LRealist
Studies ancient Egypt.
Friends:
Wadjet Anubis Set Ra
User ID: 2699
LRealist
7mo ago
Without just speculating, I can answer about people I know: I don't, and no members of my family do except for mother-in-law. My wife does in theory, but in practice she never knows where it is and never answers it when it rings. In our experience phones are basically a way for other people to get a hold of you, which is irritating; let them send an email like anyone else.
LRealist
7mo ago
Are you sure? We test a person's intelligence, sociability, emotionality, creativity, and anything else we like using a pencil and paper. Such tests are effective at predicting real world outcomes/ Tests of Neuroticism specifically have been used to predict panic proneness. You don't think that any kind of psychological screening could serve as an effective predictor of who will shoot, who will help, and who will freeze?
LRealist
7mo ago
In the context of war it's "ok", but it feels like murder because psychologically it is.
I wish more people who studied moral philosophy could read your experiences.
I've never been in combat. But talking to people who have, and reading up on the subject, makes it clear to me that a lot of what people have in mind when they discuss morality and politics is just a rational justification of these deep urges and hesitations.
When I was younger I always noticed that liberals would allow the killing of fetuses but not criminals, and conservatives would allow the killing of criminals but not fetuses. And there would be arguments and justifications. But very few people seriously thought about applying any of those arguments to warfare. How do you justify killing an enemy combatant who is both fully grown and also hasn't committed any serious crime? Somehow nobody seems to think there's a need. There are a few pacifists around, but I've never met a genuine pacifist. Everyone I've ever talked to about the subject seems to know that, on some level, you must be ready to send someone else to kill people in war, if you're not prepared to do it yourself.
I think there is something to learn from this. What I think is: If you want abortion but not capital punishment, whatever. If you want capital punishment but not abortion, whatever. If you want both, whatever. Probably all of this kind of political arguing is merely the philosophical manifestation of the kind of thing you describe in the field: A third freeze, a third help out, and a third shoot.
In my limited experience, if it's a firefight, about a third of guys shoot back, a third help out, and a third freeze up or hide. Often not who I thought would be in those categories.
Out of curiosity, how would you guess a person could tell what category he is in without actually being in a firefight?
LRealist
7mo ago
Wow. It's been over a year since I posted on the Motte or even Reddit; I came back to find this place is definitely... different. It seems much smaller, a bit more subdued, but possibly better. I know a lot of the reason I stopped contributing then was the Reddity feel of the place. But I remember the Friday Fun Threads were always pretty cool.
Who do you think has been left behind? I'm asking in terms of demographic shifts. Are there fewer younger posters? Hotheads? The general consensus seems to be this place is much more conservative, but I don't know if I've seen that, yet.
LRealist
7mo ago
You're probably preaching to the choir more than screaming into the void. I'm extremely fond of poetry, but I definitely prefer poetry that rhymes and scans. Allowable rhymes, fine; occasional lapses from proper meter, OK. But if you ask me, a lot of what is called poetry is really just a hodgepodge of essays with wide margins.
Your question reads to me as "What's the point of having fun?"
More options
Context Copy link