search results matching tag: compassion

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (131)     Sift Talk (9)     Blogs (9)     Comments (861)   

Olympian Sacrifices Chance To Win Race To Help His Brother

yellowc says...

Ah thanks, that's an interesting rule.

There is no benefit to the helper but quite clearly a big benefit to the person being helped. He retained 2nd place in this case which is not insignificant, it seems strange to do that with assistance.

I do like it but it is surprising to learn there is that level of compassion written in to the rules.

eric3579 said:

"Following an appeal by the Spanish Triathlon Federation to disqualify Jonathan Brownlee for accepting assistance from Alistair Brownlee to finish the 2016 ITU World Triathlon Grand Final Cozumel, during which Jonathan struggled with heat exhaustion in the final portion of the run, the ITU competition jury unanimously ruled against disqualifying Jonathan. The ITU Competition Jury made this decision in accordance to Appendix K, Rule 7, which states that athletes can receive help from another athlete, Technical Official or Race Official."
http://wts.triathlon.org/news/article/mola_named_the_2016_world_champion

Penn Jillette on Atheism and Islamaphobia

coolhund says...

Ohhhh... I wish people like him would actually read the Quran and the Hadithes and have some experience with the typical muslims.
He doesnt. Because he thinks we need to be compassionate and that will help, solve most problems.
The problem with Islam is that it sees our compassion as weakness. They dont respect us. Their Quran teaches them that we are inferior to them, so much that even their lowly women treat us like we are far below them.

Of course, not every Muslim is that way, but its the vast majority. And that has been proven by polls all over the Muslim world. Im not against helping people in need. But when those guests suddenly act like they own my house, want to change how I live, my culture, my values, and then they are allowed to stay and are treated better, get better chances than my own people, just because its good for the media and PC, then its getting dangerous. And its already too late in some countries. Even statistics are manipulated already to not reflect the huge increase in Muslim crime, to not show the mistakes these "morally superior" people did, like some examples in Sweden and Germany showed. Huge conflicts will come, and its because some people thought they had superior morality, just like so many times before in history, just in a different color.
We just dont learn from history. That much we learn from history.

You Americans still have it good. You check those Muslims coming to your country, if they really want to live your culture, are ready to say "ok, we accept that a part of our religion has no place in your culture", and maybe even turn into Atheists, but many European countries dont. The most conservative Muslims you can find. They just (had to) let them in unchecked, because of a new dictatorship called PC and people following it and its proponents blindly, because it makes them look morally superior and would make them look bad if they would criticize it. Again, history repeating itself at its best.

Penn Jillette on Atheism and Islamaphobia

poolcleaner says...

I agree with you and don't hate Nazis. I hate murderers though, so I hate many of the Nazis but not all of them. Some Nazis helped Jews escape their fate and if it were not for them, some of those people would not be alive today. Disagree with me all you want, I couldn't believe otherwise.

In fact, even some of the mass murderers, the Einsatzgruppen, the meticulous destroyers of entire populations throughout Eastern Europe showed signs of their shame and guilt. When someone feels shame and guilt, that is a sign of their humanity which begs for love and forgiveness.

That doesn't excuse the horrors that they contributed to, but it also shows that they were not merely bogeymen and were themselves victims.

Now, it's very human for you to disagree with my sentiments on this topic out of love and honor for those who were unjustly murdered in this life -- we are a passionate species and it is very right to feel anger towards murderers -- but if an actual loving god (not a torturing one) were to exist, it would forgive and love for the same reasons. That's my belief and I sleep well at night for having it. Otherwise, I would simply be filled with anger and hate for the people who have caused me pain in MY actual life.

Nazis never did a goddamn thing to me directly so it's only conceptual hate that I can feel towards them. But there are people who existed side by side with me who have done me great harm -- and I even forgive and love those people who directly violated my trust. People MUST forgive those that have harmed them in order to move forward with their lives, by accepting their humanity, which although flawed, is still a mammalian emotional being, neocortex enabled and desiring compassion.

Another interesting conceptual form of love is when the family of murder victims forgive the convicted killers who harmed their own family. Isn't that interesting that some people are willing to not hate murderers of their own family members? Or when George Wallace forgave the man who attempted to assassinate him? Sure, he was a born againer and the pro-segregationist who tried to deny black people from signing up for school with white kids, but he still had it in him to forgive and to love, and that to me says he too must be forgiven and loved, because a change occurred in him and his empathy manifested in new ways as his perceptions of mankind changed over time.

gorillaman said:

National Socialism is an idea.

Nazis are a people.

You're allowed to hate an idea; you're not allowed to hate people for their ideas.

How the World Map Looks Wildly Different Than You Think

oritteropo says...

Well, not really. If you're navigating using a compass, then the Mercator projection has the really neat trick of making the rhumb lines straight while keeping coasts recognisable. It's just not a good projection for general purpose uses (unlike the Waterman Butterfly).

ChaosEngine said:

In short, fuck mercator

John Green Debunks the Six Reasons You Might Not Vote

vil says...

Again democracy cant decide the death penalty, abortions, taxes, religion, defense spending and all the other puny details. Democracy can choose leaders, agendas and assign responsibility.

Noocracy is just a new name for despotism, you let inteligent people have their way, the first thing they do is take care of themselves. Stupid people must have a fair representation. Experiments are being conducted to just let them think they have a fair representation, but I am afraid they may not be that stupid. I mean I hope they (we) are not.

Democracy is fairly simple and straightforward - either there is a way to change the ruler or there is not. Putin cant lose. Erdogan cant lose. Chinese communist party cant lose. Castro cant lose. Not democracy. Obviously the details of implementation are very nuanced, like if there are only two parties is that democracy? Etc.

Basically if the ruler makes it impossible for himself to be deposed peacefully democracy ends.

So let us assume some artificial system to pick perfect leaders could be devised. They would have no responsibility (after all they are the best possible leader) no compassion (everyone else is stupid) and no motivation (Im no. 1 so why try harder). Add a secret police and Stalinist Russia is born.

The ignorant herd is painfully hit and miss, but so is the stock market. This is still preferable to any dictator, even a clever one.

Judge Goes Viral Again, Let's Inmate See Newborn Son

The Illusion of Truth - Veritasium

ahimsa says...

“What would you do if you found out that everything you know, everything you believe, everything you’ve been told since you were a child was a lie?"

"And not just any lie, but one carefully crafted, finely tuned, expertly executed, and deliberately designed with the express purpose of assuring you that wrong was right, that bad was good, and that violence was love."

"A lie powerful enough to manipulate you into taking part in horrific and barbaric acts that you’d otherwise find appalling. Powerful enough to wash blood from your hands; to alter your perception so severely that murder appears mundane and compassion becomes extreme.”-Emily Moran Barwick

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLmIqdlomtuStFtMawXWLcH9Ia2TFFkDZ3&v=kUTgZ7s_hiw

How to Remain Calm With People

Hiddekel says...

I agree that compassion is a better word to end with, but only because the word pity is a victim of some of the concepts touched on in this video, when we are pitied we interpret it negatively, we think it's patronising or demeaning, which may be feeding an unconscious fear that we're seen as feeble.
Pity: "The feeling of sorrow and compassion caused by the sufferings and misfortunes of others"

brycewi19 said:

I would only disagree with his very last word.

I'd say rather than move from "anger to pity", move from "anger to compassion".

How to Remain Calm With People

Jonathan Pie on Brexit

Jinx says...

Thing about jizm tsunamis is that the people at the bottom get the worst of it.

Also, "nothing" is a hyperbole. They most certainly have more to lose, and they'll feel every loss that much more keenly than the better off.

I think there is more to this than just the disillusioned working class sticking two fingers up to the EU elite and taking a gamble on prosperity - frankly I think that is an ugly characterization - it suggests a rash and vindictive people when really I think (or hope?) the bulk had the best intentions for themselves and this country. Desperate for change perhaps, but I don't think they saw it as a gamble.

As for blame...hmm. Can't say I'm particularly sad to see Cameron go, but you do get a feeling of "better the devil you know" when you see the other contenders. This referendum would have been up for play at the next election regardless too. Boris and Gove were the greater opportunists by far. You want rash and reckless? Look no further - Power at any cost. I think the greatest blame is with the media. Not just the tabloids either, even the BBC gave disproportionate coverage to Farage - its the classic chicken-egg thing of them simultaneously wanting to cover what is popular whilst also having massive influence over what is popular.

Anyway, I do think he is dead right about engaging with the leave crowd. What would Jo Cox do, innit. We must answer the bigotry and xenophobia not in kind, but with kindness and compassion.

Dear Gays: The Left Betrayed You For Islam

kir_mokum says...

there's kind of this weird rhetoric that i keep noticing that implies that "gays" and "islam" are the same category of thing and can be compared but can't be prioritized because they're somehow equal. they're not.

homosexuality is an inherent quality. there is nothing to critique or change other than our views of it.

islam, however, is just an idea and needs to be treated as such. it absolutely can be critiqued and changed and i would argue this is required.

the tricky part i see is the conflating of "islam" with "muslims" and using the ugliness of islam as justification for mistreatment and ostracizing of muslims. sometimes to the extent of treating them as sub human, most notably in refugee conversations. islam is gross, imo, and should be criticized (fervently) but muslims are still people and need to be treated as such, just as the gay community should. they both have the right to live and have the opportunity to live with some semblance of safety. people deserve compassion. ideas do not.

acidrom86tx (Member Profile)

transmorpher says...

I don't advocate abortion either way. But I'll advocate making a decision based on reason, compassion, and the potential consequences of any action and situation. And I certainly advocate the right for people to make that choice themselves assuming they are well informed and aware of the reality of their choice.

BTW it sounds like you are religious, in which case you must be familiar with Genesis 1:29.

acidrom86tx said:

Ah but I bet you're one of the people that advocates the murder of human souls in the womb. if so you're demented. you're literally more worried about food than your own species.

If Meat Eaters Acted Like Vegans

enoch says...

address please...
i'll be right over to cock punch you,and i shall do so with all the humanity,empathy and compassion that one human can generate.

but you are still taking one to the baby maker.

ahimsa said:

it is not "my" way or "our" way that is at issue but rather the fundamental questions of morals, ethics, violence and non-violence. when one has a choice in the matter, is not doing less harm always better than doing more harm? just as i do not consider myself superior for choosing not to harm or kill other humans or puppies and kittens, but instead look at it as the minimum standard of decency of not treating others the way i would not wish to be treated.

anyone who supports the killing of non-human animals is only looking at things from the human perspective-i.e. that of the oppressor. just as in the case of any form of violence and exploitation, the foundation of all of the false justifications against veganism are based on ignoring any consideration of the victims point of view. this is all too easy when one is not a victim of oppression themselves.

it is truly a very sad thing when mercy, compassion and empathy are considered as extreme while supporting torture, cruelty and death in the name of pleasure and profit is considered as normal and a matter of personal choice.

“For hundreds of thousands of years the stew in the pot has brewed hatred and resentment that is difficult to stop. If you wish to know why there are disasters of armies and weapons in the world, listen to the piteous cries from the slaughter house at midnight.”- Ancient Chinese verse

If Meat Eaters Acted Like Vegans

ahimsa says...

it is not "my" way or "our" way that is at issue but rather the fundamental questions of morals, ethics, violence and non-violence. when one has a choice in the matter, is not doing less harm always better than doing more harm? just as i do not consider myself superior for choosing not to harm or kill other humans or puppies and kittens, but instead look at it as the minimum standard of decency of not treating others the way i would not wish to be treated.

anyone who supports the killing of non-human animals is only looking at things from the human perspective-i.e. that of the oppressor. just as in the case of any form of violence and exploitation, the foundation of all of the false justifications against veganism are based on ignoring any consideration of the victims point of view. this is all too easy when one is not a victim of oppression themselves.

it is truly a very sad thing when mercy, compassion and empathy are considered as extreme while supporting torture, cruelty and death in the name of pleasure and profit is considered as normal and a matter of personal choice.

“For hundreds of thousands of years the stew in the pot has brewed hatred and resentment that is difficult to stop. If you wish to know why there are disasters of armies and weapons in the world, listen to the piteous cries from the slaughter house at midnight.”- Ancient Chinese verse

newtboy said:

Odd, because every argument you (and other vegans) make about veganism comes from a mindset of "My belief is superior to yours, so I am superior to you. Do it my way and you won't be as evil and wrong.' That's a really strange and dishonest argument to make if you didn't consider yourself and your ideas superior to others.

If Meat Eaters Acted Like Vegans

transmorpher says...

Making choices of a higher morality and ethical value definitely makes anyone superior. You yourself are more superior than anyone that has made the choice to beat a woman, are you not? You are physically capable of it, perhaps there might even be a life threatening or survival situation where it's necessary, but you don't do it simply because "you can" or because it makes you feel good. That is what makes you superior.
You're also superior to anyone that has decided to drive drunk too. You are superior to people who take slaves, you are superior to people that run or knowingly buy from sweatshops, etc etc.

Churches and cults are different story because they are based on flawed traditions instead of logical and consequence based choices, and demonstrable fact. Becoming vegan is a rational decision (funnily enough "spiritual" people are the ones that tend to be most aggressive when approached about veganism).

Even non vegans like Sam Harris will agree that it's the ethically superior thing to do.

Three year olds aren't necessarily self-aware either, and I hear that with a bit of south-west sauce they cook up real nice. But wait, you know that's wrong, because being self-aware isn't the only thing we measure this situation by. There are a lot of factors that go into this and in our current time and state of civilization we know it's wrong, however there have been cannibals in the past after all. Sentient or not we know that animals feel pain, they get sad, they can be happy etc. Yet we inflict pain onto them for our pleasure, that is wrong. When you see a street dog all messed up you feel sad for it. Compassion is built into us.

Well yelling at a stranger without provocation is a pretty shitty thing to do. Like I said vegans are a varied group of people, so naturally some of them are rude c***ts that forget that they weren't always vegan lol. I make no excuses for them. But as with any demographic unfortunately the obnoxious ones are the ones that get noticed. To give you an example of nice vegans, there is always someone like John Venus on youtube or the Light Twins.

Mordhaus said:

The simple point is that you are not superior. You have made a lifestyle choice because you wanted to. You have no solid scientific evidence that food animals are fully sentient. Both dogs and pigs routinely fail self-awareness tests, they may be intelligent and able to learn, but they ARE NOT PEOPLE. Vegans want us to believe that eating a pig is tantamount to eating a 3 year old baby, and simply isn't. You are certainly welcome to your opinion on the subject, but that is all.

Now to address your issue with how people treat vegans. I know that I have never went out of my way to lambaste a vegan for choosing to be vegan. I will, and have, severely castigate vegans who start telling me that they are superior to other people because they choose to not eat meat. How can you not see that having the attitude that you are better than someone else because of your choices is not the same manner of thinking that leads to church people condemning people for not following their ethos?

So, let me ask you, how many people have given you shit for being vegan out of the blue? For instance, you were minding your own business and eating a salad, then a person jumped in your face and said "How dare you eat that salad next to me?" I'm willing to bet you might have gotten some gentle ribbing if you went to a friend's barbecue and asked for a vegan option, but I doubt anyone got in your face about it. On the other hand, I have absolutely had more than one vegan get in my face and tell me that I am a murderer and a beast because I ate a hamburger at a desk across from them or sat down at a table with some brisket without making sure it wasn't a 'meat-free' zone.

The sheer chutzpah that most vegans have towards non-vegans is what makes them a target for ridicule. I get it, you think you are better than us, but we wouldn't care if you didn't feel the need to trot it out every five seconds.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon