That's a poor analogy. It's obvious when people are wearing makeup or wearing clothes that enhance their appearances. Property rights might be one reason to object to plagiarism—there are others. Pretending to be something you are not is one. — Janus

Poppycock, the only objection to plagiarizing that I remember is the posts objecting to someone trying to make us think s/he knows more than s/he does know.

That is a good observation. In some forums, the guys can talk terribly to each other, and when I objected, I was informed that the guys were friends and no harm was done. What you said is true, but there is a social cost to those negative names. However, humor is a funny thing. It can make something bad good. Maybe working on our sense of humor is the best way to deal with human problems.

Last Tuesday, my Scrabble group checked the official Scrabble position on using the word "slut" and to my delight, it is no longer accepted. However, Scrabble groups can agree to use offensive words if everyone agrees to do so. The group I play with agrees, if the word is going to get a high score, we can use it. However, at a Scrabble tournament, I don't think the words would be accepted.

The quality of our relationship is very important to our decisions. I would not use racially offensive or gender offensive words if there were someone in the room who could be offended.

Your post touched on so many important things. Your perspective on social change is insightful, and this might blend into philosophy. I am thinking of Socrates and his students, Plato and Aristotle, because they experienced wars, and PTSD goes with war.

I think they all believed it was essential to please the gods, and that drove Socrates to question what Athens did wrong, to caused them to lose the war with Sparta. He was a courageous and successful warrior, very much moved by a sense of duty and patriotism, but he was opposed to wars that could be avoided. I don't know if I can do this as well as you did, but we both turned to philosophy, and we both notice the change in Western society, and to some degree, Western civilization comes out of war.

You mentioned the stumbling blocks of our notion of what is manly. As a woman, I see the notion of the qualities of women as possible stumbling blocks. In a way, Spartan females had much more freedom than Athenian women, and this has a lot to do with feelings of independent strength or feelings of helplessness. I was so glad when we expanded the social expectations of females and got away from the Virgin Mary role model! Imagine being raised to please others and having PTSD with no one to rely on. Then add to that a belief in Satan and demons possessing people. Excuse me, can I leave now? This is a picture of a horror house with no exit.

:grin: Once again, I am experiencing wonderful feelings as this discussion is bringing up better reasoning and freedom from my trip through Hades that lasted a few years. How do we feel at ease with who we are, when our understanding of reality is all messed up? Our culture has been problematic for many of us. The Christians who are swooning over how much God loves us irritate me because this evangelical faith in a loving God is not what Western culture experienced for almost 2000 years. Not that long ago, God was jealous, revengeful, and fearsome, and people lived with fear of Satan and demons, too.

:flower: It is not easy being human, and I am so thankful for the better information we have today. I think our civilization needs to evolve, and that philosophy can do a better job of encouraging our evolution than religions based on pagan beliefs, not knowledge of reality.

One more thought. As we can lack information about how we come to have PTSD, so can we lack the memories that can help us. While replying to you, an important memory that has improved my life for the last 20 years came to my awareness. Maybe we all focus too much on the negative. Does counseling ever encourage good memories? Most of my I have felt love and I think the source of that was my father carrying me through the forest as he worked to shift from his WWII PTSD to home and family.

I'd love to hear your idea of conscience. — Copernicus

Well, do you know Jimmy Cricket?

Pinocchio was talked into going to a fun park instead of school, but the fun park turned into a place where children were turned into donkeys, and Pinocchio almost didn't escape.

Pinocchio was a wooden puppet, and a Blue Fairy turned him into a real boy and appointed Jimmy Cricket to help him make good decisions. A problem we have is not always knowing right from wrong. If we are lucky, we will have an uncomfortable feeling if we are considering doing something wrong, but often things are moving too fast, or we honestly believe we are doing the right thing, or we rationalize it isn't that bad, and we find out too late that it was the wrong and the consequences were that bad or worse, and then we get the uncomfortable feeling, and feelings of regret may follow. That uncomfortable feeling is like Jimmy Cricket trying to keep Pinocchio out of trouble.

Humans are pretty well programmed to be cooperative and moral, just as all social animals are programmed with social rules. But of course, things can go wrong, mostly because we don't know enough to know the right thing to do. Cicero said, “God's law is 'right reason.' When perfectly understood, it is called 'wisdom.' When applied by government in regulating human relations it is called 'justice.” Cicero

Today, we are very concerned about being smart, but unfortunately, we have neglected the need to develop wisdom. I think this cultural change leads to some serious problems, but at the same time, we have learned so many important things, and I hope this all balances out to a better future.

That can be answered with yes or no, depending on how you look at it.

What's your answer? — frank

I answered yes, but that is conditional on having better information. Your question is tied to notions of good and evil and the tendency to judge people as good or evil. I do not believe we are good or evil, but we do the best we can with what we know, and our conscience and feelings of regret need good information so we can avoid those regrets.

Notice the word "conscience" meanings coming out of knowledge.

Oh shit, I just used Google to remember Garry Kasparov's name, and it corrected me because I remembered Deep Blue as 'Big Blue'. What would the failing memory do without such aids? — Metaphysician Undercover

God bless you! That was the first argument I made. I don't care about impressing others as much as I care about my own mind and what I can do with it, and how much better I can do the thinking with the help of AI. I am enjoying myself, and taking AI away from me would be like taking crutches away from a person who needs them. That would be a shame because I believe the elderly have great value because they can pull from so many experiences and so many memories, and this becomes the bigger picture that the young do not see. But we are no longer absorbing information as we did when we were younger. We may forget the exact fact we wish we could remember, but when we find the information, we have a better understanding of its meaning.

The world has a better chance if the elderly participate in the discussions with the young, and both can do better with AI, Please, folks, consider the value of this.

I think, given the dangers of AI, and the ways in which prominent members of this site have used it to make themselves look smarter than they really are, that its use should be banned altogether on this site. — Janus

So what? People also use makeup to look better. Who is being hurt?

The reason for objecting to plagiarism is a matter of property rights. If we quote from a book, there are property concerns, and a person can end up in big trouble for misusing someone else's words. I don't think AI is claiming property rights.

Another way to look at this is, when I was a child, I gave a writer an idea for a book, and after she wrote the book, my mother drew the pictures. Who gets to claim ownership of the book?

The original Bible stories were pagan stories written long before the Hebrews existed. Back in the day, there was no concern about plagiarism. If someone could improve on the thought, that was a good thing. The problem here is the false belief that God wrote the Bible, and this God did things involving humans. We would have a different reality if all those stories were credited to the people who originated them.

What is best for acquiring and spreading good information?

A LOT of people have similar reactions, regardless of the diagnosis. It's powerful to have a name, a body or research to pursue, established approaches for dealing with the condition, etc. I felt 'the chaos in my mind' was alleviated by reading "The Myth of Normal", "It's Okay that You are not Okay" (on bereavement) and "When Madness Comes Home" (on the caregiver burden facing families of those with psychosis). — Jeremy Murray

I decided to delete my reply and try again. I think I should check out "When Madness Comes Home" because of the problems my family is dealing with. I do not remember the title of the book about traumatized children that I read about the same time I discovered a V.A. explanation of PTSD. I Googled for books on the subject, and today there are many books about traumatized children. I think these books are so important. Especially when we are struggling to keep our sanity and don't know why, or we may have a child who is struggling to cope with something that should not have happened.

The world has changed so much in the last 60 years. I was horrified by the belief that parents could divorce or families could move, and the children would adjust. Completely ignorant of the harm done to children when a child's life is disrupted and the child has no power over that, and not even caring people who understand we should not be so careless with children. In my day, it was wrong to cry or to be unhappy. This wasn't just so for me, but my friends also experienced this. I think the Great Depression and war contributed to the demands that our children be as brave soldiers. Today, there are books and counseling, and a change in how we raise children. I am hoping this awareness and change continue.

Before I was regressed, I read a book about how we talk to ourselves and how our memories can be wrong or just hard to live with. I think it was titled "Linguistics". And as I explained I had figured out what caused my PTSD when I was, age one and could not have had a reasonable understanding of what was done to me. I was in a body cast for a year, at an age when children develop a sense of autonomy. Not something I do while stuck in cement. I am sure I separated from my body and lived in a separate mental reality.

The point I want to make is that I had done my homework. I had been with the counselor who could do what I call brain magic. That is, change how I talked to myself or the story I was telling myself. It was helpful because I was also going through a bad marriage, which set off my PTSD. But is wasn't the cause of it. I needed them to figure out the cause was that moment my mother discovered something was wrong with my legs, and then waking as a one-year-old child to find my body trapped in cement. When the counselor regressed me I became aware of my mother's fear in those two moments and the intense chaotic horror of being put in a cast. Most important was how my mother felt! If she was scared, things were very bad.

Okay, back up to linguistics and brain magic. As the baby I told him about my mother's fear, and he "corrected" that story. He assured the baby my mother was okay and capable of taking good care of me. My internal baby wanted that reassurance and gladly accepted it. Within days, I realized I was back to being one person, instead of a few different personalities. It might not work so well for everyone. I think knowing the exact experience is important, and all the work I had done up to that point improved my chances. Also, I am very open to suggestions, so the mind magic works well for me.

Before I discovered the correct event, my counselor thought it was something that happened when I was much older. A female counselor was much more helpful than the male counselors regarding that issue. I am quite sure I am aware of why there might be reason to be concerned, because false memories can be created or at least an unfortunate ingredient that prevents the right explanation, and that makes matters worse. Before I came to the right event, the counseling experience was a problem. It is kind of like having a gall bladder removed when that is not the problem.

Sorry, I was in an emotional frenzy. — praxis

:lol: I can relate to that.

What effects from the pandemic might we anticipate from a generation that shared this trauma? Are certain epochal traumatic events more or less impactful? Why? — Jeremy Murray

I strongly hope that we shift our attention to the children who will never go to college and consider how we can integrate them into industrial jobs that do not require education. If we do not, I fear the future will have to deal with even homelessness and welfare cases as a result of a flood of poorly prepared young people lacking not only education skills but also social skills and an understanding of how people survive in an industrial economy. We have to make the effort to keep them included in society, as years ago we made an effort to keep seniors involved with the greater society.

The more I think on this, the more urgent the need to take action, seems to me.

On the one hand damaged parents are more likely to damage their children all unwilling, and on the other, epigenetics have been shown to be affected by trauma and passed down at least one generation. — unenlightened

If I had known what I know today, I would have stayed single and avoided being a mother until I was confident that problems were resolved. But that is so unrealistic. Number one I had no idea I had PTSD. Number 2, society, and my father, demanded I get married, have children, and stay home to care for the family. I was doing the best I could to be the ideal woman of my day.

I like the question about our freedom of will. It is our nature to react to life as it unfolds. Philosophically, what is our part in life? Can this be considered having free will, or is it more like being on a train, not separate from the flow of history?

What excites me most about your post is the possibility of dropping our religious notions and working with a more scientific understanding of our creation and existence. I think the proof of evolution is solid, with no doubt that we are evolved animals.

As I read your post, I thought of people with addiction problems who speak about needing to avoid things that "trigger" the desire to use. Then my mind goes on to recall the book "Emotional Intelligence" and on to Kahneman's book "Thinking Fast and Slow" and the following books that put a stronger emphasis on emotions. We don't all read the books, but we can understand triggers that compel us to do things, like a picture of something good to eat makes me hungry.

We might at least be more compassionate with people having a hard time. Hum,:chin: I love thinking, and now I am thinking about the argument about our free will. I thank my stars that I was given a sense of strength, which makes it possible for me to resist temptation and urges. PTSD can lead to what we might call acts of evil. It is easy to understand how people could have believed in being possessed by Satan or demons when they had only the religious stories to explain reality and not science. Punishing people who have mental defects that lead to bad decisions is no better than killing people suspected of being witches. If someone does wrong, there has to be a reason for that, and perhaps that is what we should address. Don't stop at judging a person who made a bad decision.

When I learned of PTSD, it was one of the best days in my life because the chaos in my mind was changed. The stress factors in my life had led me to experiencing myself as several different personalities, and one of them was out to kill me. This was different from being one person having different experiences. By this time, I had learned about PTSD while I was cleaning a VA office, where there were flyers explaining the problem. I also read a book about traumatized children, and at an Est function, I regressed to my experience of being put in a body cast. I gave all this information to my counselor, and he regressed me to the moment of crisis, and helped me rewrite the story that was in my head. I returned to being one person with different experiences, and that was the end of my struggle for my sanity.

I want to stress the importance of determining that Satan is not real and that Christian mythology is problematic, because how we understand reality and the reasoning and beliefs we use, makes a huge difference in all judgments. I am very glad we are no longer burning witches or fearing being possessed by Satan. But what if we had not evolved, but were still apes without language and stories to live by?

Sorry, but I have to use AI because this is too serious to ignore....

Traumatized apes, particularly chimpanzees, can exhibit symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and depression, often resulting from experiences like social deprivation, stressful events, captivity, invasive lab experiments, and the loss of their mothers. Common symptoms include self-mutilation, hypervigilance, dissociative behaviors, angry outbursts, and social withdrawal. Rehabilitation efforts for traumatized apes focus on providing social connections, environmental enrichment, freedom of movement, and therapy to help them cope with their ongoing psychological distress.

.

Don't be a whinny bitch. You're welcome. :lol: — praxis

That is pretty sexist comment. :gasp: And it has no intellectual appeal.

There is no “nationalism” essential to Christianity, Hitler’s Germany is the antithesis of Christianity.

But again, I get it. You don’t seem to like religion and you think it infects our politics too much.

See, I can agree with you that religion should be kept out of government policy. So we could agree on many things you might want to make policy (like maybe no teaching Bible in public school without teaching about all world religions, and no teaching Intelligent Design in science class - maybe in a philosophy class discussion about Aristotle…)

And I agree history is crap these days (but I blame wokeness for that). And I agree the education system is full of issues to work out. It would take a long history and discussion to address all you’ve raised.

But a discussion like that, with a motif and theme of all the ways Christians qua Christians have hurt the world with someone who doesn’t seem to see the vastly greater goods many people have done, in their attempts to be more like Christ - seems unproductive to do like this, or on this thread. — Fire Ologist

I am glad you could do such a fine job of raising awareness of the good things Christians have done. However, I have heard Catholics are not Christians. For me, that judgment is one of the biggest problems with the whole Christian mess. Christians seem to disagree with each other even more than they disagree with Jews and Muslims about who knows God's truth and who does not. These three religions have the same fundamental stories. Those are pagan stories and beliefs adjusted to different cultures. I do not understand how people can continue to live in those ancient stories when it is so obvious a God did not make us of mud and then leave us in a Garden of Eden with magical trees. It is also a fact that both the Garden of Eden and the Flood stories were Sumerian stories of creation and the flood. These beliefs are not supported by logic when people are working with a scientific explanation of life. How can we have good judgment when we are living with a false understanding of how we came to be?

However, I very much like the Catholic men who were the presidents of the U S or tried to be. I would love to take us all back in history to when Kucinich ran against Bush, and then take us down the path Kucinich, a Catholic, would have followed. He was strongly opposed to the Neocons' efforts to take military control of the Middle East, the Bush and Cheney "New Century American Project" that was a disaster, with Christians cheering for our war against "evil" and being thrilled by the US Shock and Awe attack on Iraq. As though this war game were equal to a football game.

You really do not know enough about what I think to judge if I am speaking about religion or politics. I see the good Christians as ignorant of their enemies, and that they are a threat to the world because their beliefs are not separate from their political judgment. THEY GO TO WAR COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY IGNORANT OF THEIR "ENEMY" AND DO SO IN THE NAME OF GOD AND BELIEF ABOUT EVIL. I hate the reality Bush and Cheney gave us; instead of a world of peace, Kucinich would have given us. Today, it is almost impossible to find any mention of Kucinich. It is as though those in control of what is on the internet have an agenda to disappear this man.

If you agree that religion should be kept out of political matters, and what nations we attempt to control with military force, why don't you see the Christian Nationalism? The evangelicals and men like Billy Graham have played a strong role in creating our story of who is the "evil" and our enemy, and who we must defend or ignore. I can not use AI to raise awareness of "proof of Christian Nationalism", but people can Google for the explanation of why it threatens our democracy and the world. Since the beginning of the US, the citizens have believed it is God's will that they control the political decisions, including wars. The Civil War was really nasty, as both sides believed God was on their side and they were doing the will of God to kill those "evil people" who opposed God's will. I want you to think about this- how do humans know God's will?

Yeah, Lincoln had "In God we trust" inscribed on pennies, taking advantage of religion to win the war against the South. Much later, Billy Graham advanced the power of Evangelicals by once again equating our government and Christianity as the same thing- a war against evil, uniting the US against those godless communists. Creating those godless Russians as the "evil" our God fearing country must oppose.

If the Bible were not Hebrew propaganda, and later Christian propaganda, and then the bases for Muslim propaganda, and the citizens of the US were not such stooges, we might have a better world and not the racist struggle we still have, with these "dark skinned people cursed by God", and not be all tied up with Woke following a long history of persecuting homosexual people.

How can God forgive people who believe they are God's favored people, and who take no responsibility for the wrongs done to "those people"? Christians are not the only human beings with viable spiritual and moral systems. And the democracy of the US is not based on the Bible, a book about kings and slaves, and God's promise to give people the hierarchy of rulers that humans require because they are born in sin. You know that evil spiritual ether in the air that somehow ties us to Satan and demons. Thank goodness we are not superstitions, right? But we have to do something about "those evil people".

When bad things happen, is it God punishing us, or Satan, or is it our own evilness that causes this wrong?

The democrat candidate for governor in Virginia tells everyone to “let your rage fuel you”. — praxis

Looks like a good statement for those willing to defend the will of God. Hitler and Trump built their campaigns on people's fears and anger. It is psychological warfare before action is taken.

Ok, so that sounds like woke propaganda.

Since when did Americans think the US government should control the content of the education of our children? That’s not smart. Government can be assholes, so why would we give them the power to select the curriculum for our children? Liberals want a strong Dept of Education. Repubs don’t. That way control over textbooks gets closer into the hands of the parents. — Fire Ologist

I am glad you are interested in the subject. I have a bookcase filled with books about education. To narrow what I know to your question, I ask you to consider Eisenhower's warning about the Military Industrial Complex and the 1958 National Defense Education Act, and what federal dollars have to do with education.

So it is not republicans who would ever say that the “US stopped educating for good moral judgment.” Republicans say that parents got lazy and trusted the government’s public schools to educate their kids and the public schools, infected by wokeness, have lost all moral authority.

Those Republicans are not well-informed. You might want to check with Christians about public schools teaching children morals. Christians operate out of a belief system, not gather facts. They hated John Dewey and hate the National Education Association, and in Texas, the Republicans did all they could to prevent their schools from teaching the Higher Order Thinking Skills that are vital to making moral decisions. This struggle for children's minds and the democracy founded on the Enlightenment, has gone on long before Woke.

No one is advocating “moral training be left up to the Church.” The Church is how parents train their own kids. But it is up to the parents.

Please try to convince me of that. I want to know what you base your belief on.

But we see how parents do in school board meetings when they just want their kids to be left out of the delusional world of woke ideology.

This battle has gone on since the early 20th century. Led by John Dewey, Noam Chomsky, and others. It is basically a battle between Christians and those who favor the thinking of the Enlightenment.

I agree Church must keep its distance from the state, and the state must remain agnostic to any religion. So do most conservatives. But being a loud and proud Christian who loves his country… why not? whoop-de-do for you. I don’t see anything solid behind Christian Nationalism. Loving God and country is one thing (a good thing); but somehow incorporating Christianity into government, that’s a caliphate. That’s not republican.

And where did you get your information about Christian Nationalism? It surely was not one of several books and the Christian Nationalism. Again, I will mention this battle between Christians and those who favor the thinking of the Enlightenment has gone on for a century, and did not begin with Woke.

Do you realize most states dropped teaching civics, along with art and music that both greatly benefit the study of science? And when it comes to US history, here is an AI fact.

Student performance in U.S. History is typically assessed by national exams like the AP U.S. History and the NAEP. In the 2022 NAEP assessment, the average score for eighth graders was lower than in 2018 and 2014, with only 13% of students reaching the "Proficient" level and 40% performing "Below Basic".

Only when our democracy is defended in the classroom is it defended, and it has not been defended in most states that cater to getting federal dollars since the 1958 National Defense Education Act. We taught history to transmit our culture, and it was our culture that made our liberty possible. That education was ended, and we are in a hell of a situation.

We stopped preparing the young for moral thinking, and Texas Republicans made that the priority in 2012. Those good Christian folks argued that education for thinking skills led children to go against their parents. Education for technology is not education for science. Texas teachers took Texas to the Supreme Court so they would not be forced to teach that creationism is equal to science. Christians are defending Christianity, not our democracy.

Christian’s fight against evil is also called, having a heated argument. Fascism and Christ are incompatible. Just worry about regular fascism. The notion of Christian Nationalism is more woke propaganda.

Nationalism that becomes fascism is Christian. Germany was a Christian Republic and our world war enemy. That authoritarian nationalism is built on Christian mythology, not Enlightenment thinking.

It amazes me how ill people think of Christians, even though it’s always been that way since Christ was hung on a cross. America was partially formed to escape persecution for saying “Christ”. Christians have always been at the helm of the country. I don’t think Christian Nationalism is anything more than patriots who happen to be Christian.

No one killed more Christians, than Christians. That victim story is for the Jews. :vomit: Please, this psychological BS is repulsive. It is bull shit that anyone was killed because of their relationship with a God. It is also BS to call a nation evil and invade it for imperialistic reasons. Christians are so taken advantage of by oil industry and the Military Industrial Complex, sending their sons and daughters to die in immoral wars, with men like Billy Graham convincing parents that God wants them to send their young into a war.

Maybe we can chill out people. Christians aren’t a real enemy. Nor are they fascists. Any fascist is too concerned about earthly power to have any real understanding of Christian “mythology,” as you put it.

Christians may not be the enemy, but their mythology must be destroyed for the good of the earth. Oh yes, they are fascist. They believe God chooses their ruler and God is in control, God wants them to enter wars, because people are evil by nature and must have authority over them, and they must follow their leader into war. Bush made a huge mistake when he used Christianity for the New Century American Project, tying Christianity to war, just as the civil war and world wars and slutter of native Americans were all tied to Christianity and God's will.

Their stories of Adam and Eve and the Flood come from Sumerian mythology. What they believe is true is a combination of pagan mythologies, and people who disagreed were wiped off the earth.

Oh yeah, we are very aware that COVID strongly impacted children, and many have fallen so out of society, they may never become a part of mainstream society. I do not think the problem is COVID alone. Many of these children also experience bad parenting. Their parents can not teach them good coping skills because they don't have good coping skills themselves, and many of the parents may also be dealing with PTSD. All of this is going on in my family, and I do not feel good about the future of almost all of my family members.

Back in the day of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, you know, they had to be dealing with PTSD. Socrates was totally hung up on the war with Sparta. He could not accept Athens' defeat, and with his belief system, that defeat was caused by the gods because somehow Athens must have displeased them. The rest of his life was a struggle to understand what Athens did wrong, to lead to the gods punishing them.

We can not separate people's belief systems from all the rest, the PDST, and the parenting, and the history in the moment, and the stress factors in the moment, and the resources of lack of resources. Their belief tells them why things are as they are, and for me, not knowing anything about PTSD, I went through a short period of thinking I was possibly possessed by Satan. In my world at that time, that was a real and serious concern.

I had to make a decision: either the Christian mythology was true and I was possessed by Satan, or it was all a false belief. Every day, I am extremely grateful that I decided Christian mythology is a false belief. And I determined to get on with my life, get counseling, return to college, and thank goodness LEARN MORE ABOUT THE GODS AND PHILOSOPHY.

And sorry, guys, but male counselors can be part of the problem. :rofl: What we are talking about here is more complex than many would realize. No, the ancient philosophers didn't create the subject of psychology, but they understood the archetypes, which is a different subject. They did hold a notion of us becoming our own heroes. Stand up straight, determine what is the right thing to do, and move forward. Keep focused on what is right and good. In a Patriarchy, this is different for men and women. I resent what the Patriarchy did to men and women. And that is another subject tied to the complex subject of our sanity and ability to care for ourselves.

Slowly, the Athenians pulled away from superstition until they thought a new religion was God's truth. Oh my, there is too much to talk about. The Heaven and Hell of the new religion came from Persia. Alexander opened the world to a new, contagious false belief system. :lol: We amuse our beliefs are correct, but when Satan appears to be consuming your life, you might want to question that belief system, and the reality of Satan possessing people, and the whole social order, and the role men and women play in it.

Bottom line- with no idea of what PTSD is, our beliefs and expectations can be very problematic.

I don’t see how the word “woke” would function as a “scare word” — Fire Ologist

You don't think well-meaning Christians are alarmed by the evil spreading across the country? You don't have a problem with the government having more power to control the decisions regarding your children than the people living in your school district? I think for many people, Woke is equated with evil, and when this evil becomes part of our education system, "woke" raises serious fears.

But you don’t seem to see any fascism coming from left/progressive/woke - you seem to be more interested in showing how “woke” is a strawman (which undercuts the entire OP) and more interested in showing how the right spreads fascism. — Fire Ologist

If we want to stop the spread of fascism, we have to begin with education and the manufacturers of textbooks. There are two ways of having social order: culture or authority over the people. Education for technology ended using our schools to defend our liberty, by transmitting a culture and organic democracy.

The US stopped educating for good moral judgment and left moral training to the Church. Christian Nationalism is the result. Christian Nationalism and its fight against evil favors fascism. That authority over the people that is made necessary by the people's evilness, according to Christian mythology. This is not a democracy based on classical philosophy and the Enlightenment, or an understanding of evolution. The US is not the democracy it defended in the two World Wars.

Look, I obviously tend to be more harsh on the left than the right, because I’m conservative. (And have been brow beaten all my adult life.) But I think the conservative counter-argument to the wrongs the left have been perpetrating in the name of political correctness/wokism are much more relevant today than the more shallow fears and purported injustices the left wants to focus on. Many might not want to admit it, but the US, and really the world, is in a better place today since Trump took office. The biggest threat to the US today is the same as it has been for 20 years - Democrat policies. Conservative racism and fascism is simply put, bullshit. The left is full of too much obvious bullshit, and too many people already see it, too many have seen enough of it, and too many people are leaving the Democrat Party everyday the left does and says another stupid thing. — Fire Ologist

I so wish people would drop the labels and name the subject of discussion. You all seem to be holding bags full of evils, but do not speak of the evil, other than to call it bullshit. Everyone is doing this, and I am left out of the discussion because I have no idea what bullshit everyone is talking about.

What are Democratic policies? Does every Democrat agree with all Democratic policies? Are all Republics fascist pigs? What are the forces under discussion?

I fault neoliberalism - but more plainly, the fear of lawsuits seems the driving force of 'determining authority'. Teachers here only have the authority they are able to create for themselves - it is impossible in Ontario to count on admin to support them, in all but the most extreme cases.

Wouldn't it make sense to build schools around the best teachers - like your grandmother and my mom?

I used to be diametrically opposed to charter schools, private schools, etc. Given I fear that public education in Canada has been ideologically captured, I now wish we had more choice for students and
teachers both. — Jeremy Murray

I think the subject of lawsuits deserves its own thread. Lawsuits undoubtedly play a significant role in our lives, and I believe our legal system has lost its balance and become part of the problem.

A teacher at the 1917 National Education Association meeting in Portland, Oregon, quoted a seer. Tagore of India to make a point.

"Whatever their efficiency, such great organizations are so impersonal that they bear down on the individual lives of the people like a hydraulic press whose action is completely effective in crushing out individual liberty and power. " Tagore

I noticed elsewhere in this thread the use of the word "fascism". Germany was known as a mechanical society. The US adopted Germany's models of bureaucracy and education. This shifts power and authority from the individual to the government. I have a 1960 book for teachers, explaining the importance of being impersonal. If we are personal or not, is a matter of culture. Huxley and Orwell based their novels on what they saw happening, with concern that these forces would be overriding.

My grandmother's generation of teachers thought it was their duty to help every child discover his/her, talents and interests. Education was for everyone, and we were opposed to schools pathing children as we have done ever since the 1958 National Defense Education Act and IQ testing.

I don't know if anyone can see what this has to do with WOKE, but hopefully everyone will realize what being impersonal has to do with it. Private decisions have been taken over by the government's "rule by law". How can we not see that the excesses of our rule by law are destroying our liberty? That all children must be taught to accept sexual variations is a horror when compared to the culturally supported notion that sex is a private matter and not something we make public.

I hear ya. I became the moderator of the politics forum at a site I hang out at, because the people were being horrible. If it was not a site I loved, I would have just left. My concern was visitors seeing that crap, and thinking that's what the site was, or at least that the site allowed that. you wouldn't think I would have to make rules that you can't call each other worthless, pedophiles, and whatever else they could think of. — Patterner

Sounds like the site where I visit to PM with someone, but rarely read any posts or make one. To me it is like getting into a mud-slinging contest. It has nothing to do with learning and thinking, and I think the people I want to share thoughts with would also stay out of the forum. Staying with the hope of making a difference is very idealistic.

Historically, there are plenty of schools whose goals were more social control than human empowerment, but I still value the project. I fear education has becoming overwhelmingly woke, which to me is divisive, a state I find most problematic given that these are children, who are required by law to subject themselves to what, at times, is nothing more than indoctrination. — Jeremy Murray

My grandmother began as a public school teacher and was forced to retire when was 65. Then she turned to private schools. One small private school interfered with her classroom discipline, and she quit. She demanded authority in her classroom, and there were enough small private schools for her to find a school that respected her as a teacher. Since her time, I have seen doctors and dentists belittled for spending too much time with patients. These educated and professional people were treated as assembly line workers.

What I am speaking of here is a matter of authority. Who has the authority to dictate what happens in the workspace of educated professionals or business owners?

Yes, we have social injustices, but is distroy individual liberty and power the best way to handle this fact of life?

Here is a reading of a book that explains the evil consuming us now. Brave New World.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0FDwfNE6YE

So yes, we need moderators. I don't go into most forums here at TPF, so I don't know how bad it can get. What I see isn't too bad. I know which people are going to belittle, and call others names, and I stop reading their posts as soon as they start heating up. Even when I'm not part of the conversation. Why bother? — Patterner

This forum is the best-mannered forum I have experienced in many years of participating in forums. People here are more apt to give thoughtful replies that are stimulating and improve the discussion.

In the beginning, before moderators, the internet was terrible. Only angry and aggressive people could enjoy what was happening. I had a forum at the time and could close out those who refused to be polite. I hated to do that, but when everyone else was upset, and many warnings were ignored, I had to cut out the trouble makers. Today, I am even more concerned about our social agreements and setting a standard. I see the bigger picture, and it is not just about me. It is a social concern.

Surely an idea has a minimum of two natures. That which the creator or purveyor of said idea intended, and that which the observer or analyst interprets. — Outlander

That is an excellent point.

More generally, one must first define "an idea", to get a more direct answer. We often go by consensus, hence the value of a dictionary and why such books remain prevalent. Obviously, by that case, it depends on the idea. :smile:

Just last night, I watched a program that discussed the significant impact writing had on our human experience and ability to manage a civilization. I don't think pondering this is a waste of time. You said the following about wondering what others thought back then....

I couldn't answer that. No man could, according to the relevant doctrine of belief. That would be like saying what was your favorite color before you were born? How silly a thing to ponder.

Einstein said imagination is very important to our ability to think. We are doing an excellent job of resurrecting the past. From marks on wood to the stories of archaeology and geology, we can learn a lot about our past. I think this is our present purpose in life, the Resurrection is the work of archaeologists, geologists, and related sciences. It is our job to learn all we can, and to wonder, and use our imaginations as we rewrite the earth and human story.

It would be silly to ponder an embryo's favorite colour, but it would be wise to consider how the embryo is affected by what it hears.

How did what come to be?

To answer that question, you must be willing to wonder about past consciousness and the ways it would be the same or different from our present consciousness. We can see that Zeus's fear that with fire we would learn all other technologies and rival the gods was justified. From archaeology, we can see human progress that was built on the technology of controlling fire, and in so doing, learning about the quality of rocks and eventually learning how to mix tin and copper and make excellent tools and weapons. And how this technology of metals shaped where people lived and traded. To me, this is very exciting information that makes me feel connected with humanity from the day we first walked out of Africa.

You answered my question about why it took so long to invent computers, thus...

Beats me. Maybe in 1,000 years your grand-kid will be asking people why did it take so long to have personal jetpacks. That's my point. We become unappreciative for things those before us would have given life and limb for. Can't you see that?

You and others may be unappreciative of our progress, but sincerely, I think that is because these careless people do not know about our history and sadly do not care to know. I am sorry for them. I am so fortunate to hunger for knowledge and get very excited about learning. My life is very good because I have security, the internet, and a love of learning. As the internet improves and science increases our knowledge, my life keeps getting better. I wish this were true for everyone. And I think our pioneer women would have been so much happier and powerful if they had the internet. Technology liberated women. Our consciousness today is very different from what it was before the women's lib movement, and we started using the word "she" in our communications, when we had only used the word "he".

Talk about the power of a word! Using the word "she" where we had also used the word "he" radically changed our lives.

One thing that might help take your ego out of the pictures is to pay attention to how someone who treats you badly treats everyone else. They treat everyone badly. It's who they are. It's not Abbott you. You just happen to be the person standing in front of them at the moment. They don't know you or care to. That being the case, why would you devote your time and thoughts to them? When you do that, they win. They successfully manipulated a random stranger into feeling negative things. Possibly ruining your day. And they did it with your full cooperation. — Patterner

:worry: Its not all about me? :gasp: :lol: Seriously, I like what you are saying but can we kick this up to the social level? No one should be treated badly because we are on this ship together, and we don't want people making trouble. To avoid trouble, we need some social agreements, because it is not all about me. Chances are good that if someone is offending me, that person is offending others, and if we agree that is not okay, perhaps people will stop opening their doors with a gun in their hand and shooting children running away. Or people going to a school and killing as many young children as they can. Even though it is not all about me, I think we need social agreements that make life more pleasant for everyone. We need to do something about the environment we are living in.

What you have said is excellent advice, makes me think of "sticks and stones can break my bones, but names will never hurt me". It is much easier to hold everything you said in mind and live with that wisdom when our lives are comfortable and pretty much how we want them to be. My life did not go as I planned. I have empathy for those we should not kick when they are down. My point was made long ago, in every religion and culture- "do not do to others what you would have done to you". Precisely because we do not know them and their circumstances, for the good of humanity, we need agreements about virtues and good manners.

One last argument- it is a real cheap shot to attack others and not near the work it takes to stay on topic and make a rational argument. I think this forum needs to hold others up to a higher standard because that is the best way to develop ourselves.

All that said, I am going to try to copy and paste your good advice in a PM to myself. When I am having a bad day, I am sure your words will help me get over it. I like Asian philosophy, which assumes we can do better when we discover what better is and intentionally practice it until it becomes our new habit. I want your good advice embedded in my everyday thinking. Thank you.

What is an idea's nature? Of what was a good Christian aware of before Christianity? How did this come to be? Was consciousness the same in all areas, or was it different in different environments? Why did it take so long for us all to have computers?

See, now that's... interesting. Do you mean, the material inventions and innovations brought about by math has fundamentally contributed, or perhaps now defines, the average modern day human's consciousness? Sure, a person should know the difference between one sheep and two, so he does not get scammed or otherwise pay more for something he needs than he should. But as far as advanced math, I'd argue the first and earliest philosophers, before mathematicians like Archimedes, or no, not even philosophers, average "uneducated" people found the exact same immersion and level of human experience reading or telling stories, playing primitive games, or acting or watching plays that we do in 2025, if not even a greater and purer form of such, such those today rightfully would and should envy. I'd bet just about anything that's true.

Sure, we can actually fly or travel underwater or to different planets while those before us could only imagine such. But, to use the old saying, "I think, therefore I am." Meaning, just because we can experience something, doesn't mean we appreciate it. In fact, if I know human nature, and I do, it's often the opposite. It numbs us to it. What used to be wonder, becomes monotony. What those before us used to dream of at night, becomes a chore. It's really quite something to ponder, all things considered. — Outlander

I have coffee with a gentleman who can not experience my passion and enthusiasm, and he envies me. I am very thankful I am not depressed like him, except that once in a while, I do lose interest in everything. I know something is wrong when I am in the dumps, thinking nothing matters.

"Do you mean, the material inventions and innovations brought about by math has fundamentally contributed, or perhaps now defines, the average modern day human's consciousness?" How could it be otherwise? Our consciousness today is nothing like it was at other times in history. It is impossible to think like someone in prehistoric times, or the very superstitious times of the Middle Ages, because we can not unknow what we know. Our moment in time forms our cohort. Our impression of reality.

"Sure, a person should know the difference between one sheep and two," Math is so much more than that. Be patient with me. I am waiting for a math book that I ordered. Hopefully, I can communicate better about the importance of math when I get that book.

Oh, oh, I get so excited. "Let no one enter who is ignorant of geometry" is a phrase attributed to Plato. We must begin with geometry and physically discovering the truths with our own hands, drawing the circles and straight lines. Now the learning is not taking someone's word for what to think, but we experience the thought coming out of our own action. When we understand the forces of nature and geometry, we have a totally different consciousness than those poor souls educated for technology, and are not educated for thinking. I think this truth strongly impacts our relationships, and being impersonal and uncaring, instead of feeling like we are in this boat together, and we'd better work together, if we are going to survive the storms.

One of the YouTubes I turned to for information said what I have been trying to say for a long time, but could not think of the words. "Survival by intimacy, not technology." In our recent past, survival was by intimacy. It is the difference between knowing something through personal experience; or just knowing the fact that someone else said is a fact, and this difference is also a difference in our relationships. Now it is okay to insult someone, and if that person feels offended, it is that person's problem, not the inconsiderate person who was insulting. Good logic, right? We can hurt people because that is not our problem, but the problem of those who feel hurt. No intimacy or social rules/ties? We are all strangers. Where is this taking us? How big is your gun, and do you pick it up when you open your door?

Education for technology favored dependency on memory, not reasoning and independent thinking. I guess now I can say most people have no understanding, no awareness, of why they think as they think.
We were all taught "how" to think, and most of us have no knowledge of the decisions about our education, so if we passed the test, we can walk around confident that we know what we are supposed to know. We have no clue what we do not know. Those who make it through college have been properly processed, and those who don't make it may be geniuses with no idea of how important they are. Who cares :angry: Survival by intimacy has been replaced by survival by technology, and this is why there is an argument against relying on science and technology, but it is not science and technology that is the problem, but how we were taught to think, and false beliefs.

:heart:

That is very good advice, and my ego is resistant to it. :lol: Really, until we get a handle on our emotions, it can be difficult to be so reasonable. As I struggle to be reasonable, I question what good are those upsetting emotions? And when I ask that question, I get an answer, that the drive is for more personal relationships. But then I argue against that. I don't have the time and energy for more personal relationships. :lol: Good grief, it is hard to be human.

I am tempted to borrow this and use it when I feel the argumentative urge rising...

I have wished I could believe in a God or religion my entire life - I grew up in a small city with a lot of conservative, religious people, and I saw how much meaning it brought to them.

Having lived through a lot of tragedy in the past decade+, it was this group of people that stepped up for me most, overall. People I hadn't talked to in years, casual friends who became close, etc. I do think people who practice virtues in a community setting are better at those virtues, in general. Thanks to Count Timothy for turning me on to "After Virtue".

Staunch atheist that I am, I can still find some comfort and meaning in religious thought. Christianity has been deemed toxic in some of my (former) progressive circles, and I find that painful, such a diminishment of the richness of our shared history.

Holding the individual responsible for everything seems to me an unrealistic expectation, given what we know today. And it may have always been an unreasonable expectation.
— Athena

Definitely. Not realistic. But neither are many of the divine principles of the religions I am familiar with. I guess you could say I came to philosophy late in life as part of a search for meaning, or it's absence, and I don't separate the rational from the divine in the existential realm.

Plus, the whole 'philosopher condemns man to be free, joins French resistance' angle inspired me to try to learn some philosophy a few years ago. I had become tired of belief systems that seemed to inspire no action.

How about compassion and acceptance of differences? I ask that question and immediately experience fear. Out of fear, I ask who I can turn to if I get into trouble, and I am not confident anyone could help me, so how woke should I be? Maybe before we expect people to be woke, we should investigate what do they fear? Is there anything that can be done about what causes the fear?
— Athena

Interesting comment.

Fear is your instant response, and I had similar automatic responses when I used to find myself in group woke environments. In certain contexts - people passing as experts, leading workshops that ignored meaningful solutions to real problems in favour of wokety blah blah - my fight or flight response would trigger. I didn't realize I had PTSD at the time, or I could have avoided that response strategically.

Woke BS would occasionally trigger my PTSD. It feels crazy to claim that, but true.

Different from fear, but the same automatic activation of strong negative emotions. Triggered by threat.

'Wokeness' is threatening, and those emotional responses should help us to deal with that threat, from an evolutionary perspective. Society is suspicious of negative emotions in general, but I certainly do better personally when I direct that heightened level of arousal with purpose rather than trying to 'subdue' it.

Easier said than done :)

Solutions? It appears to me that there are no coherent, shared moral principles around which Woke states can organize themselves that do not lead to increased polarization and a rejection of the local community in favour of a shared global community of values found on screens.

The only 'pragmatic' solution I see is to find interest groups across political and demographic divides that unite on primary shared moral principles. I think of free speech heroes FIRE in the US, who attract conservatives and liberals.

In a world with so little coherent narrative available, I think a track record of commitment to fundamental principles should demand more attention, and should be a primary objective, especially for young people who see our naked emperor. — Jeremy Murray

I am going to have to respond to one thought at a time, especially because you said you discovered you had PTSD. I am considering starting a thread just for PTSD survivors. It is a serious problem, especially when one does not know that it is a personal problem, turning one's life upside down. When I was dealing with it, it was the Toastmistress women who got me through, and because I thought I was possibly possessed by Satan, and a well-meaning church person told me that, because I turned to the church, Satan was the cause of my suffering. I had to either give in to evil or decide once and for all the mythology was not true and that it could be very harmful. I am extremely thankful, that I decided the mythology is the evil and Satan is a terrible belief. I am saying this because your experience was so different from mine.

It was the Greek gods who saved my sorry ass. From them, I start the path of "being my own hero". That is very helpful, but it was learning about PTSD and getting mental help that finally set me free. However, following the gods and learning of virtues, and my mission to make a difference through education, is what makes my life so good now. I must say, trying to understand math, quantum physics, and consciousness is making my life wonderful right now.

Our heritage is the Greeks and philosophy. They are essential to democracy and liberty, and liberty is the subject of this thread. When it comes to Woke, it is my understanding that the Greeks did not have a problem with homosexuality. In fact, it was pretty common for a man to have a wife to produce children, while the real love was between a younger and older man. This was very much so for Spartans. We might want to look at our mythology and around the world, before being sure there is a God who opposes homosexuality, and not hormones that make it so. When the great mathematician Turing was persecuted for being a homosexual, he was forced to have hormone injections or go to prison. They knew his homosexuality had something to do with hormones, but they treated him like a criminal, and he committed suicide. We lost a math genius, and something is messed up with that mentality built on a mythology instead of science. :worry:

We once believed virtues made us strong. We do not need an evil mythology of Satan and demons and a jealous, revengeful, and punishing, war god. If we do not want to give up immortality, we can wonder about quantum physics.

The only 'pragmatic' solution I see is to find interest groups across political and demographic divides that unite on primary shared moral principles. I think of free speech heroes FIRE in the US, who attract conservatives and liberals.

We had that. It was called public education and being American. That education was built on the Athenian model of education for well-rounded, individual growth. An evil religion based on a mythology of false beliefs and distorted history is not a good thing.

I don't know exactly what you have in mind, but consciousness seems outside of the scope of mathematics. — Patterner

Without math, there are many things we would not be aware of. The Greeks honored the Egyptians for their math, and they took the math a step further, demanding proofs. This train of thinking opened their consciousness. It included holding nations of evolution and the primary substance of life being the atom, not just air, water, and earth. It led them into medical truths, replacing the belief that illnesses are caused by the gods.

Without math, we would not have computers, televisions, and a much better explanation of evolution than the Biblical story of evolution. Our reality today is created by us, not the gods. Math gives us the consciousness we have today. Unfortunately, we have done a terrible job of educating the young to understand the importance of math and science, and what that has to do with democracy. Education for technology is not education for science.

Our consciousness of - that is, our subjective experience of - the brain's activity is the mind. At least some of its activity. Not, for example, the activity that keeps the heart beating. I'm talking about the activity that perceives, retrieves stored information, weighs multiple options and chooses one over the others, and other things that we think of as mental activity. All of these things are physical activity, involving ions, neurotransmitters, bioelectric impulses, etc. The mind is our subjective experience of that mechanical activity. Brain activity is photons hitting the retina, sending signals to the brain, etc. Our subjective awareness of that is red. — Patterner

I think the discussion would go differently with a better understanding of math. What do you know about using math to discover things or explain how things work?

Do you think an idea X is a specific configuration X in the brain? — Jack2848

I am not sure what you mean. If X is the idea, yes, I think it is specific to the configuration. But then I ask myself how does this work. I am trying to think in terms of qubits. I am coming from a tiny understanding of sacred numbers, which are more than the quantity of a thing. I am anticipating the arrival of a math book that I ordered. It explains math as tools. I hope to make a better argument with information from that book.

As I understand it, a number can represent the quality of an idea. The number 3 has the quality of the triad, or triangle. Its strength is its form. That is so for all forms of matter. As is so of all sacred numbers. The rule against using AI really needs to be trashed. It gives a better explanation of the relationship between quantum computers and the triad than I can give. There is no way my small and limited brain can match AI, and short of a nuclear war, I don't think we are returning to the limits of binary thinking.

Yep. You think "woke" means everything has to be relative or subjective or something?
No wonder you're so against it!
Have you taken a moment to consider the possibility that maybe the problem is with your understanding? — Mijin

What is the meaning of Woke? I read it began with a woman of color telling others of color they should not be passive about tolerating discrimination that kept their families poor. Like Mother Jones, who encouraged the miners to fight for higher wages and better working conditions. We come from a history of humans exploiting other humans until those who are exploited rebel against the system that keeps them down. As long as human rights is a power game, there will be power clashes.

The US is proud of its claim to protect human rights, but does its history of human rights justify that pride? If it does, why is Woke still an issue?

I do agree with Sartre. We are all, individually, responsible for everything.

Despite nothing having any intrinsic 'meaning'. This is the source of human suffering, and also cause for hope. Maybe? — Jeremy Murray

I can think of doing things that I strongly regret, but in reflection, I know I did the best I could with what I knew at the time. Is it just to whip someone for poor judgment and hold him/her responsible when the person did not know enough to do better? In speaking with others about this, forgiving ourselves seems to be one of the hardest things for us to do. Having a forgiving god is very helpful if we don't take advantage of Him. :lol:

I don't need someone to argue with because I argue with myself. For almost everything I say, my mind immediately argues the opposite, and this is exhausting. The best I can do is lighten up and laugh at myself. I can not be as sure of myself as the great philosophers. :lol: Of all the gifts a god may give us, a sense of humor may be the most important. How else can we manage our suffering and hope?

In Sartre's day, we didn't know as much as we do today. How wonderful to walk with Socrates and Plato, discovering life's truths when there was so little to know in their day. Holding the individual responsible for everything seems to me an unrealistic expectation, given what we know today. And it may have always been an unreasonable expectation. I have been watching YouTube explanations of our evolution and history, and that we just survived is amazing. How much more should we expect of ourselves?

How about compassion and acceptance of differences? I ask that question and immediately experience fear. Out of fear, I ask who I can turn to if I get into trouble, and I am not confident anyone could help me, so how woke should I be? Maybe before we expect people to be woke, we should investigate what do they fear? Is there anything that can be done about what causes the fear?

I'm Canadian, and I used to feel great pride in that. Still do, to an extent, but now I'm a rarity - the right and the left here both seem to think it naive to be proud of your nation.

As we welcome more and more immigrants, don't we need to be thinking about what culture we are welcoming them to? — Jeremy Murray

It is hard being human, and I think we need to lighten up. Since ancient times, it has been said, "if they knew better, they would do better". I am not sure what doing better means. Here my thinking gets all tangled up with quantum physics and consciousness and the possibility of more evolved planets. I think we look pretty barbaric compared to a different reality that I can imagine, thanks to Star Trek. Maybe our evolution is what it is and can not be different?

All hominids have evolved, but not all of them have survived. If we had the power of the gods, what would we change? And what is wrong with what we have done that we can not be proud of what we have achieved? How can we judge that without knowing the ideal that we should achieve?

I have to agree with wonderer1 who challenged your view that man exists and breaks the rules and is not bound by its rules.

In this case rules are most fairly interpreted as 'laws of nature or laws of the universe' or something similar.

Basically meaning. There's things that are possible and there's things that aren't possible. Doing the impossible would be breaking ''the rules''.
In your response to the other person who replied to you. You change the definition/interpretation. Creating an equivocation fallacy. By method of a shifting the goal post fallacy or so it seems.

In the response you suddenly hold 'rules' to have a definition closer to it's original meaning. Man made things. Or (if he exists) God made things. Suddenly to break to rules means to do things that some being didn't want us to do. (As seen in your use in the analogy of us polluting the air)

But this isn't the most reasonable interpretation of your original comment. Which seemed to imply ''humans do what can't be done" which is a contradiction. (Which the other responder noticed)
So afterwards it's redesigned to mean ''humans do what God (if he exists) didn't want us to do" but was possible to do. Which is vastly different. In the former we have a contradiction. In the latter we're just being independent and disobedient. — Jack2848

Hum, I 100% believe in universal truths about how things work (logos), and I am opposed to any notions of a mythical god that has human qualities. It is obvious that humans hold more knowledge than they did in the past, yet they continue to do things that are harmful to the planet. So I do not understand what seems to be an attempt to have an argument. Where do we disagree? Would the concept of "paradoxical" help?

I fail to grasp your meaning. — praxis

I have heard English is not the best language for expressing some things. I know I am often groping for the right word without success. I spoke with a friend about the relationship problem I perceive, and she immediately knew what I was talking about because she and I basically have the same experience of things changing over time. She immediately spoke of how we all got along and helped each other on a job. Not she and I, because we never worked together, but just the workplace was different. We were more personal and less "professional". :lol: My daughter and I have very different ideas about how things should be on the job.

The boundaries and goals were different. If someone was having a hard time with something, someone else would step in and help. We never heard of job descriptions. The job was everyone's job, and we did it together. Since then, I have been fired for being "too friendly". I have listened to nurses explain why they will no longer work in the hospital. They saw their jobs as caring, and the new policy pitted nurses against each other, and was a worse top-down organization than hospitals once were. How horribly ignorant to destroy the intrinsic qualities of a caring job. Now nurses want money, and they are not so much working for intrinsic reward. In a way, this is about status. People with money have more status than someone who is very caring. Having control over others is status. Things have changed.

The status of the mother has super changed! :gasp: Who wants to be "just a housewife"? I don't know if we will ever regain the value of the homemaker. We are living in a different reality and I think that really matters.

Sorry man, I thought I was clearly indicating I see wokeness as a primary problem for the issues I listed? I mean, there are non-woke related issues, but yeah, the failure of discipline, literacy rates? Wokeness wears a lot of that.
— Jeremy Murray

Literacy rates are typically attributed to socioeconomics, instruction quality, funding and resources, language barriers, and broader social factors like nutrition, healthcare, and family support. How does wokeness impact any of that? — praxis

I might know something about you, but I do not know you, and this is much more likely to lead to disagreement and defensiveness. I woke in a world of strangers, and a lot is going wrong! In the past I would turn to family, but family is another state, is not what it used to be when Mom was taking care of everything. Now she is working and I am on my own in a world of strangers. Get the F off my lawn, you freak. Bang, bang, the kid playing a joke is dead.