3 ms·

No you were not lied to. and thank you for heeding the good advice to not be a jerk. Whether you see it or not, the vast majority of people /are/ generally goo

No you were not lied to. and thank you for heeding the good advice to not be a jerk. Whether you see it or not, the vast majority of people /are/ generally good, and more importantly they want to be around other people who value being good, not being a jerk. Folks who are all about money and power hang in different circles; I can’t speak to their happiness levels, but regular folks steer clear of them and warn others when they get burned. Stay on the good team. There’s plenty of us and we welcome you. What can I do to help?

blooalien 2mo ago
> What can I do to help? Nothing you can do to help me specifically. I'm a lost cause at this point. I see no way back from where I'm at. I literally see zero hope for the future of humanity or this truly amazing planet we were fortunate enough to populate for a short while. If you truly do see some sort of future that doesn't end in dystopia or apocalypse, then you can help by doing everything in your power to work tirelessly toward contributing to that future. That's all. I'd help if I could, but I'm physically, spiritually, and emotionally entirely too "broken" in every way at this point to see any way that I could do anything that would turn any of this mess around in even the slightest way.
- energy123 2mo ago
  Viktor Frankl's body of work deserves a plug. Meaning can be found in the worst conditions, it's quite subjective. With meaning comes contentment. Buddhist teachings also deserves to be mentioned. Suffering comes from clenching to what the external world should be instead of just accepting how it is.
- cobbzilla 2mo ago
  Sending thoughts of hope. I am reminded of what Fred Rogers would say in times like these. Fred Rogers often told this story about when he was a boy and would see scary things on the news: "My mother would say to me, 'Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping.' To this day, especially in times of disaster, I remember my mother's words, and I am always comforted by realizing that there are still so many helpers — so many caring people in this world."
  - blooalien 2mo ago
    > Fred Rogers often told this story about ... If he were still alive, I'd vote Fred Rogers for Emperor of Earth all day long. One of the rare few humans who I'd truly label a genuinely good person. Not a hateful or greedy bone in that man's body as far as I've ever read, seen, or heard about him. I suspect the same of Jim Henson, too. Probably Carl Sagan as well. Maybe also Neil deGrasse Tyson for a more modern (still alive) example of a "good person" (as far as I can tell)? I believe "good people" still exist, but they're sadly not in positions of "power" (and probably wouldn't want to be). A shame, because the ones we've got in charge of things right now won't be happy until the planet is literally on fire from pole to pole and one of them has all the everything all to themselves...
worthless-trash 2mo ago
> Whether you see it or not, the vast majority of people /are/ generally good No mate, the entire world is -not- like this. Thank your lucky stars you haven't had to deal with this.
- bigstrat2003 2mo ago
  Nobody said the entire world is like that. We know it isn't. But I think the parent poster is correct that more people are good than bad in this world.
Gareth321 2mo ago
> Whether you see it or not, the vast majority of people /are/ generally good I've always found this sentiment to exist exclusively in privileged and overly educated, left wing, Western circles. It is an extension of the philosophy built around tabula rasa, and posits that individuals are not to blame for their actions, but rather society. When someone harms another, it wasn't because they wanted to harm another, but because society failed to instill the correct values. Even a cursory inspection of history would disabuse one of this notion, but the myth persists. I suspect it's because it clashes with another fundamental privileged and overly educated, left wing, Western belief: that inequality is always caused by injustice. That it cannot be a normal and expected outcome of people making different decisions. This fanciful ideal suggests that we should all be equally successful, with the same possessions and jobs and homes and values. Back here in the real world, with zero exceptions, we know that power inevitably corrupts even the most chaste and moral of people. Humans are both a product of their environment and possess free will. Both. At the same time. Many people choose to use their free will to harm others, and in places where the rule of law fails, this proportion explodes. This suggests that some very large proportion of society chooses to not hurt others not because of some innate morality, but because of the consequences. Of course I understand all of this conflicts so deeply with your beliefs that you will choose to dismiss them out of hand. Feel free to consider my comment nothing more than some superficial thoughts.
- Otterly99 2mo ago
  > Back here in the real world, with zero exceptions, we know that power inevitably corrupts even the most chaste and moral of people. Humans are both a product of their environment and possess free will. Both. At the same time Isn't it a bit contradictory? If corruption really is an inevitable consequence of power, then there is not much free will involved. It's easy to think that some people choose to harm other as a result of free will, but even something minor like bullying usually hides some personnal struggle (like home problems, revenge from previous bullying). Even if you take the extreme cases of psychopaths like serial killers, they all have a troubled past and lack of guidance. Note that I am not excusing their behavior, nor do I claim that all troubled people become psychopaths, but I think in general we should accept that we have much less free will that we would like to admit, and that a lot of our behavior can be traced to a wide range of elements out of our control such as: genetics, epigenetics, culture, immediate family, random events.

blooalien 2mo ago

> What can I do to help? Nothing you can do to help me specifically. I'm a lost cause at this point. I see no way back from where I'm at. I literally see zero hope for the future of humanity or this truly amazing planet we were fortunate enough to populate for a short while. If you truly do see some sort of future that doesn't end in dystopia or apocalypse, then you can help by doing everything in your power to work tirelessly toward contributing to that future. That's all. I'd help if I could, but I'm physically, spiritually, and emotionally entirely too "broken" in every way at this point to see any way that I could do anything that would turn any of this mess around in even the slightest way.

energy123 2mo ago
Viktor Frankl's body of work deserves a plug. Meaning can be found in the worst conditions, it's quite subjective. With meaning comes contentment. Buddhist teachings also deserves to be mentioned. Suffering comes from clenching to what the external world should be instead of just accepting how it is.
cobbzilla 2mo ago
Sending thoughts of hope. I am reminded of what Fred Rogers would say in times like these. Fred Rogers often told this story about when he was a boy and would see scary things on the news: "My mother would say to me, 'Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping.' To this day, especially in times of disaster, I remember my mother's words, and I am always comforted by realizing that there are still so many helpers — so many caring people in this world."
- blooalien 2mo ago
  > Fred Rogers often told this story about ... If he were still alive, I'd vote Fred Rogers for Emperor of Earth all day long. One of the rare few humans who I'd truly label a genuinely good person. Not a hateful or greedy bone in that man's body as far as I've ever read, seen, or heard about him. I suspect the same of Jim Henson, too. Probably Carl Sagan as well. Maybe also Neil deGrasse Tyson for a more modern (still alive) example of a "good person" (as far as I can tell)? I believe "good people" still exist, but they're sadly not in positions of "power" (and probably wouldn't want to be). A shame, because the ones we've got in charge of things right now won't be happy until the planet is literally on fire from pole to pole and one of them has all the everything all to themselves...

worthless-trash 2mo ago

> Whether you see it or not, the vast majority of people /are/ generally good No mate, the entire world is -not- like this. Thank your lucky stars you haven't had to deal with this.

bigstrat2003 2mo ago
Nobody said the entire world is like that. We know it isn't. But I think the parent poster is correct that more people are good than bad in this world.

Gareth321 2mo ago

> Whether you see it or not, the vast majority of people /are/ generally good I've always found this sentiment to exist exclusively in privileged and overly educated, left wing, Western circles. It is an extension of the philosophy built around tabula rasa, and posits that individuals are not to blame for their actions, but rather society. When someone harms another, it wasn't because they wanted to harm another, but because society failed to instill the correct values. Even a cursory inspection of history would disabuse one of this notion, but the myth persists. I suspect it's because it clashes with another fundamental privileged and overly educated, left wing, Western belief: that inequality is always caused by injustice. That it cannot be a normal and expected outcome of people making different decisions. This fanciful ideal suggests that we should all be equally successful, with the same possessions and jobs and homes and values. Back here in the real world, with zero exceptions, we know that power inevitably corrupts even the most chaste and moral of people. Humans are both a product of their environment and possess free will. Both. At the same time. Many people choose to use their free will to harm others, and in places where the rule of law fails, this proportion explodes. This suggests that some very large proportion of society chooses to not hurt others not because of some innate morality, but because of the consequences. Of course I understand all of this conflicts so deeply with your beliefs that you will choose to dismiss them out of hand. Feel free to consider my comment nothing more than some superficial thoughts.

Otterly99 2mo ago
> Back here in the real world, with zero exceptions, we know that power inevitably corrupts even the most chaste and moral of people. Humans are both a product of their environment and possess free will. Both. At the same time Isn't it a bit contradictory? If corruption really is an inevitable consequence of power, then there is not much free will involved. It's easy to think that some people choose to harm other as a result of free will, but even something minor like bullying usually hides some personnal struggle (like home problems, revenge from previous bullying). Even if you take the extreme cases of psychopaths like serial killers, they all have a troubled past and lack of guidance. Note that I am not excusing their behavior, nor do I claim that all troubled people become psychopaths, but I think in general we should accept that we have much less free will that we would like to admit, and that a lot of our behavior can be traced to a wide range of elements out of our control such as: genetics, epigenetics, culture, immediate family, random events.