There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Katrisia

@[email protected]

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Katrisia ,

I disagree. Generally speaking, psychologists aren’t competent either. Psychiatrists at least know about the human body, its interactions, and psychopathology in depth. Psychologists study the things you mentioned, but many fail to study the biological parts and how deep psychopathologies can go.

Therefore, I’ve encountered many psychologists who think that all problems are caused by the environment, by inner (often cognitive) processes, etc. They fail to understand severe mental disorders such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and regularly make one of two mistakes (if not both in different contexts): downplay the severity of psychosis and mania/hypomania or think the mildest symptom is psychosis or mania/hypomania.

Also, many psychologists I’ve known and seen lean into the antipsychiatry movement. This may not be a problem when treating, say, mild to moderate depressions of a certain reactive nature. They might advise not to take medication and, indeed, medication may not be necessary for these cases. But to do the same for endogenous recurrent depressions and, again, severe mental disorders is borderline clinical negligence.

Finally and in the same vein, many psychologists do not understand how dependent on the physiological are phenomena such as behavior and beliefs. They often picture our mental experience as mostly free, perhaps influenced by many factors (e.g., psychoanalysis), yet ultimately driven by ourselves. I disagree. I disagree not only because there are many scientific observations to the contrary, but because my own experience has been ever-changing by the silliest of things, like medication for physical illnesses, food, weather conditions, etc. Anecdote incoming: >!Traits that psychologists would try to explain away, treat in talk therapy, and solidify as part of my personality were mere consequences of the physiological and went away immediately after I stopped the causes. The average psychiatrist would find this obvious, while psychologists were often surprised.!<

If I may add, both psychiatrists and psychologists face a profound ignorance about the things they study. Psychology has tried to explain them, and in this effort it has created dozens of different and incompatible schools of thought (e.g., psychoanalysis, behaviorism, cognitivism, etc.). Psychiatrists are also at a loss in the definitive hows, and I should add there’s also dense theory behind it (it did not stop with Emil Kraeplin or Karl Jaspers). If you ask me, I wouldn’t consider one more scientific than the other just because one created more paradigms/theories; if anything, remaining observant and pragmatic sounds to me more scientific (in both disciplines), but that’s a whole new conversation…

Katrisia ,

Similarly, people interested in philosophy (and other theoretical stuff) might take a break and think of different things like “but how’s the soap made, anyway?”.

Katrisia ,

My understanding is that tankies believe that groups that have partially or completely followed far-left principles should be exempt from all criticism. I disagree. As long as it is honest criticism, it should not only be allowed but encouraged.

I’ve also heard that tankies are historic revisionists to an extreme. While I agree Western history is not telling us the real version of things, I don’t think other countries are either. I won’t say that an event happened one way or the other just because country A or country B says so. If historians and other experts are still debating an event and its details, I prefer to watch from a distance as I have no way to contribute to those debates.

So… no.

Katrisia ,

This might sound pedantic, but it isn’t, it was actually naive: I expected a better environment in academia when I was young.

Why? Because academia is supposedly full of bright people, and I assumed they would be bright enough to be cooperative (because academia advances more when we are, and they supposedly love knowledge); unattached from superficiality (like judging people by their looks, money, etc., because they should know an interesting person can come in any “package”); relatively ethical (as bright people should figure out something close to the categorical imperative, although with unique details); a non-dogmatic, eager to learn and correct their ideas —over preferring recognition and pettiness— attitude (again, just because I assumed their intelligence must guide them towards appreciating knowledge and authenticity over much more ephemeral and possibly worthless things such as prizes, fame, etc.).

I was wrong, so wrong. It’s painful to remember how I felt when I realized it…

But I think the premises weren’t entirely off, I just imagined people much wiser and more intelligent than they are, myself included. Anyway, I fully understand why others are shocked too.

Katrisia ,

You’re thinking of April Jesus. This is December Jesus.

Katrisia ,

I am going to make some very broad strokes here. So no armchair quarterbacking me. I know it’s way more nuanced but I’m not writing an essay on Lemmy.

In general Western philosophies always have a “goal.”

I know you said it was a broad stroke, and that in general is that way, but I kind of disagree still. I think Western philosophy is about finding if we have a purpose and what is it, and many philosophers since Greek antiquity to today have answered they are skeptic of it existing or it being able to be known. From Pyrrho of Elis and Hegesias of Cyrene to Arthur Schopenhauer and Slavoj Žižek.

The word we are looking for is teleology (not to be confused with theology). It refers to finality, that there is a goal. Many philosophers did not subscribe to a teolology.

Your human life is to prove your worthiness.

Same thing as before.

You need to look back and atone for your past mistakes. You need to look forward so you can do the right things to be worthy. It is very little about being in the now.

I agree a little more with this, there are many Western philosophers preoccupied with ethics. But that’s why I think they were talking of different dimensions. It was not that existentially you should roam the past or future, that your mental activity should be there. It was about being responsible in the now for the future, and to be held accountable for your past. It was a morality thing, not a conscious/existential thing.

In this case tacos are the moment. So next time you’re eating a delicious taco. Spend that moment to be one with your taco. Concentrate on the smell. Then feel the texture as you pick it up. How the various colors interact with each other. Then as you bite off some, feel the textures in your mouth and how the flavors interact. Watch yourself, be aware of every time you chew. Remember there is no past there’s no future there is only tacos.

Hey! Go away with that mindful nonsense. If I do that, I spend too much time with a single bite and I cannot eat as much (/s).

Katrisia ,

I don’t know how to post images, but Google “Dinosaur Liberty Security” or “Dinosaur Freedom Security” and that’s what came to my mind.

Katrisia ,

SMITE isn’t a shooter, though. Overwatch 2 killed Overwatch and left an empty space. I don’t see a problem if two games (or more) try to fill it. I hope they are fun.

That said, it shouldn’t be Valve’s only focus if fans are expecting different games from them.

Katrisia ,

I thought it was him, William Whewell, in response to an almost rant from Samuel Taylor Coleridge about “natural philosophers” (today’s scientists) not deserving to be called “philosophers”.

I just googled it and found:

Coleridge stood and insisted that men of science in the modern day should not be referred to as philosophers since they were typically digging, observing, mixing or electrifying—that is, they were empirical men of experimentation and not philosophers of ideas.

[…]

There was much grumbling among those in attendance, when Whewell masterfully suggested that in “analogy with artist we form scientist.” Curiously this almost perfect linguistic accommodation of workmanship and inspiration, of the artisanal and the contemplative, of the everyday and the universal –was not readily accepted.

Yeah, that was the story I’d heard.

Another source says:

Coleridge declared that although he was a true philosopher, the term philosopher should not be applied to the association’s members. William Whewell responded by coining the word scientist on the spot. He suggested

by analogy with artist, we may form scientist.

It’s funny because nobody remembers S. T. Coleridge as a philosopher but only as a poet. I’ve read that his philosophical writings were like an eccentric and almost immature version of German idealism. The thing that haunts me is that famous F. Schelling is well read but often misunderstood, so if they both were part of the romantic movement and they were both close to idealism, it could be that they both suffer the same fate.

Anyway, I digressed. That was the story I knew. Basically, a gatekeeping poet separated philosophers and natural philosophers.

It’s even curious because there are rumours about men like Coleridge being “half-mad”, and recently there have been studies on it. It would be ridiculous (just as history tends to be) if an old mad poet had divided these branches of knowledge on a fit of bad moods.

As someone who is aging. Late thirties. How can I keep my finger on the pulse of current trends, particularly in music?

As an example. I grew up in hip-hop but at a certain point I stopped listening to new people and realised recently that I’d slept on some bangers. Like Kendrick particularly, but even people like Juice WRLD and Xxxtentacion....

Katrisia ,

I’m from the 90s and I’ve been catching some trends thanks to TikTok and YouTube. Exactly what you said, new videos and keep jumping to suggested videos. Also, read the comments, people often have recommendations (you can even ask and you’ll get some new musicians).

Katrisia ,

Communities for underground music and the one for roller skating.

Katrisia ,

I don’t know, the world is depressing. Recently, details about Palestine have been disheartening…

Katrisia ,

French and Spanish would have been better.

Katrisia ,

Most psychologists […].

And yet for some reason philosophers […] and artists […].

Why are you careful/nuanced with psychologists but dump philosophers and artists in the same bag as if they all do the same?

I see this a lot. The other day, I was watching a science video. Same thing: “some physicists believe…”, “other physicists…”, but “philosophers say…”.

Do you think philosophy and art (disciplines that by their very nature are diverse and creative) create only one type of people? I mean, Karl Popper is a philosopher against Freud, you just said it. You could find many philosophers opposed to Freud, indifferent, critical, in agreement, etc. Artists are the same, very different people among them.

Now, the real question should be why is Freud popular amongst some artists and philosophers and other non-psychologists, especially in certain regions like France and Argentina, or certain traditions like old continental philosophy. And that’s probably the beginning of an answer at the same time: a strong tradition of psychoanalysis within certain circles. Also, a matter of coherence or lack of. For example, if you start reading French existentialism and keep reframing certain aspects of reality, you may find yourself inclined to epistemological paradigms that do not oppose psychoanalytical theories, so you could combine them if you want to. If you start denying materialism in some ways, you may end up denying biological explanations of psychopathological phenomena, so Freud could be a good substitute (or not, depending on the person).

I guess if I were to give a psychological reductionist answer, Freud and similar authors appeal to part of the population that is skeptical of conventional models, the status quo, scientism, hard materialism, etc.

Katrisia ,

We are already here.

Mexico is heading towards its most violent election ever, with 30 candidates murdered, 77 threatened and 11 kidnapped (english.elpais.com)

More than 170 attacks have been committed against politicians in the lead-up to the June elections. This violence has put campaigns under tension and is sowing doubts about governability in several regions. Specialists warn that the line between the Mexican state and organized crime is increasingly blurred...

Katrisia ,

It’s late so don’t mind me, but I didn’t get your point. They’re killing candidates from all factions, all parties. Perhaps different people are killing independently for different reasons. Mega corporations killing the candidates that want regulations on their use of water, deforestation, etc. Nestlé, Coca-Cola, and others are devastating the lands and I’m sure they’re profiting nicely from that and don’t want to stop. Organized crime. Corrupt politicians. It’s not simple (or clear) to me, why do you say it is?

Katrisia ,

I get it now. I don’t agree with your points.

you’re claiming that these killings are spontaneous and only coincidentally helps the incumbents or the party leadership positions maintain authority.

I don’t believe it benefits the party that today is dominant, not only because they are getting killed too but also because they are being accused of making Mexico violent and it is super important for them to prove that things are getting better.

This is not the same as saying that the killings are spontaneous, on the contrary, it is an unstable game of power grabbing because of very special circumstances in Mexico that allow this uncertainty of who is getting what in 2024. This in itself lets us see that there are powerful groups fighting and not a tyranny from the current government nor them only silencing opponents.

This isn’t normal. This doesn’t happen in other places of the world.

I don’t know about normal; it isn’t desirable, but perhaps it was to be expected. Why Mexico and not other countries? I think this is an oversimplification.

First, it does happen in other countries, but differently. Some have coup d’États, revolutions, extremist terrorism, etc. Of course if you compare Mexico to Germany, Germans are playing chess under the table. Compare Mexico to Arab countries, African countries, and even violent Latin American countries. Violence exists in many other places. Yet, secondly, you can only see similarities when comparing social circumstances, never mirrors. You won’t find another Mexico in its details because no other country has Mexico’s history. I repeat: it does happen in other countries, but differently. And that’s why what you said was too simple.

For this to not somehow be organized or orchestrated would be completely illogical, because then it would be occurring elsewhere as well.

Following the last part, no, this can perfectly be complex. ‘Heterogenous’ is the word that is coming to my mind.

To me, it’s more illogical to believe a single force is orchestrating this violence (which, again, is getting people from different groups killed) than to believe it is power grabbing from many sources. The first option even sounds a little conspiracy-theorish or paranoid, if I’m being frank.

Katrisia ,

lemm.ee/comment/11472049

Katrisia ,

I’ve heard of Goldfish and Vidzy.

Katrisia , (edited )

I believe they are talking about a specific community that has formed over TikTok, a very anticapitalist and cosmopolitan one, and not about the platform itself.

If your algorithm is favoring that content, your short videos will be full of people talking about all things wrong in our global state of affairs; alternatives and temporal solutions (that happen to harm corporations, ironically because the information is becoming popular thanks to one, so I guess it’s the ladder to get to the rooftop); global situations that are not talked or barely talked on regular news (like Congo, Palestine, etc.); the truth behind Western propaganda and lies, especially the ones against populations and ideologies (e.g., “this country doesn’t prosper because they’re [whatever]” vs “we exploited and condemn this country to scarcity for decades and lied about it”); etcetera. In my time there, I’ve learnt a couple things.

I know that these content creators will find another platform if TikTok goes down. Lemmy has shown me that social media can be free of corporations, but that’s something many people are not aware of yet, especially since the techy people that could explain it on TikTok are not there.

So… yeah, TikTok has some interesting sides content-wise. There’s even the rumor that this is one of the reasons they want it banned in the U.S.

Instagram Advertises Nonconsensual AI Nude Apps (www.404media.co)

Instagram is profiting from several ads that invite people to create nonconsensual nude images with AI image generation apps, once again showing that some of the most harmful applications of AI tools are not hidden on the dark corners of the internet, but are actively promoted to users by social media companies unable or...

Katrisia ,

I don’t want to fall into a slippery slope argument, but I really see this as the tip of a horrible iceberg. Seeing women as sexual objects starts with this kind of non consensual media, but also includes non consensual approaches (like a man that thinks he can subtly touch women in full public transport and excuse himself with the lack of space), sexual harassment, sexual abuse, forced prostitution (it’s hard to know for sure, but possibly the majority of prostitution), human trafficking (in which 75%-79% go into forced prostitution, which causes that human trafficking is mostly done to women), and even other forms of violence, torture, murder, etc.

Thus, women live their lives in fear (in varying degrees depending on their country and circumstances). They are restricted in many ways. All of this even in first world countries. For example, homeless women fearing going to shelters because of the situation with SA and trafficking that exists there; women retiring from or not entering jobs (military, scientific exploration, etc.) because of their hostile sexual environment; being alert and often scared when alone because they can be targets, etc. I hopefully don’t need to explain the situation in third world countries, just look at what’s legal and imagine from there…

This is a reality, one that is:

Putting hundreds of millions of people into a state of hopeless depression

Again, I want to be very clear, I’m not equating these tools to the horrible things I mentioned. I’m saying that it is part of the same problem in a lighter presentation. It is the tip of the iceberg. It is a symptom of a systemic and cultural problem. The AI by itself may be less catastrophic in consequences, rarely leading to permanent damage (I can only see it being the case if the victim develops chronic or pervasive health problems by the stress of the situation, like social anxiety, or commits suicide). It is still important to acknowledge the whole machinery so we can dimension what we are facing, and to really face it because something must change. The first steps might be against this “on the surface” “not very harmful” forms of sexual violence.

Katrisia ,

I’ve heard the argument based not on structural power but average physical capabilities and biological structures. [I’m going to use the terms meaning sex and not gender]. The man is most likely the person that can gain control during the act, and he doesn’t risk being in pain as much as the woman. Therefore, the man holds more power and is more of a threat on average.

This is also technically true, and I don’t think it is about consent but freedom. [I’ll keep using the words for sex and not gender]. Sexuality becomes another form in which women can become subjugated, so it’s a matter of precaution, I guess (especially since men are being socialized to be entitled or even violent, which is the other part of the picture).

I’ve also heard the extreme version of this argument saying that penetration is what I just described, always, without exception.

In both cases and in yours and in others, I don’t think the meme is correct because the reasons are very different from puritanism.

Katrisia ,

The suicide rates have become one of the most popular arguments, which is a shame because it is incomplete. More men complete the suicidal act, but more women attempt it (apparently, they just own less guns, less substances in the garage, etc.). In other words—because I explain like sh*t in English: women are more suicidal, but less lethal in their attempts.

Both sexes, and intersex people, suffer a lot. The various genders suffer a lot.

I know influencers that talk about this problem without being Andrew Tate, but when I recommend them, I get downvoted as if they were worth nothing. I disagree. Of course, it is not a solution because life is always hard and confusing, but to listen to leftist men who understand feminism and other current social movements, and speak of the role of masculinity today considering those is very refreshing and it definitely helps and it is a step forward.

In a nutshell, they talk about caring about mental health. Many of them already are through their own journeys via psychotherapy or other means of introspection and emotional awareness. They talk about feelings and beliefs within the people that were told that they need to be a cartoon, an action figure, because vulnerability is for the lesser sex and a real man™ despises those things. They talk about healing, understanding, cooperation, etc. I don’t know if you’re a leftist, but that’s behind other concepts such as anarchy or social welfare. It is nice to see the line of thought from healing the personal to healing the communal, and viceversa.

So… yeah, ostracism is not the solution. It’s funny because I’ve suffered from agoraphobia and things like that in other moments of my life, and I understand the dysphoric feeling brought by just thinking about society. I have rejected society time and time again, but we are social creatures and we need each other.
I need you because writing this comment is something that I feel I have to do. You’re giving me some minutes of purpose and even hope that I can make you feel less alone in this world. We both need the person that is making Lemmy possible, and our instances, and many other people on that chain. We like having friends and romantic relationships and random interactions on social media. We like going to events and activities in our towns or cities.

As I see it, If society is not ‘rejectable’ without hurting ourselves and others, the next thing to do would be to interact healthily with our fellow human beings. It is an available journey, there are people willing to help in each step, but you need to trust and trust is hard as f*ck.

Katrisia ,

I liked Revolt.

Katrisia ,

The study of psychopathology in any form, particularly of severe mental disorders such as schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder type I.

I like philosophy, mathematics, and arts more, but that would be my favorite field of science.

Katrisia ,

Wow! Pranks from 2004 are ads in 2024.

Katrisia ,

Exactly. I often post walls of text, and it is probably because it takes me a lot of words to express ideas in English, but I also feel like I cannot discuss something deeply in whatever number of characters are admitted now on microblogging. Forums and such are great and I love reading long posts and comments. Also, I get lost in who is replying to what on those sites, but here it is literally linear!

Katrisia ,

Technically, Mexico has had only two presidents from a right-wing party. Before, they were from the centrist party. The current president is a very well known leftist.

The country was bombarded with religion for centuries, so maybe you are thinking of that, but even so, the majority support a version of religion that mixes a “social concern for the poor and political liberation for oppressed peoples” with spirituality. It is similar to the recent declarations of Pope Francis about Marxists and Christians having a common goal It is called liberation theology.

Also, Mexico tried to legalize drugs back in 1940. It was promoted by a psychiatrist that informed the government that substance abuse was a mental disorder, which was very progressive for the era. Here is the story.

Of course, if you dig deeper, you’ll know the United States basically coerced Mexico into criminalizing drugs again.

Around half the population still supports drug legalization, even after years of propaganda. The commenter below was shocked about abortion legalization. Abortion is legal in many places. Same-sex marriage is also legal, even in some more right-leaning states. A couple years ago, a transgender clinic with free care was opened in Mexico City. Similarly, free healthcare and many other welfare initiatives such as free education (including universities) are common and not negotiable for the average Mexican.

So, yeah, I guess you’ll find homophobic old people, religious nuts, or lately, U.S.-influenced right-wing supporters, but Mexico is overall progressive as I see it. Even historically:

Slave abolition was one of the first things Mexico did as an independent country, around 1810-1817. The first black president in 1829. Safe place for U.S. slaves to escape and live as free people during the 19th century. First native (indigenous) president in 1858. The Constitution has been protecting native populations’ rights since 1917. During the 20th century, there were big movements in favor of socialism (e.g., agrarian socialists called zapatistas, or students’ movements in the National Autonomous University of Mexico). The list goes on… The first woman president is probably happening this year.

I hope this puts things into perspective, and sorry for infodumping!

Katrisia ,

I’d like to prevent many tragedies, but I’m not sure a single book would change history. I can actually imagine it going very wrong…

— Mein Führer, this book here explains our theories about the origin of the German population and about the natural maliciousness of Jews are wrong.
— Let me see… Lies, all lies! This here is evidence of their pervasive propaganda against the aryan people.

— Witchfinder General, a book had arrived… from the unknown.
— What kind of sorcery is this? “Witches do not exist”. “…These trials were the result of ignorance and greed”. What in the name of God is this blasphemy? A powerful witch is near and these are her evil tricks!

So I need to think of a better plan, lol.

samxavia , to asklemmy
@samxavia@mastodon.social avatar

@asklemmy What do you think it would take for people to drop Twitter & Reddit and move to the Fediverse?

Katrisia ,

I’m in that demographic (born in the 90s), and my friends are definitely apathetic/uninterested in trying new platforms. I am trying to convince them of alternatives 🫡, wish me luck.

Katrisia ,

The lack of individuals within a species is not a problem as long as the population is healthy. Horses are not in danger of going extinct. I do not know the numbers then and now, but horses are fine, and the ones alive in countries that would have put them to work in other eras are free of suffering, which is something every sentient being wants to avoid.

I’m glad horses are not being used as much as before; they are not objects, they are animals just like us.

Katrisia ,

I believe many great human beings have existed throughout history, but the impact they cause is often limited by their circumstances. For example, there have been thinkers defending compassion towards human beings and animals in possibly every culture, but those sages live and die admired yet misunderstood. Their lives are seen as “extraordinary”, and thus, not attainable for normal people like us. We give up on following them since the start, instead of trying to achieve their wisdom or understanding…

Anyway, by mere impact, I guess Socrates, Plato, and Immanuel Kant are on the top for me. The first ones were influential in the development of many branches of knowledge, and solidified a tradition of critical thinking since antiquity. Immanuel Kant is kind of recent, but I’d say his works were really important for discussions around philosophy, science, arts, religion, and more. I admire Immanuel Kant greatly. I was recently reading a little text he wrote about psychiatric disorders and he was predicting modern paradigms in the 18th century. He was such a brilliant and knowledgeable person.

There are also incredible inventions and discoveries that have helped us all, but often those are the results of collective efforts. Still, as I said before, amazing human beings the ones that gave and still give these things for free. Getting personal again, I wouldn’t be alive without many of those advances (vaccines, medications, etc.). On the technological side, the founder of that website that unlocks academic papers has had an impact that is yet to be analyzed.

Sorry! So many people…!

Katrisia ,

That’s hilarious! I guess he was a normal man with normal blunders in his daily life. I’ve heard about his meticulousness, that we had strict rules for his routines and reunions, but never details (and never the cup of coffee thing). Thanks for sharing.

Katrisia ,

🤘

I like women but I also like cock but I'm not otherwise attracted to the male body at all. Wtf is my sexual orientation? AITA?

I like women. I like the shape and curves of the female body. I like boobs, I like asses, I like pretty vaginas. I also appreciate and am aroused by a nice cock. I’m however not otherwise attracted to the male body. I like femboys as long as they have a feminine-like shape and curves, as many of them do....

Katrisia ,

From Wikipedia:

Polysexuality has been defined as “encompassing or characterized by many different kinds of sexuality”, and as sexual attraction to many, but not all, genders. […] Polysexuality is also considered to be another word for bisexuality however unlike bisexuals, polysexuals are not necessarily attracted to people of the same gender.

I think ‘polysexual’ fits. You like some genders (cis women, trans women, feminine-presenting people, AFAB NBs, etc.), but not all.

Katrisia ,

About philosophical topics such as free will too.

Katrisia ,

Sure, the spouse that has to create a reward system so that the other person does their chores is the one in the wrong, not the spouse that apparently needs parenting. Also, marriage is a favor to the former, not something both want and benefit from (/sarcasm).

Katrisia ,

Unfortunately, women tend to want partners, men want caregivers.

Thank you. Nobody’s seeing that. All the comments saying the woman is mean, instead of talking about how irresponsible the man must be that he needs a reward system to do what he should be doing on his own* for his family.

*I’m not sure if it’s the right expression. I mean by his own volition and out of responsibility.

Edit: I won’t acknowledge the rest of your comment because, honestly, it got confusing.

Katrisia ,

I use TikTok (I know…). There, when there’s rivalry, it is frequently ‘gen Z’ the one bullying ‘millennials’. They criticize the way they use technology, their fashion sense, their attitudes, their musical tastes, etc. Studies are noticing that ‘gen Z’ tend more to the right-wing, so I guess there’s a part of them also criticizing previous generations for being too leftists or whatever.

I use the quotation marks because this whole generational thing seems to me arbitrary and U.S.-centric. I’m in the years that are considered the transition between these two generations and I share characteristics with both. It’s silly how serious we’ve taken this thing.

Katrisia ,

I haven’t noticed, but some people say they are feeling political tensions, and…

The year 2024 is notable for the large number of elections, with 7 of world’s 10 most populous nations (Bangladesh, India, United States, Indonesia, Pakistan, Russia, Mexico) voting; countries that are home to nearly half of the world’s people will hold elections in 2024.

From the Wikipedia complete list.

I guess everyone is just a little worried about national and international elections.

Katrisia ,

and if you give to charity, you will harm your spirits.

Huh? Is this about obligatory alms/tithes or is it about any kind of help to others, or both?

Katrisia ,

If that’s true, will his next life inevitably be a little worse than now? Average, perhaps? Even bad? Then it would not be about reincarnating for the better each time but a lottery, in which eventually you’ll get a relatively better life than the others, right?

Or is the best life the last one before crossing to somewhere else? Will Earth become emptier and emptier then, as we all cross? Then why the number of beings keeps increasing instead of decreasing? Who are these new souls?

Do you believe his humbleness is part of why he has those circumstances? Will he keep the good life because he deserves it? Some systems talk about merits, about reincarnating into what one deserves. Then, every orphan and every Palestinian and every pig deserve what they have suffered? If so, those systems often invite us to compassion, but is there space to absolute compassion when the Universe itself is punishing them for terrible deeds in the past? It would be similar to watching children being spanked; on one hand, you feel bad for them because they need to learn this painful lesson; on the other, you feel good because they deserve them, especially if the harm was against you, you may even feel a spark of joy from something similar to revenge. So are we supposed to feel this mix of feelings for beings who have it worse than us? Happy that they’re getting to learn, happy that they’re been punished, happy that they won’t be doing it again? Because that’s not how I feel, and I would feel sadistic to feel it based only on this theory we’re imagining. Then there’s the question: is this kind of cruel punishing the only way for souls to learn? If so, why such a primitive system? We do not even use it for our children anymore, and psychologists have found it is detrimental instead of constructive. Is this the best way the Universe can help us grow? If it is, it seems suspicious, who is behind? If it is not, then it is needlessly cruel as there would be more peaceful ways, and we should be questioning this instead of embracing it just because it is the thing we’ve been given.

On a similar line, do you believe we somehow learn virtues that we inherit for the next life? If so, are we all collectively better people than in the 19th century (because some of us would have surely learnt something)? Is humanity walking towards an utopia then? How do we explain the centuries in which we seem to devolve, in which irrationality, wars, hate, and more increased? Today, are we really that advanced and far away from Ancient Rome or Ancient Egypt?

The person you were talking with was happy you have a mind that lets you consider things from positive sides, and said that many do not have that chance. If reincarnation has a purpose in each life, how are we supposed to learn, grow, change, or whatever we are supposed to do (in case there is something to do) if we are partially limited by our brains and many other things? Why would we judge those negative thinkers as if they decided their current life?

…Unless we decide our current life, as some systems propose. Then many things we do are determined already because we knew which were our limits and which were our base characteristics (e.g. our temperament, which is innate). This contradicts a lot of the things we were thinking and makes the scenario more similar to a game than to a learning path. But it poses a lot of new questions such as who or what are we when we’re not humans but beings deciding where to be born? Why do we do this? Is it ethical to embrace an identity who has no memory of the deal and impose a life onto it full of things that identity did not consent to? Because maybe the being decided to live as a woman who would be hurt, develop PTSD and learn to live through it all. It sounds dramatic and interesting. But the woman is a new consciousness, a new identity, then is it right to make her suffer all that just because another consciousness, a previous consciousness agreed to? The same question might be asked for whatever case of reincarnation in which we reincarnate in very different identities. If it is possible and a cruel murderer reincarnates in a sweet person, why should a sweet person pay for the crimes of a cruel murderer?

So many questions still in the air that I haven’t written down… But all different variations of reincarnation seem problematic at some point already. Do you agree? Because many people who find these metaphysical problems in different postulates (not necessarily reincarnation) tend to say that we are judging high ideas with mundane ideas. How can I say it is an unfair system if whoever designed it is much wiser than us, so it knows better to be fair and good, and we cannot understand such elevated balance so we think it is unfair. Yet, at the same time, the system that they propose is full of explanations, promises, and consequences based on our human values and morality, not higher ones. The Universe gives ‘good’ things for ‘good’ deeds or ‘good’ personality, then it does work with our frames at some point, huh? Then, all our questions are indeed valid. All this paragraph to say that, if you agree that indeed there are things that seem weird, suspicious, or wrong when thinking about reincarnation (or metaphysical beliefs in general), how do we keep our belief in reincarnation?

I’m not saying it does not exist just because it does not entirely “click”. I’m asking why to believe in it when we realize this, instead of taking a more skeptical and distant approach, maybe curious, maybe excited, but cautious?

Katrisia ,

Sorry, I’m answering myself because I forgot to post my own opinion.

I clearly have problems with any metaphysical explanation, because every one of them tells us to accept this Universe as it is, which seems arbitrary and, depending on the ideology, even cruel, and because we have no good reason to prefer an idea over the others. Do I believe in a god, gods, only matter; reincarnation, ascension, definitive death; simulation, real thing…? I do not know. Why would I pick one at random? If there’s something more to this existence, I’ll perhaps know when I die, and I will fight for our right to be better than we are right now because, come on, here on Lemmy we tend to be leftists, right? We do not like bigotry, exploitation, or unhappiness. We fight in our own ways against this. Then why would I stop when I die? If the ones controlling this reality are messed up, are we to accept the status quo and thank the tyrants that, at least, we were to experience smelling flowers although children were literally bombed next door? No. If they’re tyrants, heads must roll. Let’s be fucking spiritual punks! Not yet, just if we confirm this suspicion, lol.

Oh! Reincarnation, right. If reincarnation was real and it would make us cycle at random from one life to another, without anything else (no merits, no punishments, no learning, just cycling), I guess some lives would be better than others, yeah? But then, why? Is there a purpose? If not, what happens to souls that are tired of cycling? Can we opt out? If not, who or what is holding us against our will? Can we escape? Again, many questions, lol. But I finally answered!

People who can don't get mad and just go with the flow, how do you do it?

Here recently it seems like everything just gets under my skin so quickly and easily. It’s not that I get mad and take it out on others, it’s just the fact that I’m constantly annoyed and stressed. Something as simple as the dogs tracking some mud through the house will just ruin my mood. I know some people who would just...

Katrisia ,

Yes. In my case, my mood disorder was causing irritability. Many disorders can cause it (e.g., MDD, BPD, IED).

OP, I’d suggest an appointment with a specialist if everything else has been ruled out; everything else includes bad sleep habits, bad eating habits, physical illnesses, etc.

Katrisia ,

A recent comment of mine:

In an old interview, Mr. Narcissus [Elon Musk] said he may have bipolar disorder; he said he experiences “great highs, terrible lows, and unrelenting stress”.

He has doubts because his highs and lows follow events in his life, whereas episodes from bipolar disorder often appear without triggers. […]

We’d know if he went for an evaluation/possible diagnosis, but I cannot even imagine him doing it.

Kanye West is usually manic when he acts this way. I guess this supports Musk’s suspicion.

Katrisia ,

Have you heard the “I don’t suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it” quote? They meant it, huh?

Katrisia ,

With luck, it buys a state in which we can find happiness.

Is it possible to be happy without money? I’d say it’s only possible for extraordinary people, not for the majority of us.

Is it possible to have money and still not be happy? Of course, many people have money but still feel empty, lonely, misunderstood, apathetic, bitter, regretful, etc. And many people have money, but they cannot be happy because their health is bad and it is not solvable, not even with their riches (e.g. treatment resistant depression, terminal cancer).

I’d say, for almost everyone, money is a necessary condition for happiness, but it is not a sufficient condition.

Katrisia ,

That’s insane. I hope not only that they win the lawsuit, but that companies understand stimulants can be harder (even dangerous) on some people.

The way caffeine affects me does not risk my life, but it can get ugly as I have a mental health condition that gets triggered by stimulants. It is so common to rely on caffeine nowadays, and it’s present in many beverages and snacks. People forget it is still a drug.

There should be labels and there should be less of a presence of caffeine (and other legal drugs) in unrelated products. I mean, it’s normal if coffee has caffeine, it shouldn’t be normal that a lemonade has caffeine.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •