anything harder than wearing masks
this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2024
78 points (89.0% liked)
Asklemmy
44152 readers
1114 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I don’t think we will ever have a society that is truly saved from class warfare. I think that the upper classes will always exist in some form and they will always oppress the vast majority of the population, with varying degrees of brutality. I also think this is the most important issue in our society and must be dealt with. It’s depressing.
In Marx's own idea the point were class warfare is no more is when our civilization can satisfy any needs of anyone.
It would be the ultimate goal of communism, perfect equity through infinite automation of all resources.
Then they would only be art, philosophy, science and social activities.
Except, as long as there's limited resources, fighting for it is our nature. To the point of having to much if may be.
Considering how little we actually know, how much we are still figuring out today, how wrong we once were, and most definitely still are on many things, about said nature, the naturalistic argument is IMHO rather weak. The argument silently assumes too many things, at least with our current knowledge - that human beings do actually have an inherent nature, that said nature is uniform enough across the whole species to make that generalization, that said nature is inevitable and can't be evolved past or rationalized against, that it always was the case and will always be, etc.
Yeah I feel like human nature is actually cooperation.
It definitely is a big part of our nature as social creatures.
Although we can cooperate with our group and fight against another, hence the consistent wars throughout history.
I think human nature isn't one sided.
But you're right in that cooperation is the most effective (and desirable) way of survival.
Definitely true.
I think the hypothesis of a nature both in human actions and society as a whole does have enough merits to be a good starting point.
Were I think there is a lot of unpredictability is on conditions of living and technologies.
Technologies especially, evolve so much quicker than society or human nature.
I would say recently our technologies twisted some of our own nature. For instance how we reproduce in such a controlled way.
Not only this but we do now more than ever things not because of our nature. And it's also been put into very unique situations.
A great example is social media (including Lemmy itself). We have access to communication so far from us it created very unique communities.
If humans have a nature, then humans will always have that nature by definition. “We” might get beyond that nature, but it won’t be “us” after that. It will be our descendants.
And not like “sons and daughters” but rather “our evolutionary descendants”.
As for humanity, we exist in a particular set of inescapable challenges, which define what it is to be human.
There's no problem in society that can't be fixed. But the problem is there's too much conclusion without proper understanding
Getting consent to creating a life from a unborn child. Every human being was raped into existence by their parents.
Rent is due in 7 days.
I don't know if that's a problem with society so much as it is a problem with reality.
...or a problem with time and sequences of events.
load more comments
(8 replies)
Human beings. The issue is humans.
We truly need those trisolarians to speed up.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I understand the point in OPs post, but I disagree with it based upon evidence we have available to us. I think first and foremost it is important to mention (I dont have the studies linked but it shouldnt be hard to find) that teenage drug use overall is trending downward, with that including underage alcohol use/abuse. If younger generations use it less, the problems caused by alcoholism will be less prevalent as time goes on. Secondly, weve been putting up with drunk drivers for a while but (as our younger generations have been told for about 20 years now) the consequences for drunk or impaired operation of a motor vehicle have become more and more severe. I do believe alcoholism is something that can and will be phased out given enough time. The only thing that is still a mystery is what vice is going to replace it, and whether it is going to be better or worse.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Alcohol abuse is a symptom of trauma. Trauma begets trauma. That's the thing never solved. Take away alcohol, it'll find another avenue.
Not to mention it occurs naturally in rotting fruit. It would be like attempting to ban photosynthesis.
Are we gonna outlaw yeast, too?
Believe me someone will try.
Eventually biology itself will be banned because of how un-controllable it is. All that will be allowed will be silicon components manufactured by a central authority or assembled under centrally-approved code.
During prohibition in the US, there was inoculated fruit juice being sold with the warning like: "do not leave unattended for 2 weeks at room temperature, as it may ferment".
Stay away from my bread.
Weed is illegal in many parts of the world, as are psychedelic mushrooms.
And those are even harder to make consumable than fruit literally fermenting on a tree, or yeast getting into some sugary drink.
So unless we’re gonna get rid of leavened bread and cut down every Marula tree we’re not getting rid of alcohol.
Mushrooms just grow here in the grasslands. Only problem is harvesting season is mostly in the autumn. So you need te dry them.
But (magic) mushrooms growing in the wild are pretty common in north-west Europe. ( The species is found in a lot of places psilocybe semilanceata ) of course there are many more and you don't even have to wait to get fermented.
Still even I can just pick them they are still not allowed here (in the Netherlands)
True, but yeast spores are in the air, and if you leave an appropriately sweet and sterile liquid open it will just.. make alcohol. They use this technique in Belgium to harvest wild yeast for Lambic.
So until magic mushrooms start showing up inside my house I still don't consider it equivalent.
In NL there's a loophole: the fruit (paddo) is illegal, but the mycelium (truffle) isn't.
Studies have shown that not all alochol abuse is trauma-related.
That's an interesting article. I appreciate that they mention that the studies may be flawed because they attained wildly different data, probably due to methodology. They also mention that people with personality disorders are often not caught by these surveys.
Did you not read it? Personality disorders ARE caught by the studies. The article references a 2020 study by Elizabeth A. Evans et al., which explicitly examined the prevalence of personality disorders among people with opioid use disorder. It states, “55.1 percent of women and 57.0 percent of men with opioid use disorder were found to have a personality disorder, such as borderline, antisocial, etc." Also, the article mentions findings from 16 studies on antisocial personality disorder among people with alcohol use disorder (AUD). Seven studies explored borderline personality disorder in AUD populations, with prevalence estimates ranging from 6–66 percent and a median of 21 percent. These wide-ranging results reflect the inclusion of personality disorders in the research.
I'm certain you misspoke?
The first half of the article focuses on the biggest study, the NSDUH
SAMHSA’s annual National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). NSDUH does not measure different mental health conditions individually, and probably fails to catch personality disorders.
That's where I saw the information.
That's one survey, you said "these surveys" (plural) which is why I was confused.
I was mistaken. It is the biggest and most discussed survey though so I still think it should be mentioned.
Sometimes alcohol abuse is just addiction. Trauma soon follows, though.
Crime. There'll never be a world without it and at some point society will have to realize that there's an "acceptable level of crime", beyond which any further measures to reduce it would be unacceptably authoritarian.
Fix poverty and you fix crime. I mean there will always be people with severe mental disorders that make them violent or deadly, but this could also be potentially handled by making complete mental health check ups part of universal healthcare. People who are likely to become violent could be separated from the population and potentially cured.
I remember the case of a 6 year old girl who was adopted from a situation of severe abuse, violent, sexual, and neglect. She became a violence obsessed psychopath. She kept trying to stick needles in herself along with other self harm behaviors. She attacked her adoptive parents with a knife. After this they locked her in her room at night and put a lock on their bedroom door. She attempted to kill her brother, and tortured and killed animals.
There is a documentary about her called Child of Rage. Warning - this is extremely disturbing.
Eventually, as no progress was being made, she went to live with a therapist for intense behavior modification therapy. She was cured without the use of drugs. Now she is a successful RN and author.
I went way off track here but I wanted to reemphasize that poverty is the source of the vast majority of crime, and even the most broken psychopaths can be cured.
End poverty, end child abuse, end crime. End capitalism.
Ending poverty would certainly help, but I disagree that crime would be fixed. People commit crimes for many reason that aren't related to poverty. Envy, hatred, love, sexual desire, religious fanaticism, political extremism etc. Crimes like murder and rape often have motives completely unrelated to financial status. Not all perpetrators have severe mental disorders either.
In terms of "fixing" people who are violent, I agree in so far that the justice system should focus on rehabilitation and helping people. In many but not all cases, that can be achieved. But generally those people commit crimes first before they're identified. You propose mental health checkups to prevent that in the first place, but many people who are in a bad mental place would not voluntarily go to those. So would you make them mandatory for everyone? That would be quite dystopian, especially with the possibility of being locked up without even having committed a crime. That's exactly the kind of thing I mean by measures that are unacceptably authoritarian. And even then, people would definitely slip through the cracks.
That's fair.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I have wondered this about certain harmful cultural values. Culture seems to be the "great enabler" when it comes to things we would wish would change about people (think of Japan's habit of overworking people or Greece's penchant of old inequality). And the fuel of the flame there is going to take a gamechanger to douse.