A big hearty fuck you to all of you who were too weak to do anything but assimilate in this dystopian society. Too weak to be good. Too weak to break free. Too weak to do anything but adhere to the most crude, selfish, short term motivations. Too weak to be friendly, open, honest. Too weak to be anything but a mere survivalist. Focusing almost solely on just surviving with a few crap diversions thrown in, finding at most one person you'll be real and meaningful with, if even that.

You've made the world the piece of shit it is and you're too weak to face what it is. Too weak to see what it could be. Too weak to do anything but find a way to be happy in dystopia. And thus it won't change. It will never change. You'll only look for change when you run out of food and shelter, otherwise you'll put up with anything. Short of being literally beaten to a pulp there's nothing too crude and meaningless for you that you won't convince yourself is just fucking great.

You have no scope of mind. No ability to see that there must be more than just surviving and some meaningless diversions. But you're slaves who won't revolt. Who've tried to convince themselves this is all for the best. You won't do a goddammed thing outside the social norms.

Lady at work's boyfriend is going to become a coal miner. He'll be working 6 days a week, which with his commute added in will each be ten hour days. Reminds me of asking my mom about my grandfather, asking what he was like. She answered she didn't really know, he was always at work until he was killed in the mines when she was 16. This lady at work's cousin has already been killed in the mines. What does she think? "When it's your time, it's just your time." As if there's nothing that can be done to change the situation. Nothing to do but meakly agree to be a slave and try to convince yourself it's all for the best.

Another woman is planning on becoming a coal miner, again working 6 days a week, like her husband who already does so. She believes that we exist to work and wouldn't even know what to otherwise be doing. The idea of spending time not working is shameful to her. She's a perfectly evolved prole. One of many. Such is our evolution.

Things were actually better in old England compared to here today in America where now everyone is a worker. Most of the people now crowing at the top of the pile of dead human corpses all work long hours also. They mostly got to the top because they worked their asses off. Because that's what they like to be doing. Their job is their life and so it is for pretty much everyone. In old England you had far more people who were free to just be idle. People who just inherited fortunes. Yes, the majority were stuck in virtual slavery but at least a very few had free time for art.

Now most of the people who potentially could have sufficient free time to make some beautiful thing, some thing beyond mere survival, got in such a position exactly because they liked working so hard, and thus like robots continue working so hard, accumulating massive wealth they don't even know what to do with. Wealth and free time is now far more likely to be wasted on people who have no idea what actually to do with either other than to try to make sure others see how rich they are. The inequality and injustice of inherited wealth was actually better than this.

And so we evolve to love doing nothing but working absurdly long hours in jobs that shouldn't define us, but more and more, do. More and more of today's slaves want to be slaves. Those who don't being far less likely to successfully reproduce.

The happy man is defined by his job and wouldn't know what to do if he wasn't working. The happy man doesn't hardly speak to his neighbors and likes it that way. He's got his food, shelter, sex and TV, what else could he need? He sees anyone step outside the social norms and he thinks they must be nuts or possibly some kind of criminal.

...The above was written with a temperature of a 102 a bit after taking 2 lortabs. After getting the irregular heartbeat I started eating grilled cheese sandwiches as they're such a comfort food for me having grown up on them. As a result I caught the flu and felt all around awful. Really, really bad.

Anger, frustration, hatred. Such may be all incredibly crude, violence based feelings, but it's probably just too much a basic part of who we are.

To some extent I've been avoiding negative thoughts lately and instead enjoying small things. Doing so reduces tension and makes the days pass nicer. And also removes my motivations, my sense of direction as far as writing. Removes my purpose for being eventually.

So that eventually I apparently use feeling awful as fuel to help me try to remember. Including anger because it is an awful feeling.

Something vaguely like that.

One has to still believe in people's potential while recognizing the stupidity behind their actions. One has to somehow still believe in their potential while recognizing their willful ignorance. If you don't believe in their potential then you're basically believing that they're evil, that they must be punished in order to learn to be good, that they must have fear in them to keep them on the straight and narrow.

Must somehow believe they have potential despite their willful ignorance. Despite their closedmind.

But how do they really have any potential when such is the case? In the face of the closed mind what is left really but anger and force?

The mind is closed because of fear. Have to reduce their fear enough that it opens...

Men aren't as good at recognizing when women are angry.

Also in the specialization of tasks, tribes in which the men became somewhat cold and stoic and thus better warriors were more likely to survive. But then women that were better at communicating were needed to stop the tribe itself from falling apart from violence.

Sex.

The male praying mantis may continue to thrust after his head has been chewed off but I think the vast majority of beneficial sexual mutations are related to perceptions that the activity is increasing one's distance from nonexistence.

-like with having friends in general we perceive we've got a bit more power/security, more so the closer a friend they are...
-information, what's underneath those clothes? etc... And to some extent we do look exactly how we are... or better put, we have an ability to decipher looks...
-usually men liking to feel in charge, a sex game where they feel more powerful than they otherwise actually are. Unfortunately is rape not just a question of a greater degree of such a thing?
-...I dunno... information (=power=increasing distance from nonexistence), feeling connected (=power=etc), etc...
-altruism, making the other person happy in turn, showering them with love, makes us happy....
-...and why are the most regular features so often considered the most beautiful? Ugly stuff. It's about conformity. And, having our genes combine in a way that will result in a hopefully well conformed child. And so short women always want tall men for example. And so hindus value fair features (caucasians are the most average looking). Japanese die their hair red. Black men love white women... and asian women... But it doesn't work in reverse so well because the power balance gets out of whack. The poor asian man feeling too physically inferior to a black woman. (And there has to be a balance though... what is it again that the women generally has in order to keep things from getting too out of balance? I don't remember at the moment... was it sex? Ugh, I dunno. Oversimplifying.)

The perception of beauty is tied right into conformity. We are constantly controlled by the need to conform without realizing it.

There is still something of the headless praying mantis thrusting away tied into human and animal sex... I think of certain things and get an erection. There's no sense to it but it feels good. Oh well.

--

What were the three main negative emotions? Anger, sadness and....???? Luckily I wrote this down somewhere... But anyway, sparked by rideflame's blog to reremember...
We feel sad when we want others to help us. We feel anger when we perceive someone is closeminded.

Not remembering the third primary negative emotion is the number one reason I have this blog. No need to look it up right now though. If I ever came along and found this blog deleted (which the owners reserve the right to do at any time) that would be awful.

--

My first day as a nurse was yesterday. Went well. I can't quite put my finger on just why I like work so well. Was wondering if being the only guy harkens back to some primitive thing, where I vaguely feel like the alpha male. I don't think so... There are men who work there on night shift. I switch to night shift very soon. They seem just as nice as the women. I really don't think I care that I'm surrounded by people who physically are female. But there perhaps is something about the different way of thinking. Occasionally it hits me how bizarre it is, for me of all people to be a nurse, surrounded by women. I am not the sort of person one would expect to be a nurse. Somehow it seems to be working out really well.

To change the mind of a closeminded person through the use of reason:

1. You must overcome their suspicion that your "reason" is really just something devious, like the arguments of O.J. Simpson's lawyer. You must overcome their suspicion that ultimately you just want to win arguments at all costs and control people.

If you feel that they are being closeminded you must hide your natural urge to turn to frustration, annoyance, and anger. The urge is natural because when someone is being closeminded reason is generally shut off and this leaves only force. But you must hide such honesty because the minute you express it their mind closes that much more. Because then they really see it as you wanting to force them, to control them.

A truth seeker practices the golden rule and tries to not hide things from others. One never hides things exactly because one wants others to reach all truths the same as you hope to do. But exactly by not hiding things these others see the threat of force and shut down their minds from any learning.

2. You must make it clear that no punishment awaits them if they admit they're wrong...

3. Show them that they don't lose their personal identity by changing their mind. Compliment them about other aspects of who they are. Make them feel other aspects of their persona are what's important about them.

4. Make truth become the way to happiness. An impossible task. The truth so often means focusing on negatives instead of just ignoring them. To ever actually be happy for a given moment we must indeed ignore all sufferings, both are own and that of others. For a person to truly think that truth is the way to happiness, it means looking at the negatives a lot more. We are all spending every moment trying to be happy. The question is to what degree do we focus on long term happiness or immediate short term happiness. Ignoring all negatives right now, means achieving immediate short term happiness. To think that truth is the way to happiness means focusing instead so much more on the long term.

'I had always wanted you to admire my fasting,' says the Hunger Artist. 'We do admire it,' says the impressario who employs him. 'But you shouldn't admire it' - 'Well then we don't admire it,' says the impressario, 'but why shouldn't we admire it?' - 'Because I have to fast, I can't help it.' - 'What a fellow you are,' says the other, 'and why can't you help it?' - 'Because I couldn't find the food I liked. If I had found it, believe me, I should have made no fuss and stuffed myself like you or anyone else.
Kafka, The Hunger Artist

This ultimately is probably how one instead focuses on the long term. By having a long period of time where they cannot be happy right at this moment. Ignoring negatives was not possible. So they learned to focus on the too far future and instead associate truth with happiness instead of the "fake" smile.

But zombiefying people in order to force them to focus on the longer term is no good.

You must instead recognize just what monkeys we are. Realizing to what a huge extent all disagreements are still really solved solely by force in this world. You must address them not like a civilized person (a zombie) but like the monkey they are. You must tiptoe around them concerning any disagreement, doing your best to "not make any sudden movements" lest they think you're really just trying to force them. In this way they hopefully won't automatically turn the disagreement into a battle of wills and seeing who can successfully force the other to change.
-
"Why do you always have to win arguments?"
"Huh? I'm just telling you the reasoning behind my point of view. You in turn tell me the reasoning behind yours. Why would you think I'm just trying to win an argument?"

Definitions

The seven 'deadly sins': Pride, Anger, Envy, Sloth, Gluttony, Lust, Greed

Gluttony, greed and (excessive) lust are all variants of the same thing. They're all attempts to move away from nonexistence which end up being excessive. (Although I'm not too sure when (if ever) lust gets excessive exactly. Fellini's Casanova?) They are straightforward attempts at happiness that are failing.

Sloth or laziness is an existential problem where you can't really see the point in doing anything. No matter what you do you won't actually be moving away from nonexistence so why bother?

Envy is where you see that someone else has some valuable thing that you perceive possessing would move you away from nonexistence. Envy is tied into hate/anger as we're hardly planning on using reason to take away the thing from the person. Instead some form of force is used.

Anger is about wanting to use force because you perceive that some person stands between you and decreasing your distance from nonexistence. And you think they can't be reasoned with.

(Excessive) Pride is more interesting. The dichotomy is pride versus humility. But it's quite close to being closedminded versus openminded. Excessive pride is like arrogance, being too sure of yourself, too convinced you're right, that you're wonderful, etc. All of that is basically just closemindedness. While being humble instead can mean seeing that you could be wrong, that you hardly know anything, etc, which means basically being openminded.

But of course what they really wanted was for people to bow down to god, considering him all powerful and themselves as disgusting bugs in comparison. This idea entirely trumped the openminded/closeminded idea that would have been of such great use. So people think of pride versus humility and they picture some imaginary god that is so so great compared to them. They're pitiful in comparison and should meakly follow the rules he has already laid out for them. And so that's what they do instead of seeing pride versus humility as being the same as closedminded versus openminded. And so they're humble before an imaginary god but arrogant before all real people.

-

'Unhappiness' is the perception of moving closer towards nonexistence. The essential types are anger, fear, sadness and existential nihilism (boredom, laziness...). When you perceive that you are moving towards nonexistence is there any alternative than these 4 essentials?

To try to overcome your feelings of anger (or hate, frustration, annoyance...) you can at least recognize what's going on. You think someone can't be reasoned with so you're subverting to your monkey ancestry and wanting to basically beat the crap out of them to force them to do as you say.

It is at least better to feel anger then fear. With anger you've at least got an idea what you actually want to do to remedy the situation. Some entity is causing you to move closer to nonexistence and they need some force! Fear is on the other hand perceiving that you're moving towards nonexistence and being very doubtful about what action you can possibly take.

Sadness is the form of fear where you want help from others. Sadness is better then fear right up till others reject you/will not give you any help. Although at least then you've got a bit more to work with to turn instead to anger...

One can get away from anger, fear and sadness by going instead to existential nihilism. (Instead of being stressed, realize that life is ultimately a short and meaningless thing.) And then when they get sick of that they can hopefully instead go get stressed out again.

Otherwise one can attempt to change their perception of the situation. (By actually changing the situation or by some other way.)

I'm not entirely sure where disgust/revulsion belongs. It is the considering of some thing that we perceive would move us closer to nonexistence but that we don't really perceive it to be that much of a real threat. And/or we take a step back and try to look at it 'objectively'. It seems it can be tied to fear or anger.

i gather) is the transcript of a TV advert for "Hefty" bin-bags -
__________________________

Actress 1) If I had a man like Hefty…
Actress 2) If I had a man like Hefty…
Actress 3) He'd always be coming up with new ways to impress me
Female Voice) Introducing Hefty The Gripper. The first kitchen bag with the stretch and grip top so it hugs the can and won't slip

Actress 3) oh, and he'd know how to hold on tight
Actress 1) …then he won't cave under pressure
Female Voice) Nothing is made like the gripper. It stretches, grips, and stays put so it can take it like a man.

Actress 3) and when I'm done with him…
Actress 1) (shown dropping a bag of trash into a garbage can)
Actress 3) Ciao baby
Actress 2) Bye-bye!
Actress 1) So long!

Female Voice) The Gripper – new from Hefty. The strong dependable type.

__________________________

I think that it's.... horrible. (O.o) really. Morally obnoxious, plain and simple.

I think it also exemplifies the whole 'disposable' society mentality....

So many people nowadays expect (or at least aim) to live in a way where they just throw away anything they don't want, with no guilt, repercussion or responsibility involved.... just maximum convenience for them.

:-P I guess that some people revel in applying such a superficial mindset to relationships too, hoo boy... I wish that I was cool like those people.... Gee, I guess that I'd better hurry up and get me some of those cool hefty bin bags, huh ?

Especially since I'm female, so am clearly the exclusive target audience for the advert.... which also doesn't manage to come across as being blatantly sexist, at all.

Because of the violence in our societies, women can be very afraid to dump men, so being able to do so as easily as throwing out the trash, without worrying about repercussions is seen as empowering.

OTOH we do live in a society where ultimately if a person just suddenly dumps you with no explanation, you're expected to just not even care, to the extent you instead are filled with moral outrage and want some kind of explanation at least, you're considered a stalker.

Ultimately with so many people stuck together instead of living in tribes of a hundred or so people, what people do is instead of trying to work on relationships, they just bounce around from person to person and when they aren't quite happy with someone, why bother talking about differences at all? Just say, "this isn't working out, bye."

If that isn't considered an adequate reason, if the other person wants more explanation than that, then they're a stalker. And they need to just piss off, there's millions of people, what the hell's their problem? Just go away. Geez, what a pyscho.

...so it's potential violence (anger, hate, etc... stalking) on one side and indifference on the other. And with millions of people living together, there's nothing for it but that indifference must be considered OK, as it would be so very difficult to not be indifferent to most people when there's so many of them. While of course violence, anger, hate isn't considered OK for obvious reasons.

But speaking unpractically, speaking philosophically, indifference is actually worse then hate, anger, etc. In that hate is ALWAYS a reaction to indifference. Or at least a reaction to the perception of indifference.

Which isn't to say that hate, anger, etc is a good thing. It definitely isn't. But generally I try to respect it more then indifference. I try to understand that it arose from the perception of injustice thanks to indifference on some person's part.

But the social norms of our society go the opposite way. Indifference is basically OK while expressions of anger are very seriously looked down upon.

Looking at the planet as a whole, indifference is the real problem. Millions of animals are killed daily not from hate but from indifference. The destruction of the environment is a matter of indifference. Ultimately the suffering of billions in poverty is the result of indifference.

...the idea of having an actual society though means not being indifferent to those around you. It means you don't just dump a man like you're throwing out the trash. The commercial, while 'empowering' women, is ultimately praising an anti-society social norm. A social norm which destroys the idea of people having meaningful connections to each other in a society.

In India they have arranged marriages. This is seen as horrible to people in the west. But there is a beautiful thing in it. It is similar to the guy from a commune I met who says the members were married just at random. Again, sounds horrible (and the two examples: India and the commune) are of course quite different in some ways, but both show the ideal where people are Openminded. And thus open to discussing differences and seeing where they may be wrong and ought to change in certain ways, see how some of their actions maybe are causing harm. And furthermore Openminded in the sense of being able to see the good, the beauty in one another. And thus being able to love anyone.

This openmindedness, suggests that if something isn't working in a relationship, you should talk about it.

But when you've got tons of people thrown together, people will instead learn to be closeminded. And from a closeminded point of view, there's no reason at all to discuss differences as it's accepted that people don't change. Thus no point in pointing them out. This closemindedness comes about in a number of ways. One way is simply by using force to get people to do what you want them to. They learn that being 'wrong' equals pain, thus they try to avoid ever changing their minds.

Another way is just simply with tons of people around you, there's no need to work things out with people. Just drop them and find some other ones that are more identical to you.

For our society to work we have to learn to not be indifferent to one another despite the fact that there's so many of us. We have to learn that despite the fact that hate, anger and violence certainly aren't solutions, they aren't the real problem. The problem is indifference.

Negative reinforcement or force instead of reason helps cause people to view realizing they're wrong as some very negative thing. They see 'wrong' as equaling punishment and thus want to avoid being wrong and one way to do so is avoid admitting/facing ever being wrong.

Anger and force help ensure a closeminded world.

I'm in an intensive 2 year nursing program. And as a part of it we have this internet system where right now we have to communicate online with one another. Normally we just do things face to face. The online communication brings back to me how quickly communication can break down and people can jump to assuming the worse of one another. Here I had a small issue with someone not turning their work into me in time, and me having to wait on them, etc. It's someone that in the flesh seems nice enough. No problem. A civilized person not looking to jump to thinking nasty things about people. I suppose looks can be deceiving... But, anyway just dealing with this person online then, instead of in person... really adds all kinds of negatives. Perhaps it's just me. But in the absense of adequate info I do then take into consideration potential negatives that in normal interactions almost always can be put aside...

And so I need to ease way up on the internet discussion boards. I go to them because I'm somewhate eccentric and lonely where I live. I have 22 saved under favorites. They're mostly negative one way or another. Horrible cliques of imps attacking one another, vapid useless chat, or just mostly dead/dying.

Participated in the most ridiculous internet discussion board thread I've ever taken part in, in like 10 years of these awful things. A guy started a thread that contained pictures of him with a type of insect inside his house, talking about one hiding out in his beard, etc, like they're his pets. He wasn't very clear... mentioned something about equality of species or something... But the type of insect it was... appears lays it eggs inside other animals. According to wiki it supposedly does this even with humans. So... I tried to be nice and point this out, while also saying equality of the species and all was great, I'm an vegan myself.

...The guy responds by attacking me. Saying I'm trying to put him down. Reduce him to a larval host. And he goes on to mention he communicates telepathically with these insects.

...OK. So this guy's crazy. It happens. What starts getting more bizarre... is someone else comes after me. They say "that insect doesn't do that". They insinuate I've edited wikipedia to say such a thing, etc.

At this point how does one not at least feel frustration? I understand that this second person is used to discussion boards; probably has many years of 'forumwarz' under his belt. (forumwarz.com) Such disgusting attacks are just the norm for him.... I guess. :( I'm not actually frustrated with him. (And understand here, frustration is a form of anger, I don't believe in it.)

I'm frustrated (angry) at "god".

The positive is believing in a god I suppose. But... who says god is smart? He can be stupid too. Thus, he's not evil. Thus there's still no evil to believe in...

But there's a default... if I make him stupid... then I jump to frustration with whoever it was that created such a stupid god. The turtle on the turtle's back.

I'm still angry at god about this. Brings to mind Sergeant Lounatic in the Bucket of Truth episode of Upright Citizens Brigade. Not on youtube unfortunately. Season three still not released for sale despite cult popularity. Great show.

Was like a demon last night so angry. Still am. So frustrated with you God.

And it's so ridiculous. Me being angry at god. I've heard people say such things in the past and thought it ridiculous. I think at times I was doing the same unknowingly even while thinking other's were ridiculous for it.

But with other's its about how their loved one has been killed and so on. I haven't experienced that and can't say much. Even imagining something happening to my wife is so horrible to me. But still I just can't imagine being angry at god over it... I don't know. But I do get angry over the little things which add up and up, I get frustrated. What a world you made you evil person you.

Eh, I'll get over it. Or not. Horrible mood last night. Slightly better now.

Cussing

And finally... I had always thought it ridiculous, this idea that certain words are forbidden. Whether it be saying 'Voldemort' (actually in a world with magical words shouldn't certain words be forbidden?) or any 4 letter word. OK, I suppose the n word, fine then. But the f word just expresses how you feel, why instead are you supposed to use a word that doesn't express as well how you feel?

When asking anticussword people about this, they of course can't give any logical reason at all. It's just mindless assimilation. If you aren't mindlessly assimilating it either means you're too stupid to manage it or you thumb your nose at the culmination of mankind's history. Either way you're a disreputable person to be shunned. Follow Tradition!

Funnily enough though, my whole cold clinical thing about getting rid of anger completely, means also getting rid of cuss words pretty much. As there's just no reason to express frustration or anger if you're not actually ever feeling any. But supposing you still are, should you hide it? Should be quite careful. Hide it from most certainly.

The earlier thoughts about anger/hate/belief evil; my eradication of such thoughts; was time well spent. Very well spent.

Was helped by the fact that it's an absolute. I didn't conclude that it was a question of degree; certain situations, to a certain extent. If I had, it probably would have been too complicated for my mind to manage over any long term.

---

I can't stand the internet. I don't like the coldness. The lack of meaningful connection. It's a pulling back of the curtain. An awful truth.

I want to write a song called, "Put Your Clothes Back On."

On lyrics: I suck at writing them it seems. Which comes right back to keeping a sense of mystery, (IOW not pulling back the curtain, put your clothes back on). In lyrics it seems keeping mystery, being vague somehow is better so often. Which is a gimmick.... Or is it? Could it be just a nice sense of humility? Doubt it. Thinking awfully lately.

Also I'm too polemical.

The lyrics could just straight up be about how ugly the human body actually is with a few faint allusions to it possibly being about something more.

It seems it has to have at least a double meaning... in fact I suppose that is a huge part of what makes music enjoyable. The idea of more than one feeling being expressed simultaneously. If I write a song called Put Your Clothes Back On, what would be the feelings? There could be a sense of hopelessness. That of turning away from truth because actually the truth isn't any good. Nothing can be learned when looking at it. (This is just art here. Not what I truly ultimately think.) But it has to have more than one meaning. Just sounding hopeless won't do it. I could try to mimic the happiness of the exact opposite; some usual love song/making love. I could make it sound like entering a new period in life of great happiness, where we've agreed to turn away from the truth. There would have to be a track that was saying, "This is horrible!"

What are songs that come to mind? Christian Death's Romeo's Distress.
http://www.amazon.com/Only-Theatre-Of-Pain/dp/B0010B6O76/ref=pd_bbs_sr_5?ie=UTF8&s=dmusic&qid=1217829270&sr=8-5

It was a feeling of being hurried to the point of frantic and finally having a pay off in the end. Finally reaching happiness for your trouble. I want a hurried frantic feeling during which various imperfections of the human body are unfortunately pointed out. Then finally "the pay off" is the solution of turning away.

So the beginning would be hurried and in a major key but dissonant. At the point the solutin is reached, the song will start slowing down. Possible switch to a minor key, (is that possible?) and become consonant. This part will be happy and lovey while also something saying, "this is horrible!" and a feeling of hopelessness in the background. (But not too polemical, perhaps a little something that was earlier suggesting to keep up hope that now is expressing reservations...)

Just an experiment that won't work well; an example of trying to write more symbolically than I usually manage. So start off aspiring to lovey happy. Something in a major key that is kind of hurried and keeps falling into dissonance. Then the solution which gives consonance while falling into a minor key? Perhaps slowing way down (into giving up, death?)

---

The problem with writing symbolically is that it's such a failure in the sense of understanding how short I fall. Knowing how much I have to default to "duh, it sounds good." But just doing that from the beginning turns creativity into something a tad too random. This being "symbolic" at least puts on a cloak of meaning (over the truth); at least makes it appear as not pointlessly random.

This blog ruins mystery that's for sure.

It's hard to like the music of someone I think is stupid and harmful. There's a few people out there I wish I hadn't of gotten to know a bit. Doing so really ruined their music for me....

So I'll try to write such a song. Fall far short probably. But without a doubt I'll still manage to write a "song".

Silliness, silliness, silliness...

"Evil" is just a not quite determinable degree of indifference

This definition of 'evil'/'profound stupidity' (knowing you're causing a greater degree of harm and just not caring), just means being indifferent to suffering. All hatred is actually directed at what is perceived to be indifference to suffering. But provided it's even correct that the person is being indifferent, they are doing so because of this so called "profound stupidity" (which could use a better name I suppose) and not because they are "evil". The rest, and that's a hell of a lot, is just mistakenly assuming other people are "evil" when they're not.

This mistaken perception leads people to try to punish people (use force) instead of using reason.

I've been amazed at how badly vegans treat one another. Perhaps it's because while they might be less indifferent, they are just as bad as everyone else at incorrectly perceiving "evil" in others. And when they do, they turn to anger and force pretty much the same as everyone else.

Does labeling 'evil', "profound stupidity" actually change anything? Yes, the person won't be full of anger. Beyond that? Because you're not showing anger the possibility of reasoning with them is improved IF it turns out the perception of "profound stupidity" was incorrect.

It doesn't totally solve the problem. But it does help in at least these two ways.

The two fundamental problems of this world are indifference to suffering and the misperception of indifference to suffering.

The only thing to lessen the first is training young minds to empathy and increased understanding. For the second it can be helpful to not think in terms of evil/hate/anger. Further simply improving communication through better honesty. The main thing holding back honesty is the reality of what a violent world this is where force is so prevalent.

Expressing anger

Just supposing one was still devo and occasionally forgot and went back to believing in evil, and feeling hate and anger, in the spirit of honesty should they express this anger?

Never express anger unless you are very close to actually using some force. Expressions of anger are Only a message that you think the person in question is evil (causing harm and just not caring, not possible to be reasoned with). All such expressions do is potentially cause the person to feel fear and thus you have indeed reduced the interaction to Force instead of Reason. We're all devo and feel anger anyway, but unless you're actually about ready to go beyond Reason, you should simply be Dishonest and Hide this.

Honesty isn't always the best policy. Finally. For the first time in my life I'm saying this.

For me you could express anger and it'd be OK. I have empathy and can see the pain which caused the anger and that you've reached a point where you feel like I'm just not even trying to understand. But apparently the vast majority of manking isn't like this. Everyone else sees the anger and assumes the worst; they assume force may be coming any second, and apparently that completely takes precedence over any attempts at empathy.

Express sadness only. And if that doesn't work, float away on the postindustrial wind.

In response to harm

In response to harm there is sadness and/or anger. Are there any other alternatives? Crying requires belief in god, does any sadness at all require that...? Not sure. Is there some other undefined thing near sadness? Should sadness be broken down into different things? Is there a sadness that beseeches god or some person to help and then is there another kind of sadness?

The other is anger. For that one must believe in evil and thus think force is necessary. (Because the person knows they're causing harm and just doesn't care, thus reason will do no good; Reason versus Force).

What can cause a turn toward anger instead of to sadness? Some people are disposed to usually go towards anger instead of sadness. Of course, the main thing is simply believing in evil. That may explain it. Would you ever just get sad instead if you felt the cause of the situation was evil? If you feel that no one really is to blame, or the situation is just such a hard to thing to fathom that you can't see who could be culpable really... You could then turn to god for help, IOW turn to sadness.

Is there any other reason to turn to sadness? ...? Just in general if the situation is beyond the ability of humans to fix it. Or so far has been. If it seems hopeless. With no belief in evil there is no anger. Yet that only leaves sadness (if any generally negative emotion at all...) What does one feel if they don't believe in evil yet don't believe in god either? (And of course aren't just intellectualizing all the emotion right out of everything.)

Pity. Pity is a sort of sadness. Just a sadness for some other person; this profoundly stupid person. Sadness doesn't require belief in god. It's just that as a situation becomes hopeless we naturally start thinking about gods.

In this world of force, men with pride turn to anger instead of sadness.

To sadness there is potential crying; and men don't let some person who caused them harm, cause them to cry. They don't even let some person who caused them harm, cause them to be sad. Instead there is anger.

And he who turns to the rightwing adaptation first, wins. (He stabs the other guy in the back first, wins.) Anger is the rightwing adaptation.

The sad man is the loser (the jackals all laugh at him). The madman still has a chance...... :((((((( Or so he thinks. When really he's a bigger loser than the sad man.

Hate

To summarize: with thinking of evil as instead a sort of "profound stupidity" there is little to no reason in today's world to believe in hate. Hate is only of use if you think you need to physically apply force at a moments notice. Hate was probably more needed in the far past when physical violence was more of a way of life. Back then there may have been more reason to think of certain harmful acts as being based on "evil" instead of considering them a sort of profound stupidity.

To feel hate towards someone means believing in evil. Is there ever a good, logical reason to believe in evil? Does instead calling 'evil', 'profound stupidity' really change anything at all? If we instead call it profound stupidity, does the hate go away?

The way we treat one another can be loosely divided into two ways:
1. The leftwing way, where we try to reason with people.
2. The rightwing way, where we try to use force.

Does the rightwing way get good results ever?

If we believe that some people are truly incapable of being reasoned with, then the only way to get them to stop or start doing something, is to resort to force and/or threats of force.

Capitalism, BTW, is based on this concept. The idea that people won't diligently work unless they have the threat of unemployment/no money hanging over them.

Ideally we could always reason with people. But I must sadly admit it seems quite often that doing so doesn't get anywhere. The "rightwing" way often seems to be needed. Often force seems to be needed.

And so hate seems to be tied into force, is hate also needed then? Could it actually serve some useful purpose? Did we evolve it for a useful reason?

If a person is profoundly stupid (evil) or for that matter just stupid (I use the word 'stupid' very deliberately instead of ignorant as I'm talking of the situation where it definitely isn't just ignorance,) then perhaps it is unfortunately useless to reason with them. In which case there seems to be nothing for it but to turn to force. As this need for force is the same whether they are stupid or "evil" (profoundly stupid), hate does not naturally go along with force as there is no need for hate if an action can be labeled as just stupid.

In this way hate does not go along with force.

But force, which is also violence, is often better applied if you get angry, if you feel hate. The hormones get running, the blood vessels constrict, you can much better jump up and apply force.

So, although logically there is no need to feel hate in the face of harmful acts, as they can all be thought of as just different types of stupidity instead of being evil, any kind of stupidity unfortunately means that force is going to be needed. Profound stupidity (evil) may mean much more force is going to be needed as the person just flat out doesn't care that they're causing harm and is more likely to cause a lot of harm if you try to intervene.

And in order to apply that force in the past, it was very useful to get angry in order to be better able to apply that physical force. It was very useful to believe in evil in order to feel hate and thus get angry.

We have evolved to think of many harmful actions as evil instead of stupid. Thinking of them as evil caused us to feel hate. Feeling hate made us angry. Getting angry made us better able to physically apply the force that was necessary to combat the "evil", (really just stupid,) action.

It does seem that unfortunately hate serves a purpose. Or at least it really used to serve a purpose.

If I manage to remove all belief in evil from me by instead thinking of "evil" as profound stupidity, then I find I no longer feel hate. But in losing my hate towards such harmful people, I'm making myself less able to apply the force that at least in the far past was a very real part of life.

In today's world, the need for human beings to use their physical bodies to apply force upon others is mostly gone. As such, hate serves very little useful purpose. It mostly just stresses out the body and shortens the lifespan.

In today's world hate serves very, very little useful purpose. If we don't believe in evil and instead call it profound stupidity then there is no feeling of hate at all. Unfortunately we seem programmed to believe in evil. The mind must conquer the "instincts" in order to get rid of hate.

We do unfortunately still have to resort to force sometimes. But it is always the last resort. When we have to resort to force we have, to an extent, failed.