Fruck
Lacks all conviction
Fruck is just this guy, you know?
User ID: 889
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
Too late "Lizzardspawn" if that is indeed your real name, you have revealed your power ot level. A bold move in a room full of thelemites like the motte.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
Have you played phantom liberty yet? Being a stealth hacker in PL is op as fuck, legendary quickhacks are ridiculous. My set up goes invisible and slow mo if anyone sees me and contagion plus iirc cyberware malfunction drops entire rooms of enemies, with every death cutting any potential trace progress by a third. It's a lot of fun, but it does feel cheap.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
I figured it was parody when you said in the beginning the world was just because everyone was equal, but I thought you were looking for responses in the same pithy quasi-religious style. What kind of responses were you hoping for?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
It's not that I distrust this conservative organization's study, necessarily, but at the least I wonder if they would ever have published it had it shown the opposite results. That kind of factor already introduces bias.
That kind of factor is present in literally every study ever, you can always wonder if the authors just printed self-flattering bullshit. Going off the replication crisis, it's even a safe bet.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
It doesn't matter that free will doesn't exist, you have to act as if it does anyway.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
It does, but I worry that that's why mainstream Christianity has gone so astray and is currently falling apart. We made a measure a target. Basically I'm with hlynka, we need to abolish the victimhood narrative, not rework it - and while there might be versions of Christianity which support the victimhood narrative, they are flawed imo compared to our borderer shtick of personal responsibility and finding meaning in helping others.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
Privileged/disadvantaged is exceptionally close to bully/victim, but it isn't the same. Being a victim doesn't make you righteous, it increases the possibility, but that's beside the point because victim hood isn't what's important - what is important is that you help people who are suffering so they don't have to suffer.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
That sounds like it would make for an excellent movie.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
Aren't we talking about on the same level as making them eat vegetables or waking up at night to look after them? My point is about expectation childless people have of looking after kids vs the reality as understood by parents - expecting parents I talk to often seem to expect every second diaper change to look like tequila night at the burrito barn.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
This is so little trouble it's barely worth the mention.
It does seem like it's going to be a massive deal before you've done it though.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
So what? Why does anyone need to know where phrases came from or who popularized a particular trope or whatever?
I don't know, why do we need to know what air is or how it works? I'm assuming you know how air works here, but I think it's a safe assumption. Hell, I'd bet on it.
Also you appear to be contradicting yourself. If you totally understand and agree with this -
Culture is what unites us. Our literature and plays and films and songs allow us to communicate with each other through metaphor and allegory, and when people can communicate prosodically they think more alike and don't have to spend all their time explaining in jokes and slang, or adding throat clearing in deference to the people who refuse to participate in the culture.
Then you shouldn't need me to explain why it is necessary to maintain a connection to the artifacts a culture is based on.
We do teach nonfiction, even if it's not focused on as much as I'd like, and yet I don't have the impression there is an epidemic of kids bullying other kids for sharing a name with a bad person they read about. Since I don't expect there to be a way to resolve this difference in intuition, I'm quite comfortable letting the other readers decide for themselves which of us is most likely correct about this.
For starters I was, as I said, talking explicitly about when crafting metaphors and allegory, which we don't do with non fiction. Even when we do, like the Chernobyl miniseries, or Oppenheimer, we fictionalise elements which can potentially hurt others. But also I would note that almost everyone related to Hitler and Stalin changed their surname.
No, I'm not worried they're going to get bored. I removed the boring fiction books, remember?
That's funny, but still a poor argument. You said we shouldn't teach stuffy old Shakespeare because kids won't understand it or be interested in it. Setting aside the fact that Shakespeare is performed to this day (indicating both understanding and interest), interest and understanding didn't matter to you prior to that part of the argument.
Who said that a demonstration of the magnificence of our civilization needs to come in the form of fiction?
You did. You still are it seems. I just asked you to name three works from the last five years better than King Lear or A midsummer night's dream, I didn't say they had to be fiction.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
I totally get that and don't disagree at all. I just don't see how reading plays from 400 years ago or novels from 150 years ago does much for that. We all effortlessly absorb our culture by simply growing up in it and living in it.
You only say that because you have been saturated in a culture which bases 75% of its popular storytelling on remaking plays and novels from centuries ago. Without Shakespeare we don't have 10 things I hate about you, She's the man, west side story, the lion king, ran, brave new world, and way more than I can list here. Not to mention all of the phrases and sayings and aphorisms we use every day, like it's all Greek to me, love is blind, in such a pickle, heart of gold, cruel to be kind, pound of flesh, and wild goose chases. I mean for goodness sake, we even get for goodness sake from Shakespeare!
I'm not I understand. You're saying that people would be upset about, say, learning about the Irish potato famine or Newton or the causes of WWI or the invention of the telegram because some students might be related to some of the people involved in these incidents? I'm genuinely not trying to strawman or make you look stupid, I'm just totally lost. Maybe we're talking about different things?
Yeah I'm saying you can't fashion allegory and metaphor out of real people's lives without upsetting people. Well you can for positive things of course, but not negative things. Like, pretend Helmedhorror is your last name. But it turns out the most vicious guard at Auschwitz was a distant relative also named Helmedhorror or some guy named Helmedhorror was a soldier in a war who got scared and ran away, getting his squad killed. Kids are vicious, and they will use that to ruin your school life.
Why should a high school teacher be teaching morality? That makes me bristle.
They literally always have and always will. At least if they are using old books and plays to do it they can't exclusively jam a bunch of current year bullshit down their students throats, and if some try their students will be able to find smarter and more sensible writing on the subject.
Because if students can't understand it and aren't interested in it, it's going to be harder to teach them whatever you're using it to try and teach them (e.g., grammar, reading, metaphors, whatever). Additionally, they're going to have a rather dim view of the magnificence of their own civilization if that tedious and stodgy sludge is what we put in front of them as the supposed crown jewel of it.
I feel like you missed the point of this by skipping the next sentence. You removed all the fiction from the school because it's 'entertainment' and now you are worried they're going to get bored?
Also please list three works from the past five years that you believe demonstrate the magnificence of our civilisation better than King Lear or A midsummer night's dream.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
I also don't think there's any place for literature in the curricula of any non-elective classes in middle school to high school. Literature is entertainment. It can be used as a vessel to teach reading and writing, but you could just as well do that with nonfiction. So you might as well be teaching them about things that are actually true or things that actually happened. This is doubly the case for older literature (e.g., Shakespeare or anything from the ancient world), which is not something that is easy for modern readers to understand or be interested in. Frankly, I think the emphasis on it borders on snobbery in many cases.
I understand that the point of literature has been completely lost in the regular world, but it is very blackpilling to see not one but two motters consider it entirely useless and fit for the rubbish heap.
Culture is what unites us. Our literature and plays and films and songs allow us to communicate with each other through metaphor and allegory, and when people can communicate prosodically they think more alike and don't have to spend all their time explaining in jokes and slang, or adding throat clearing in deference to the people who refuse to participate in the culture.
You can't do that with non fiction, because people get really upset when you use them or their family as examples, not to mention removed relatives and very common names. Beyond that, real life doesn't play out like stories, which makes it much harder to work into teachable lessons, fables and parables, and those are the tools with which we teach morality.
As for older literature - for starters why do you care what modern readers can understand or are interested in? You got rid of 50% of the school library on the basis it was entertaining. Why not make them suffer The Tempest or The Odyssey? Seriously, I would be much more on board with you guys if you said "only old shit they won't find entertaining", partly because they would actually find it entertaining, if not at first (and I really think you haven't thought through the implications of removing all entertainment, so students have no respite from studying fucking fractions at the rate of the class' slowest students) but mostly because it would rebuild an understanding of the world that would allow us to communicate across generations, instead of intra-generational like we have now.
Also that last line about snobbery makes me think this is more personal than you are letting on.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
It sounds like a pyrrhic victory to me. You get rid of the, what, quarterly bitching about upvotes and downvotes, but in doing so you take away one of the public's few methods of influencing the discourse and put it on the mods, who are overworked already.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
Cripes I forgot how long he'd been doing this. Fair enough.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
Wait, did you ban him? Quincy sent me here so I might be missing something, but there's no hammer next to his name. I want the hock stuff to stop too, but I think he should get a warning before being banned, especially if you're banning him indefinitely.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
Would you have thought that if you were just hearing about it for the first time? Because to me it sounds like a euphemism for a manhole cover, or a circular piece of cardboard covered in bandaids, gum and used condoms.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
You want to give the mods more control over the conversation? Who are you and what have you done with Arjin?!
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
Oh it's definitely implausible, that's why I called it conspiracy theory talk. It wouldn't surprise me if it turned out to be true though, after all the other implausibly convoluted manipulation techniques the USG has employed over the past century.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
Which is why they were told dumb kids need the phonics method or they will be left behind. And did we mention which races have more dumb kids? You're not a racist are you?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
Fair, I can't say my experience with current thing followers is any different. I was under the impression that it's not that being able to read can save you though, it's the not being able to read leaves you at the mercy of those who can. I figure if you can't read, what can you do? Follow instructions, or work out everything from first principles based exclusively on the information in your memory. And when you are forced to follow instructions out of necessity you also implicitly trust the person who instructs you. Same with maths really.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
I swear that fragmented phonics bullshit actually discourages kids from reading. My sample size is similarly useless, but of the eleven kids I know who can read, the three who were taught that way all hate reading and do it slowly, while the two who were taught the whole language method love it (and the other six all learned to read before they started school, and they of course love it.) And while I know it's conspiracy theory talk, it wouldn't surprise me if it was deliberate - an illiterate population is a more manageable population than a literate one after all.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
11mo ago
Who was allegedly being made uncomfortable by the piece of steak? The most fragile vegans in the world? Or is it an inside joke?
Not me. The only thing I hate more than shapes is the idea of rotating them. It's unnatural. If God wanted shapes rotated he would have oriented them differently in the first place. I'll start trusting shapes when someone makes a hexagonal barbecue.
More options
Context Copy link