search results matching tag: road to ruin
» channel: learn
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
- 1
| Videos (1) | Sift Talk (0) | Blogs (0) | Comments (3) |
- 1
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
| Videos (1) | Sift Talk (0) | Blogs (0) | Comments (3) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
Limitless (film) and Americans obsession with work
luxintenebrisneoliberalism. from ronnie to donnie? that's a failing grade.
the road to ruin.
a path to ruin -> https://youtu.be/iFm9v0wvEnw?t=139
Why I Left the Left
newtboy"Offended" is different from "harmed". The SJWs need to learn that lesson fast. Harm in this context means put in physical danger of injury, which a stampede or riot would fall under and why you can't incite either.
If one is truly "harmed" by offensive words, that's an extremely odd personal mental problem that should not be inflicted on the rest of us, please just avoid the public and stick with your similarly afflicted group.
Your TV point is good, change the channel or turn it off.
Your college point is terrible, IMO. College is, in large part, intended to expose you to new and differing ideas and mindsets and teach you how to interact with those holding them. Interpersonal communication was a requirement where I went. If that's something people are uncomfortable with, they don't belong in colleges. Period. If someone wants to start a school where those ideals (safe space, regulated speech, trigger warnings, etc) are reinforced, fine, but it shouldn't be accredited because, no matter how good the classes and students are, it's missing a key component.
The boss being offensive, there's a clearly defined legal line, if they cross that line you can sue, if not, grow a pair and realize two of the most important lessons my parents taught me...."life's not fair", and "what you want and what you need are two different things, and knowing which is which can be the road to contentment, while not knowing is always a road to ruin". I feel like a lot of kids today have never heard either.
I agree with all of that, and there definitely are reasonable limits to completely "free" speech -- like the fire in a crowded theater staple example.
"Harm" seems like a good place to start when defining those limits. It works in the "fire in a theater" base case really well; by making that out of bounds you avoid trample / stampede injuries.
But what about "trauma or deep internalized concepts where we might see words leading to genuine harm of an individual", as you suggest? I'd agree that cases like that can exist. But to me, the question then becomes "how easily can you avoid those words?"
Offended / "harmed" (perhaps genuinely) by something you see/hear on TV? Very easily solved -- change the channel. Publish "trigger warnings" recommending like-minded individuals also avoid that channel/program/whatever if you like; people who do not agree can also easily avoid those.
Offended / "harmed" (perhaps genuinely) by something your professor said in a University? A bit harder to avoid. Someone in that situation can drop the class and try to take it with a different professor (which may not be possible), avoid taking the class entirely (although it may be a requirement for graduation), or contemplate moving to a different university (which is likely an uneconomical overreaction).
There are arguably better options available for such a person. I'd encourage them to reflect on the phrase "choose your battles wisely", and decide if this particular "harm" (giving all benefit of the doubt that it does actually exist) is worth escalating.
Offended / "harmed" by something your boss says at work? "Choose your battles" still applies, but perhaps also consider asking people who have had a job and who have had to work for a living for advice. When (trigger warning) 99.9% of them say something like "welcome to the real world", maybe -- just maybe -- it is time to look within and re-evaluate your own offense / "harm" threshold.
Mayday Immigration Reform Demonstration
BlueGeorgeWashingtonJonathan Mann is not a true journalist. His narration of the Mayday protest is the most biased and distorted perception of an event that I have watched in a long time. He supports illegal and criminal behavior and when the police try to do something about it he complains. This sort of ridiculous protest creates very bad feelings and Jonathan Mann fans the destructive flames of anarchy with his pro-illegal immigrant and anti-police commentary. Illegal Immigrants have no rights and that includes the right to protest. You are going down the road of ruin and should try living in Mexico if you don't like it here. Why can't you work on bringing people together in a positive way and have the courage to tell someone who broke the law (like an illegal) that they "broke the law" and are wrong. WAKE UP!