Being born. Don't want to make that mistake again.
Samvega
joined 1 year ago
Because they care about money, not harming children. This is why we live in a world where there isn't enough effort put into keeping children safe by rich people, because they prefer money to chlidren.
I will wait for humans to decide to feed hungry children.
There is no careful use of language that can stop people from preferring hatred. Humans are machines for making the world worse, and they will continue to do so, and while they do it they will rationalise doing it, and while people get hurt (including themselves) they will blame the victims.
"It's not fascism!" they complain as minorities are scapegoated and children die. Just get used to the fact that anything that is pointed entirely towards harming people for fun and profit is going to attract a range of derogatory words, and maybe think about how to stop humans from hurting humans instead.
Most people want social media to read and talk about the mundane things that are interesting to them (like sports, or their hobbies, or some new cool bar they want to go on, or some interesting places to travel)...
Hey, more evidence that most people aren't worth talking to, nice.
I'm not interested in what content you are interested in.
Yes, this is the kind of thing a terminally boring person says.
Interesting that you think that I may be interested in Threads content.
I wonder if Bing over- or under-estimates the wealth of Bill Gates.
leading you to understand things
I don't understand anything. Therefore I have no ideology.
You have failed to show that it is an ideology. You have explained that you disagree with it, but that's not the same thing.
It's an empirical fact that living beings don't like being hurt. Therefore, it avoiding hurt is good. That's not an ideology, it's reasoning based on observable facts. An ideological position would be "we need to hurt living beings to further our interests". The ideological position involves those interests.
Seeing all living beings as equal (e.g. in terms of prioritising not harming them, just as I would prefer not to be harmed or to harm myself) is about not having an interest, and therefore is clearly not ideological. It's also objectively true, because in terms of cosmological time, the consequences of all living beings become equal.
Will me being infantile stop humans from hurting each other? If not, why would I be motivated to change?
Will me growing up (to stop being infantile) get in the way of my refraining from hurting others? If yes, why would I be motivated to change?
In my infantile state, I can clearly see that - even in a complex world - harming other living beings is wrong. I don't like being harmed, so why would they like being harmed?
Maybe you need ideology to simplify the world. But that doesn't mean that I require it. That's part of the complex world you assert we live in, yes?
view more: next ›
I'd try to help, but I'm not fully sure, either. Sorry!