From: oldernow@dev.null   
      
   On 2024-04-20, D  wrote:   
      
   > But, it is much more fun to be sure and absolute in ones   
   > beliefs! ;)   
      
   I'm not so sure. ;-)   
      
   For me I'd say it's fun for a season, but hindsight   
   invariably has a way of poking holes in such certainty.   
      
   > Yes, I often think about this and what it means   
   > for humans. We are evolved to deal with dangers and   
   > risks. Modern society on the other hand is evolving around   
   > eliminating all risk, and providing us with 100% safety   
   > at all levels. Even safety when it comes to thinking the   
   > right things, saying the right things. I mean, try to   
   > deviate an inch, and you and me both know what happens   
   > when we deal with people who's lives focus on safety.   
   >   
   > One of my theories is that the more "safe" society becomes,   
   > the less meaning people will find and the more our mental   
   > health will suffer. We were never made from evolutionary   
   > point of view, to live in a state with 0% risk and 100%   
   > safety. It kills the soul of humanity, unless this state   
   > is reached slowly so that psychology and our own inner   
   > software manages to catch up.   
   >   
   > Imagine what would happen with people without an inner   
   > drive an passion in a society where every lives off the   
   > government without any demands.  The only ones who would   
   > thrive are the ones with internal drive and passion,   
   > the rest would suffer.   
   >   
   > I think this is partly why Nietzsche speaks about pain and   
   > struggle being so enormously important to human growth and   
   > values. With pain and struggle, how much can you feel that   
   > you live? How much would you value your achievements? Of   
   > course he turns up the volume to 11 when he writes, but   
   > I do think he has a point.   
      
   As Fielding Mellish (Woody Allen character in "Bananas")   
   would say: "it's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a   
   mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham!"   
      
   The only time I care one way or another about that safety   
   thing is when it's causing me what I consider extra,   
   unnecessary work, whose time and energy I might have   
   applied to activity more valuable to me/us.   
      
   The most frequent case is my wife insisting we need to do   
   this, that, and ten others to our dwelling/yard to make it   
   safer for grandchildren. I mean, I obviously don't want   
   to leave matches/lighters laying around. But she'll want   
   to make additions/modifications to things that are less   
   than perfectly safe, and yet we both lived through them   
   being that way in our youth. And it can become a sort of   
   mania a la "Well, now that we've done that, maybe we need   
   to do *this*?!", and it can become never-ending.   
      
   So we throw time/effort/money at such, it maybe sorta   
   kinda covers an extremely low odds accident possibility,   
   it robs the kids of practicing being careful, and then   
   a couple months later it's utterly useless, requiring   
   more time/effort to remove correctly, i.e. without any   
   house/yard scarring traces.   
      
   To me, it's an award-winning "benefits don't rise to the   
   level of the time/effort/cost" example.   
      
   But to even *think* that (did I mention she can somehow   
   magically tell what I'm thinking?) is  anathema   
   en route to a high crime against humanity - if not God   
   Himself! :-)   
      
   >> But they've (you know who they are!) gone from   
   >> championing a godless survival scenario (until realizing   
   >> how un-fucking-fit they are...) to championing a "rule of   
   >> the weakest/dumbest by way of guilting and such" scenario -   
   >> which, unimpeded, probably means the end of the species.   
   >   
   > Yes, and then, after a few generations, we'll get the   
   > movie Idiocracy.  ;) Actually, perhaps, that should be a   
   > weeping smiley. ;)   
      
   Yep to all that.   
      
   > But the idea I think is not that far fetched. Evolution has   
   > stopped guiding us as a species with the modern welfare   
   > state, and based on how evolution works, I guess we will   
   > pay a price eventually. On the other hand, I still think   
   > that there are plenty of arenas for evolution to work,   
   > but far less so, than before.   
      
   This is all really interesting in that if we take   
   evolution as a supreme being of sorts, one can easily   
   model safety obsession as *sin* against that supreme   
   being for not trusting - yea, for activity circumventing -   
   its plan/"will".   
      
   And therefrom doth a commandment emanate before our very   
   ASCII-entranced eyes:   
      
   "Thou shalt not make my perfect world set up to perfect   
   you safe from perfecting you!"   
      
      
      
   > Then you can dial that up a notch too, by adding   
   > technology and genetic modification to the mix. Should   
   > we enhance ourselves freely and fully as a form of self   
   > expression? That scares many, because in todays world   
   > equality is the value par excellence, and why should people   
   > be allowed to "cheat"?   
      
   Surely - in the aforementioned brand spanking new religious   
   context - doth thou actually mean *sin*!!!! :-)   
      
   >> But, again, I'll be safe in death's arms before then. But   
   >> it's going to be close.... ;-)   
   >   
   > That's what my father says. Literally, I'm ok, you'll have   
   > to watch all the sh*t as it happens. And I say "thank you   
   > father, thank you so much". ;)   
      
   Oh my gosh, it's a brand new "sins 'o the fathers" scenario!   
      
   --   
   oldernow   
   xyz001 at nym.hush.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)