3 ms·

> risking body parts for a thrill is uncool - Free divers - Rock climbers - Motorcycle riders - Mountain bikers - Sky divers - Skateboarders - Glider pil

> risking body parts for a thrill is uncool - Free divers - Rock climbers - Motorcycle riders - Mountain bikers - Sky divers - Skateboarders - Glider pilots - Base jumpers There is a vast array of body-part-risking hobbies with a spectrum of associated risk. While I’m not one to encourage obvious stupidity, bodily risk is at the center of so many things that humans value, that I think there’s a framing problem by saying this is just uncool. More interesting is to explore why people are drawn to these things to begin with, and to examine why we dismiss some categories of risk as unnecessary or stupid while other socially acceptable risks are part of our daily lives. When I was a kid, I was drawn to model rocketry. I’m surprised my fingers are all still intact, but some close calls quickly reoriented my precautionary measures (I started being a lot more careful). The book “Flow” explores why some people do the things they do, and it seems that engaging in risky endeavors like rock climbing can be rewarding because of the feeling of flow and control one experiences. “Try crazy stuff but be as safe as you can be, and avoid impacting others” seems better than “uncool”, IMO.

mihaic 3y ago
Like some dude said, that's just, like, my opinion. I'm not forcing it on anyone, but I do want a fair chance of trying to convince others of it. I understand that mastery and control can come from dangerous activities, but I can still voice my disapproval of these activities, since you can get the same feeling through safer ways.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  >you can get the same feeling through safer ways. Interesting position which I dont personally think is true. I dont think it can be proven either way, but my counterpoint is below 1) Variability: Different people have different attraction/affinity and passions for activities or lifestyles. 2) Non-fungability: Not all feelings/experiences have equivalent replacements and not all personalities can be modified find equivalent satisfaction in something else. 3) Risk: Given that not all feelings are replacable with similar life satisfaction, individuals can and should balance risk against the life they want. Some feelings and values are worth dying for. (e.g if base jumping makes you so happy you would rather risk dying than live without it, DO IT). This should be celebrated, not condemmed. There are worse fates than death, and I think a safe and unfulfilled life is one of them. Of course everyone's opinion and "general advice" on this depends on if they think the current cultural norm is erroring on the side safetyism or risk-taking behavior. Based on my experience, I am far more concerned about my friends, family, and children stifiling their self actualization by taking too few risk opposed to too many. People's advice will also obviously depend on where they their personal attractions are. For me, many of the things that make me satisfied with my life involved some risky behavior. Someone who's life satisfaction is derived from knitting might feel otherwise, but thats not me. In short: "Different strokes for different folks"
- haswell 3y ago
  I’m not arguing against caution, and I tend to be a cautious person in my 30s, but this can be taken too far in both directions. My point was more that framing this as a thing to judge (implicit in uncool) isn’t ideal and probably less likely to change minds than an exploration of the reasons people enjoy things, with clear examination of the risk/reward, which isn’t going to be an absolute number to apply equally to all personalities and life situations. Many rock climbers are tortured people and will tell you that doing what they do is the reason they’re alive. Having had brushes with dark frames of mind personally, I can understand the willingness to embrace whatever it is that will provide consistent/reliable relief. The binary position (disapproval) misses the broader context. And perhaps there is a less risky alternative to be found, but it seems more likely to be found if explored from that broader perspective.
  - mihaic 3y ago
    Overall, if I myself were to give a single counterargument, I'd actually agree with you. My initial message through was that multiple counterarguments by multiple people need to be made in order to really balance out the perceived coolness of those that risk harm in extreme activities, and I was arguing to not simply shut down the poster that said: >If you are risking fingers, cutting off body parts or taking dumb risks just stop. It's not worth it. It's not cool or interesting. These are the things you regret later.
Clamchop 3y ago
I would tend to agree. It's borderline offensive to me that some snap back with "how stupid" because their threshold for acceptable risk is different and pushing up against it doesn't thrill them. But I nevertheless have hangups with the original scenario as described. It seems constructed to dial up social pressure and exploit it to provoke careless behavior and avoid accountability. Countercultural in a sense (arguably straddling antisocial) but that's not the same as good, and it's nothing like those sports that usually have a culture (hmm) of planning, safety, and consent. Well, maybe not motorcycling and skateboarding so much as the others, but you get the gist. And yet, there's still something appealing about the idea... can't quite put my finger on it, but perhaps I've already blown it off.

mihaic 3y ago

Like some dude said, that's just, like, my opinion. I'm not forcing it on anyone, but I do want a fair chance of trying to convince others of it. I understand that mastery and control can come from dangerous activities, but I can still voice my disapproval of these activities, since you can get the same feeling through safer ways.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
>you can get the same feeling through safer ways. Interesting position which I dont personally think is true. I dont think it can be proven either way, but my counterpoint is below 1) Variability: Different people have different attraction/affinity and passions for activities or lifestyles. 2) Non-fungability: Not all feelings/experiences have equivalent replacements and not all personalities can be modified find equivalent satisfaction in something else. 3) Risk: Given that not all feelings are replacable with similar life satisfaction, individuals can and should balance risk against the life they want. Some feelings and values are worth dying for. (e.g if base jumping makes you so happy you would rather risk dying than live without it, DO IT). This should be celebrated, not condemmed. There are worse fates than death, and I think a safe and unfulfilled life is one of them. Of course everyone's opinion and "general advice" on this depends on if they think the current cultural norm is erroring on the side safetyism or risk-taking behavior. Based on my experience, I am far more concerned about my friends, family, and children stifiling their self actualization by taking too few risk opposed to too many. People's advice will also obviously depend on where they their personal attractions are. For me, many of the things that make me satisfied with my life involved some risky behavior. Someone who's life satisfaction is derived from knitting might feel otherwise, but thats not me. In short: "Different strokes for different folks"
haswell 3y ago
I’m not arguing against caution, and I tend to be a cautious person in my 30s, but this can be taken too far in both directions. My point was more that framing this as a thing to judge (implicit in uncool) isn’t ideal and probably less likely to change minds than an exploration of the reasons people enjoy things, with clear examination of the risk/reward, which isn’t going to be an absolute number to apply equally to all personalities and life situations. Many rock climbers are tortured people and will tell you that doing what they do is the reason they’re alive. Having had brushes with dark frames of mind personally, I can understand the willingness to embrace whatever it is that will provide consistent/reliable relief. The binary position (disapproval) misses the broader context. And perhaps there is a less risky alternative to be found, but it seems more likely to be found if explored from that broader perspective.
- mihaic 3y ago
  Overall, if I myself were to give a single counterargument, I'd actually agree with you. My initial message through was that multiple counterarguments by multiple people need to be made in order to really balance out the perceived coolness of those that risk harm in extreme activities, and I was arguing to not simply shut down the poster that said: >If you are risking fingers, cutting off body parts or taking dumb risks just stop. It's not worth it. It's not cool or interesting. These are the things you regret later.

Clamchop 3y ago

I would tend to agree. It's borderline offensive to me that some snap back with "how stupid" because their threshold for acceptable risk is different and pushing up against it doesn't thrill them. But I nevertheless have hangups with the original scenario as described. It seems constructed to dial up social pressure and exploit it to provoke careless behavior and avoid accountability. Countercultural in a sense (arguably straddling antisocial) but that's not the same as good, and it's nothing like those sports that usually have a culture (hmm) of planning, safety, and consent. Well, maybe not motorcycling and skateboarding so much as the others, but you get the gist. And yet, there's still something appealing about the idea... can't quite put my finger on it, but perhaps I've already blown it off.