not even wrong
extreme sjf language policing is the mental equivalent of runaway nuclear fission reaction
it’s very easy to understand in terms of a simple control theory argument.
if you try to prescript the way people talk to you, you disallow certain topics completely, simply because those topics will arise later than you’ve made your list of allowed words.
this will introduce a requirement of continuous upgrade, which will inevitably fail due to the two processes being of different nature. the number of ways the language changes is growing exponentially, but the number of ways you can grow you allowed language is limited linearly.
in other words, people who will try to do good to you will seem as if they want to hurt you, therefor you exclude the negative part of the feedback loop. that is, you create a positive feedback loop, that goes off the rails so fast, it would be fascinating to watch, if it wouldn’t be so destructive…
however, it is a mistake to try to blame these kids, as they do not know it better. if you want to blame anyone, you should blame those who teach that belief is stronger than your immediate experience, or in other words: they teach that fantasy is able to change reality itself.
i call these people postmodernists, not because this is the best name, but because out of the many branches they have, post-modernists are the ones who are the most honest about what they want, if you actually listen to them:
“Therefore we will not listen to the source itself in order to learn what it is or what it means, but rather to the turns of speech, the allegories, figures, metaphors, as you will, into which the source has deviated, in order to lose it or rediscover it — which always amounts to the same.”
and:
“Contrary to what phenomenology — which is always phenomenology of perception — has tried to make us believe, contrary to what our desire cannot fail to be tempted into believing, the thing itself always escapes.”
― Jacques Derrida
a better name would be “believers”, but that’s usually about religion, and this is bigger than religion.
it’s a question about free will.
you see, in order for you to be blamed, you have to imagined as a willing actor, with motivation. we don’t punish rocks if they fall on our head.
but free will by itself is meaningless, how much free will you want to give to five year old? how do you decide at what age you give more freedom to a child? how do you decide who can hold the keys to the granary? who you trust to watch your back when you are sleeping?
so, postmodernists, faced with the struggle of life, decide that the best way to make things happen is to think and talk about it.
religions usually suggest some form of rituals, chanting, prayers, so forth. sometimes with drugs to enhance the effect.
spiritualists, new-age and esoteric thinkers tell you about communications with angels, spirits or entities from higher or different dimensions.
i have some quibble with most of these people, because it’s often careless how they deny even the good vaccines just because there are some less effective ones — just to give an example. there are countless others.
but the seriousness of this issue lies elsewhere, something that is shared by 99.99999% of the humans on this planet. although i should be sure to ask some more people about this.
anyway, if this is true, you are probably part of the problem. here is how you can decide: do you know any idea that you would be uncomfortable dissecting? is there something sacred that you would not allow be questioned?
how about the idea that you are an integral entity?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ERFBg2Uh1c
just a question.