of these emotions is still alive and will need significant support if he or she remains that way.)
In reply to ibminer
For you, they are of course just "severe individual precautions"... everyone else is apparently just lacking courage and fearful. Not you, though.. Mr. courageous, laughing in the face of death with your "severe individual precautions" -- right back at ya', COWARD!
There do exist options other than “bullheaded foolhardy recklessness”, and “hysterically shrieking demands to lock down the whole world and forbid all laughter”. I am thinking: “Rational individual precautions based on a dispassionate risk-reduction analysis, which have only a small impact on persons close to me, and zero impact on society.” I will take that one.
See also:
Reductio ad absurdum, would you also call it cowardly or hypocritical for a soldier who preaches courage to don a helmet and body armour before walking into a hailstorm of bullets.
(That sentence is concluded with a full stop, because it is not actually a question. And b.b. that it is a reductio ad absurdum: I am explicitly not comparing myself here to soldiers! In this context, I will accord the honour of that comparison to frontline ER doctors and staff who are currently bathing themselves in high viral loads of SARS-CoV-2.)
Your failures of reading comprehension are not my fault. Nor is your incorrect assumption that I care if you read. If you don’t want to read what I write (or are manifestly incapable of understanding it), then that is your loss, not mine.
At this time, I have only one further item to communicate to you: A grievance over a dishonest, factually false, and defamatory (plus peculiarly petty) remark that you made to me a few months ago. With disquiet and indecision, I held my reserve on that out of respect for your considerable work against forum scams; I now see that that is always a mistake, for I need to address it before I plonk you. Other than that, please feel free to place me on your ignore list. I am not writing for you.
More people need to learn and understand more about projecting (intentional or unintentional).
True. Whereas here, the people who are arguing have such fundamental differences in their (mostly unexamined) premises that most of them cannot even understand that they are viewing others’ opinions through the lens of their own subjective mental models of the world.
There is a total difference of worldview between “safety first” people and “life is risk—live and die with courage” people. To see across the impassable chasm between worldviews requires an objectivity that only rare philosophical minds even have the innate ability to acquire through the considerable study which, of course, also requires a will for such an undertaking.
There is absolutely no way to tell the state of the person based off of their reaction. For all they know, the mastermind behind this humorous joke, theymos, had COVID and barely survived it.
FYI (and I have no idea about the status of theymos’ family, which is none of my business):
People are panicking about this to an unbelievable extent. It's a bad disease, to be sure, and some precautions should be taken, but it's not worth putting the entire economy on hold. [...]
(I recently had all of the symptoms of the virus. I wonder if I had it, or if it was just the ordinary flu. It was very unpleasant, though I got over it in a few days.)
(I recently had all of the symptoms of the virus. I wonder if I had it, or if it was just the ordinary flu. It was very unpleasant, though I got over it in a few days.)
Point of the plot: If you do not like it, then ignore it. Do not in any way attack or demoralize those that do.
Interesting comment, considering how many situations you have jumped in on to attack and demoralize based on you not liking something...If this is what you want to live by, you too should practice what you preach.
[1] Maybe it does, but this is a difficult discussion.
Kitty, you are mistaken about your “mistake”:
- I have never seen you try to coerce anybody into enjoying your sense of humour, as if it were “universal”.
- If ibminer, et al. disliked theymos’ sense of humour here, then they were perfectly free to ignore a day-long Internet forum joke without throwing self-righteous, pulpit-pounding public temper tantrums about it.
There is nothing comparable between your defence of theymos’ right to laugh...
Point of the plot: If you do not like it, then ignore it. Do not in any way attack or demoralize those that do.
...and others’ demands that everybody should just be huddling down in their
I myself do go a big step further than I have seen you go: I express my unlimited contempt for superannuated children, who are wont to kick and bite when the illusion of their safe nursery-world is invaded by cruel reality. They are spreading panic which is actively harmful to the rest of us.
I condemn anybody and everybody who PANICS.
Out of respect for those few Americans who are not contemptible domestic animals begging to be wrapped in unlimited chains forever, I will quote a great American—a famous quote, which obviously applies here:
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” — Benjamin Franklin
Out of respect for those few Americans who are not contemptible domestic animals begging to be wrapped in unlimited chains forever, I will quote a great American—a famous quote, which obviously applies here:
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” — Benjamin Franklin
In reply to TwitchySeal
~snip~
If you're gonna go via corona, you'll most likely be heavily sedated hooked up to a machine for days or weeks before it happens. No pain or stress.No, I myself most likely will not be. I am determined to never die in a hospital; and hospitals are anyway short on ventilators for people who actually want them. Consider it self-triage.
You may or may not agree with my priorities as to myself. But it is my personal decision, and one made with a far deeper personal understanding of the issues at hand than that of the usual level of “informed consent”. If I present symptoms of COVID-19, then I will lock myself in alone at home, and stay that way until I am either recovered or dead. I have prepared myself accordingly, just in case. Meanwhile, I don’t dwell on it. I have briefly alluded that someone I care about contracted COVID-19; if I am thinking about COVID-19 in my personal life, I am mostly not thinking of myself!
(She is thus far alive and kicking. It is a private matter that I do not wish further to discuss publicly, other than to express her and my deep gratitude to the few people who sent along their well-wishes, which I duly conveyed.)
I have had past experiences which assure me that my words are not idle big-talk. The Latin quotation from Seneca now writ large in my signature is not idle talk, either. Such philosophizing is useless and worthless, if one is not ready at any moment to put it to practice—as perforce can only happen in times of hardship and tragedy! Anything else is the vapouring of a cheap hypocrite.
But imagine having the person you're closest to put on a ventilator and quarantined. Almost no updates. You can't see them. Could you still function while waiting for the phone to ring?
One of my neighbors is going through that right now while self quarantined by herself. Sometimes demoralization just can't be rejected - at least temporarily.
One of my neighbors is going through that right now while self quarantined by herself. Sometimes demoralization just can't be rejected - at least temporarily.
Please express to your neighbour my condolences and well-wishes. For any decent person, fear for a loved one is indeed incomparably worse than any fear for oneself.
Nobody can pretend to understand the individual pain that your neighbour now bears for a person who is irreplaceable to her. As a practical matter, the most courageous service that she does for her loved one is to endure this, and keep putting one foot before the other—no matter what.
I once saw up-close the same excruciating process drag on (for over a year, not a few weeks) with a woman whose teenage daughter had advanced-stage cancer. In such scenarios, women usually have greater emotional endurance than men (and that is very old-fashioned wisdom, not modern “feminism”). Your neighbour will need every ounce of that strength—whether to nurture her loved one after the “hooked to a ventilator” part is over, or to assure that the memory of that person is not lost amidst tragedy. She may not be able to rouse that strength for herself—but she must, for her ill family member; and it would be a crime to sap her strength by immersing her in demoralizing “end of the world” mass-panic. —Her, and all the people worldwide who are now likewise situated.
(How does it go nowadays? “Denial, anger, depression, bargaining, acceptance.” I optimize out the first four steps—as is not only realistic but necessary, when the object of these emotions is still alive and will need significant support if he or she remains that way.)
In reply to ibminer
I am determined that if, despite my severe individual precautions, I myself were to contract COVID-19
For you, they are of course just "severe individual precautions"... everyone else is apparently just lacking courage and fearful. Not you, though.. Mr. courageous, laughing in the face of death with your "severe individual precautions" -- right back at ya', COWARD! There do exist options other than “bullheaded foolhardy recklessness”, and “hysterically shrieking demands to lock down the whole world and forbid all laughter”. I am thinking: “Rational individual precautions based on a dispassionate risk-reduction analysis, which have only a small impact on persons close to me, and zero impact on society.” I will take that one.
See also:
In my own life, to protect myself, I am making some severe trade-offs. But I am doing that consciously, coldly, without fear; and there are individuals whom I care about sufficiently that for my part, I would risk COVID-19 to spend some time with them if I could. There are also faraway individuals whose actual illness with COVID-19 I would personally attend if I could, even if they were to cough all over me—even though that would be almost tantamount to a suicide mission for me. Each trade-off must be weighed differently—consciously, coldly, without fear...
Reductio ad absurdum, would you also call it cowardly or hypocritical for a soldier who preaches courage to don a helmet and body armour before walking into a hailstorm of bullets.
(That sentence is concluded with a full stop, because it is not actually a question. And b.b. that it is a reductio ad absurdum: I am explicitly not comparing myself here to soldiers! In this context, I will accord the honour of that comparison to frontline ER doctors and staff who are currently bathing themselves in high viral loads of SARS-CoV-2.)
<snip>
You constantly talk yourself in circles, which is why I don't read 90% of what you post anymore.
Your failures of reading comprehension are not my fault. Nor is your incorrect assumption that I care if you read. If you don’t want to read what I write (or are manifestly incapable of understanding it), then that is your loss, not mine.
At this time, I have only one further item to communicate to you: A grievance over a dishonest, factually false, and defamatory (plus peculiarly petty) remark that you made to me a few months ago. With disquiet and indecision, I held my reserve on that out of respect for your considerable work against forum scams; I now see that that is always a mistake, for I need to address it before I plonk you. Other than that, please feel free to place me on your ignore list. I am not writing for you.
Information wants to be valued—and I do not mean that in the monetary sense. Intelligence is priceless.
If you are not reading it, then it is not for you.