handypolymath

You should know that I've written and erased a number of answers before coming to this conclusion.

Anger is not an emotion unto itself. Anger is an expression of fear, of helplessness, of frustration, of grief. Where there is Anger, there is something deeper, like the roots of a vine that might strangle you. If you cannot reach the roots, you will not kill the vine.

Anger, though, serves a purpose- to inspire urgency, to act, to move in the defense of self or others, to call out injustice.

Anger is only an evil when it is acted on without discipline. When it is allowed to become a reflex motivator, when it skips higher thought and speaks directly through the teeth and the hands. This is anger without control.

This question has forced me to ask myself if there is a difference between anger and hatred.

Is hatred irrational? Anger may be as well. Is hatred directed to the innocent? Anger can be, too. Is hatred akin to cruelty? Anger, again, is not innocent of needless suffering.

So what purpose must hatred serve, in pursuit of a just world? What can hatred do that anger cannot? What does it mean to hate something?

I'm not a scholar. I haven't studied these things academically. But thinking of my own experiences, and remembering the exact circumstances and contexts and the nuance of every little piece on the board, I can tell you that there was revulsion, and there was myself, and there was forces beyond my control.

I think that Hate is when anger fears it cannot win. I think Hate is when you are faced with something that you want to believe you have possibility of overcoming while suspecting in some way that you cannot. I think that Hate is when you are afraid of the thing that enrages you.

Hate, if you ask my opinion, is a bit like being mauled by a bear, knowing that you will not survive, and going for the eyes regardless, because it doesn't get to grow old and happy if you can't either.

Good for the continued existence of your peers. Bad for everything else.

So I suppose, if you are in a position where a bear is mauling you- metaphorically- hate probably isn't your biggest obstacle right now.

But if the bear is out there somewhere, on the other side of the forest, and you are sitting in a hole somewhere in a stiff rigor of rage and spite and terror, then I think it may be best for you to tell yourself now:

The bear will kill. Killing is in the nature of the bear, and a bear is helpless to change its nature. Knowing the nature of the bear, I will stay away from it, and deter it, and stay away from its path, and I will pity it for the nature it cannot compel itself to resist, and for the wonderful things it will never experience.

I do not need to fear the bear, because I understand its nature. I do not need to hate the bear, because I needn't fear it. All I must accept is that there is a bear, and it is wise to stay away from it.

It's unfortunate that the bear must live this way. It's unfortunate that you share your forest with a bear and not something kinder. But if you cannot change it, and it cannot change itself, then all you can do is accept that it is a bear.

this is NOT because of blocking screenshots, it's because of HOW streaming sites use your computer's hardware to optimise performance, which means the thing rendering the video and the thing capturing your screen aren't the SAME thing. so they can't talk together.

Р isnt P

the big finding of the whole experiment was that both food and comfort are not just substantial, but required for healthy development. in the 50s the popular theory was that mothers should touch and hold their babies as little as possible to avoid “spoiling” them, especially right after birth (which explains uh. a lot about boomers as a generation).

Harlow conducted his experiment to investigate this idea, and he found that physical comfort nearly eclipsed the food as a need in the baby macaques. They would go to the wire mothers only when they were hungry, sometimes even trying to reach the milk bottles without letting go of the cloth mothers, because they so badly needed both. Harlow’s other experiments showed that being deprived of parental comfort and enrichment as babies dealt lasting psychological damage to the macaques. and today we know that human babies can just up and die without enough skin-to-skin contact.

we're looking to create an AI policy, and when we were talking about this, my boss (older millennial) was genuinely shocked to hear that younger people do not (seem) to view AI positively (a la the recent commencement speakers being booed)

please rb for larger sample size!

Question 1/3

Thank you for helping with this data collection. Please rb for as big a sample as possible!

Eight of Swords and Two of Wands