thejdizzler
2hr ago
I have had second dates, but not with Catholic women. I think the issue is my heterodoxy.
I mean Jung is no saint either. He had sex with his patients for "therapeutic purposes".
Where does Jung say that Satan needs to be raised into the trinity? I remember reading something about how we need to embrace the divine feminine, but don't remember the Satan part.
But speaking of Satan, the whole idea of Satan has always been a little weird to me, especially from a historical literary perspective. The first time we see Satan (apart from the Garden of Eden retcon) is in the book of Job, where he isn't a fallen angel, but in fact one of God's strongest soldiers. Before this the false pagan idols of the Canaanites, Babylonians, and Egyptians provide enemies enough for YHWH. Then he's not mentioned again in the New Testament where he's this unseen dark mirror of Jesus. It's not until the Renaissance with Paradise Lost that we get the "traditional" rebellion and fall from heaven story from Milton.
Then there's also the teleology. Why did God create a being such as Satan that he knew would rebel/sin/become evil? Of course you can pull the free will argument here, but I find that much less convincing than in the case of humans. Even if it is Satan's "choice" to be evil, it seems pretty cruel (or pretty non-omnipotent) to allow Satan to continue to causing suffering to himself and others with no possibility of redemption. Some Christian universalists believe that this isn't the case, that in the end, even Satan will be redeemed and bow down before Jesus. This could be one interpretation of Jung (that Satan needs to be redeemed and raised to the trinity).
The other possibility, which I think Jung actually probably meant, is that Satan, like Jesus is a part of who God is. This throws out the omnibenevolence part of YHWH, but fits in a lot better with the text of the Bible and also the world that we actually inhabit. Evil and suffering are necessary parts of creation, and at least it seems to me that they are their own ontological thing, rather than just the absence or inversion of good like many Christians claim (I think Schopenhauer has a good simple argument about this that I found convincing. Think about the pain of stubbing your toe, a minor but all too common evil. Is this pain an absence of good? No, as the pain is clearly a positive sensation. Is this pain an inversion of good? Maybe, but it's not like you often have a really good feeling in your toe). For Jung this process (the integration of the shadow into the church in the same way that God integrated Satan into himself) was vital. Now in practice, like you, I'm not sure I agree (seems like a great excuse to do terrible things), but it sounds nice in theory.
Not to mention that YHWH clearly changes character over time. YHWH in a lot of Genesis is an insecure and jealous dick, but by the New Testament, and perhaps even before, he's become a much more mature and wise figure. I like Jung's explanation of this (if we are built in the image of God, it makes sense for God to also have integrate his own shadow, which he does in part by incarnating and being killed as Jesus, but also through his various covenants with Noah/Abraham/David/Job). But of course this violates the omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent axioms, so it's heresy in pretty much any church.
Perhaps the resistance to this kind of textual/historical analysis (or even openness to debate) is why I haven't been to church for a couple months. Once you start to poke holes in this stuff and are met with hostility rather than answers, it's pretty hard to not see what a house of cards it all is. "No matter how tender, how exquisite... A lie will remain a lie..."
thejdizzler
23hr ago
I could not disagree with this harder (+the data backs me up). Maybe it’s slightly different 5-10 years older than me, but there are so so many single men in my social circles. Sure some of them have some social skills to work on, but they’re mainly average guys with average hobbies. Some of them haven’t been on dates in years.
Are you a woman by chance? Perhaps that might explain our different perspectives.
thejdizzler
1d ago
Very relatable. Especially the romance stuff. Despite what a lot of the retvrn posters on this forum would have us believe, it's pretty grim out there for average looking guys, even if we are religious (I've attending catholic mass for ~4 years now, with a recent lapse, and have been active in the young adult community, and absolutely no second dates!). And it's not like I'm some basement dweller either! I'm out of the house most weeknights, don't game (except for twice a month with my college friends and we play terraforming mars of all things), I'm really fit, and I think my social skills are at least average. Sure I could probably lock down some tik-tok obsessed land whale, but what exactly is the point of that? I'd rather eat at a restaurant by myself and jerk off after.
In terms of my career, sometimes I really enjoy my PhD and the process of science in general, but the way I see academia going fills me with dread for PI-ship. It's all status jockeying, like you observe, and a lot of the science produced isn't even real! I like my hobbies too (running, fermenting, and language learning), but the internet and hyper-competitiveness of everything puts so much pressure on me to "improve" or "monetize" these that I don't think they would be very much fun anymore if they were all I had.
Luckily I believe that some sort of collapse is coming in the next 20-50 years, so we won't be in this state for much longer. Just sucks that it has to occur during the part of my life where I'm supposed to form a family.
thejdizzler
2d ago
Interested to hear your thoughts on Stormlight. I don't think I'm going to like it, but I promised my friend group I would read at least the first book.
thejdizzler
2d ago
So what are you reading?
Working on my annual re-read of Battle Cry of Freedom and staring the Stormlight Archive.
thejdizzler
2d ago
One of the more impactful books I read this decade was Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman. The books argues that our media environment, primarily TV in the time that this book was written, encourages political infantilization, rhetorical deskilling, and an obsession with appearances rather than substance of policies and candidates. Parts of this argument are undoubtedly true: Postman gives the example of the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858 where people stood for 7 HOURS to listen to the two politicians duke it out over the nitty-gritty policies related to slavery as an institution at that time. I couldn't see very many people today, much less your average social-media addicted normie (probably the equivalent of a rural Illinois farmer in the 1850s), paying attention to anything for 7 hours, much less grasping complex policy arguments.
But at the same time, I wonder how rose-tinted Postman's perception of political culture in the antebellum period was. I'm doing my annual re-read of Battle Cry of Freedom, and this time around it really struck me how much heavy-handed, or even blatantly-illegal shit that the pro-slavery faction of the nation in the 1850s got up to in the lead up to the Civil War. The Filibuster invasions of sovereign Central American countries were sanctioned by many politicians in the South, and the individuals responsible got away scot-free because of the bias of the jurors. The Fugitive Slave Act and related Dred Scott and other Supreme Court rulings were attempts to basically force the North to accept slavery throughout the whole country. Pro-slavery forces from Missouri tried to falsify elections in Kansas to force admission of that state as permitting slavery, despite a nearly 10:1 ratio of yeoman farmers:slaver holders in the territory. And this isn't even getting started on the morality of slavery itself. Of course the more extreme abolitionists also got up to some indefensible stuff (mainly thinking John Brown and his backers), but the majority of the insane policy prescriptions and rhetoric came from below the Mason-Dixon Line. All this is to say that basically, it seems to me that the undoubtedly superior attention spans and verbal reasoning skills in general didn't seem to do much to help policy-makers decide the slavery question. In the end force of arms had to do that.
I see a lot of parallels between the South's position in the 1850s and perhaps surprisingly the pro-immigration crowd in California/other Blue States. Of course there are perhaps more moral parallels with the extreme abolitionists, but in terms of contempt for the constitution, federal authority, and inability to understand the game theory of their opponents, the anti-ice protestors remind me a lot more of Jeff Davis and Robert Toombs than William Lloyd Garrison or Abe Lincoln. In both cases, it doesn't seem that attention span, or verbal IQ helped either side convince their opponents or find a peaceful solution to the problem.
Are there other examples that you can think of where the attention span and deep thought that Postman aspires to have helped cities/nations get through tough political challenges? Or are these tools only really useful in justifying what one already believes in a slightly more pretty way, leaving the actual battles over fundamental differences to be fought on the battlefield.
Postscript: One difference that I do think is real between today and the 1860s is the willingness of young men to actually put their lives on the line for what they believed in. Say what you will for John Brown, or Stonewall Jackson, but they were willing to die to fight against (or for) slavery. There were quite a few university professors and students in the Union Army. I don't think you would see this kind of behavior today from either side of the political divide, but especially from the left.
thejdizzler
4d ago
I like this framing!
thejdizzler
6d ago
So does NoFap/Semen Retention actually do anything? Or is it all a bunch of bullshit?
thejdizzler
7d ago
I wonder if it's because cyclists in general hate stopping. Decelerating and accelerating again on a bike is really annoying, and being forced to do repeatedly might be the source of the annoyance. Not that makes this acceptable behavior in a pedestrian space.
As a cyclist I think most of these interactions could be avoided if the roads were made safer for none cars. I'm not going to zoom through a public park if I can use a nearby road without feeling like I'm going to die.
thejdizzler
7d ago
Again, more anecdotes, not actual statistics. I don't doubt that you have had and continue to have these terrible interactions. But the statistics show that cars have at least 8x the rate of this behavior on average. Maybe we just don't notice because it's been so normalized, but the statistics don't show that ill behaving cyclists are any worse than the worst drivers.
thejdizzler
7d ago
I was hoping for a reasonable discussion from this place, but nope, once again the cyclist hate is out in full force in the comments to this very reasonable and balanced top-level post. Not one actual statistic about the actual danger from cyclists to pedestrians (vs. cars), just anecdotes about the one time a cyclist was really reckless and dangerous on the road that really pissed the poster off. As you state, cars are 8x more deadly to pedestrians (and this is not including to other motorists). And cyclists are supposed to be the arrogant, crazy, and entitled ones?
And that's also missing the fact that the real problem seems to be E-bikes, as you suggest, not analog bikes. Ebikes/mopeds/etc. are fundamentally different from analog bikes because you can easily reach much higher top speeds (whereas this usual requires being pretty experienced on an analog bike), you don't have to expend enormous amounts of energy stopping and starting (because you have an electric throttle), and your vehicle weighs much more, meaning it represents a much bigger risk to pedestrians than a 10-20 pound analog bike. Lumping analog bikers in the same category as those electric motorbikes is insane.
I understand the appeal of cars. They are fast and convenient and give you a lot of independence. But as a national form of transportation, they are incredibly wasteful of resources and space, kill tons of people, and make our cities and communities dysfunctional. And in a future on the downslope of fossil fuels, they won't be possible at the scale that they are now. I wish we would consider how to reduce our car dependency when we still have the surplus energy to do so, but I don't think these kinds of issues are on many people's radars here or in the wider world, so I doubt that this will happen.
thejdizzler
8d ago
Can you link the video? Sounds like something I need to hear.
thejdizzler
10d ago
As RandomRanger says below, sometimes you have to think about more important things than winning the next election. The debt is a very serious problem that will be resolved either by fiscal responsibility or by default. Both of these are going to hurt, but one is going to hurt much more than the other. If the voting public can't look beyond the immediate present and choose the least worst option (rather than merely punishing the party that institutes fiscal responsibility), then we do not deserve democracy and would be frankly better off in a political system where people with low-time preferences aren't allowed to dictate policy. I have some hope that maybe people aren't quite as stupid as they seem. Last time we talked about politics, even my dad who is a staunch entitlements defender recognized that we need to do something about the deficit. Being a budget hawk is coming out of conspiracy territory and into the mainstream.
Will something actually happen to prevent default? I unfortunately doubt it. There won't be higher taxes for at least the next 3 years, and Trump seems unwilling to actually touch the big spending categories. And I sort of see why. Can't cut defense because we are on the brink of WW3. Can't cut medicaid or social security because your voting base will revolt. The theatrics of DOGE conveniently dance around this fact, and I have been disappointed to see how many otherwise very on the nose bloggers/posters here (John Michael Greer is at the top of the list) are unable to see that. Cutting the NIH and NSF budgets, while it might feel good, doesn't fix the problem (and actually makes it worse as you actively contribute to brain drain of talent). We basically need either the boomers to die much faster than expected, for them to take one for the team and not collect social security (I would eat my hat), or some kind of massive improvement in health of the general population that greatly reduces medicare/medicaid expenses. None of these are going to happen, so we are basically fucked.
thejdizzler
11d ago
I think it's because Henry II (the first Trastamara) was technically a bastard. Makes it pretty hard to uphold the divine right of kings when you usurped the throne from your half-brother.
thejdizzler
11d ago
I just finished my 102nd book in Spanish yesterday! I've been learning spanish for about 5 years now, and reading has been a great way to improve in the language (the other things I do these days are watch Netflix/YouTube and take lessons once a week with a tutor on iTalki). Full list of books here, but some favorites below:
Olvidado Rey Gudú by Ana Maria Matute. Mix of Game of Thrones and a fairytale, nothing like it in English. The central premise is that the main character has been cursed (or blessed) with being unable to love. There also is no English translation, so you have to be able to read Spanish/Italian/German to be able to enjoy it. Longer review here
Crónica de una muerte anunciada by GGM. This is a who-dunnit but rather than a search for the murderer it's a search for the reason that the whole town allowed the murder to happen. This one has a pretty unreliable narrator, and has been increasingly fun on re-reads as I try and piece together the real motivations of the various characters.
Los cuerpos del Verano by Martin Felipe Castagnet. This is a short science fiction novella about a world without death where bodies are recycled. Probably one of the more depressing (but realistic) takes on trans-humanism I've seen in science fiction. My longer review here.
Castilla en llamas by Calvo Rúa Alberto. Non-fiction about the rise of the house of Trastamara (whose most famous monarchs are Isabella and Ferdinand). Probably one of the best arguments against monarchy ever: every time the King of Castille dies there's a civil war for succession in this period. The book did a good job of storytelling rather than just name dropping facts and people.
Translations of Joe Abercrombie: I love the first law trilogy, and these are some of the best fantasy translations I've come across.
thejdizzler
12d ago
The thing is all of them matter to me, although I guess I have to think about prioritization
50 miles a week is my "normal" mileage, although I haven't been up there for about 4 months because of injuries. I'm at about 35 right now so this is doable. 50 probably will take about six hours total. I'm a very good runner (2:35 marathon, 4;17 mile) and decent swimmer so this should be fine.
I needed to add more context for the Anki stuff! When I say 3k spanish cards I mean get up to that total. I'm at 2700 right now. I'm at 405 with Italian so it would only be 400 extra cards total. And my Spanish is quite good now (I just took the B2 test), so I think I'm ready to add Italian.
I have about 100 (free) subs on substack. I think posting there helps me think more clearly (as does here, but there's not a possibility of being paid for being a motte poster!
I should have also clarified about the reading. The Spanish and English reading are combined, so any reading I do for Spanish counts towards both goals. 400k words is about ~1600 pages, so this would be about half of my total goal!
More negative goals might be a good idea too (quit this, limit that). I have a soft goal of only watching one YouTube video a day. Hopefully this will save me some time.
Savings rate means save at least 20% of my take home income for the month. Basically means cutting down on spending.
Thanks for the feedback!
thejdizzler
12d ago
Chores spreadsheet basically just means doing my chores on time. I've got stuff like changing kombucha and yoghurt cultures and dusting/vacuuming that have longish time horizons that would be better if I spread them out, hence the spreadsheet.
thejdizzler
12d ago
One of my problems in general, but certainly when it comes to self improvement/wellness is trying to do too much at once. For example, here is my list of goals for this month:
• Chores spreadsheet
• 400k words read Spanish
• 2 substack posts
• Read 3000 pages total (~100/day, roughly 8-10 books).
• 4 Spanish gramar exercises
• Up 3k spanish Anki cards, 500 italian Anki cards
• 300 minutes of meditation total (average 10 min/day)
• 20 days fap free
• Swim 4 days a week
• Build to 50 miles a week running
• Savings rate of at least 20%
This + goals at work seems to overwhelm me. Are there specific goals in this list that you think I should focus on? Things that I should cut? Is there a better way to approach goal setting in general?
thejdizzler
12d ago
I think dating is a big part of it. There is no motivation for me to grind or hustle or finish my PhD fast because I don't see girlfriend/wife opportunities coming very easily.
thejdizzler
19d ago
Yea I'm gonna be careful. Unfortunately extra weight makes me significantly slower. I gained 20 pounds between spring 2023 and this spring and my times have suffered a lot. I'm trying to lose 3/4 of that weight (I was 155 in 2023, 175 earlier this spring, aiming for somewhere in the range of 160-162, which would put me at a BMI of 21.5 or so). I could lose more but then my swimming/body image will start to suffer.
thejdizzler
19d ago
Seems like we are in the same boat, although I'm not sure how interested in dating I am over the next few months, mainly focusing on trying to finish the PhD and healthmax.
I think you should get Lasik or something similar if you can, but glasses can also be attractive to a certain demographic.
thejdizzler
19d ago
Noted. Tan and carrot juice are both in the cards because it's summer baby!
It used to work when you could do this in the context of socially sanctioned courtship. The man knows he isn't being played too hard because no one is having sex with the woman. Women in turn get to get more exposure to a man and test his level of interest commitment. I think it's a W for both sides. Certainly women seem to still like it today (why is Pride and Prejudice still so popular).
More options
Context Copy link