|
+ Show Spoiler [nah man you have great points] +On March 19 2015 04:46 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:+ Show Spoiler [im so fucking retarded] +On March 19 2015 04:41 Acritter wrote:+ Show Spoiler [don't worry, not retarded] +On March 19 2015 04:31 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2015 04:24 Acritter wrote:On March 19 2015 02:59 Acritter wrote:On March 19 2015 02:58 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:On March 19 2015 02:54 eieio wrote:On March 19 2015 02:54 kirsed wrote:
We're going too deep.
Nicki minaj vs Taylor Swift? nicki minaj on monster > t swizzle > average nicki minaj this is correct oh i've got a question: one of my most intelligent friends in college still loved linkin park and that aesthetic of "teenage angst" music, it accorded with some anger problems and mental issues he had. he claimed it was unfair to assume everyone should grow out of that kind of music just because it appeals most to teens, because it's still good music and valid emotive material for people who still think similarly. this is evidenced by the fact that many such people making the music are in their twenties and beyond, even though the primarily audience is probably teens. the question: is he correct or are you a dismissive asshole? That's actually a really interesting question that I'm going to think about. Not comfortable answering that immediately. All right. I feel prepared to answer now. Let's start with the reason we expect people to grow out of those things. It is not, I would argue, just because we've unfairly painted certain attitudes as "childish" and others as "mature," as we traditionally deal with things such as play versus work. It is rather because attitudes of "teenage angst," heavy with anger and self-dissatisfaction and resentment of others and society on a whole, are not suitable for living a happy life as an independent adult. We generally expect individuals to have found ways to resolve such issues by the time they leave their teenage years, because otherwise they won't be capable of fully "growing up." So, then. How do we handle the case of an individual who still has "teenage angst" far past their teen years? First, I can say that it is not an inherently moral problem. There is nothing about "teenage angst" which necessarily harms others, even if there are some correlations such as forcing others to listen to shitty music, and as such we have no right in castigating the aforementioned individual on a moral basis. It is, instead, a personal issue. As described above, "teenage angst" lies as an obstacle for living happily as an adult. An individual who still bears "teenage angst" as an adult will struggle through many problems that they would not otherwise experience. As such, such individuals are obligated for their own sake to try and handle their "teenage angst," and to not accept it as a terminus of their self-identity. said friend was an incredibly mature, empathetic, and responsible individual, but he's plagued with schizophrenia (which he's medicated for), anxiety (which he's medicated for), and a dark outlook on life and the world at large that will likely never go away. not to say it's not bad for him, but it's unrealistic to expect him to cast such issues off any time in the near future, despite him getting a job and playing the part of a responsible adult. Show nested quote +So much for the individual's personal attitude. What attitudes, then, are we justified in having towards an adult with "teenage angst?" An obvious conclusion is that we cannot view them as a paragon, given that they lack in what I will shorthand as maturity. They may have stellar abilities in other fields that we may desire to emulate, but in so far as individual living is concerned, they are no good role model. We are, furthermore, justified in using them as a negative example: this is a lifestyle that is undesirable, and "teenage angst" is a deep cause of that undesirability. However, as mentioned above, I will repeat that we are not justified in moral criticism of the individual: they may be living badly, but they are not a bad person. That is the distinction that I will draw. i don't look to the vast majority of people as potential role models, so this doesn't resonate too deeply with me. Show nested quote +In summary: I think that it's bad for you and you alone if you still listen to Linkin Park at that age. I won't deny that you have emotions that Linkin Park speaks to, but you should work extra-hard to try and address those emotions, because man oh man are they going to fuck you over. It's like if you don't know how to do your own laundry: sure, nobody's saying that you just imagine that you don't know how to do laundry, but you better get to work snappy-like to make sure you find out how. trust me, he's tried. some people have more difficult struggles than others, some seemingly impossible. for what it's worth, he's doing better than me overall at playing the part of a responsible adult, despite my greater hesitance to go back to listening to that kind of music. I know nothing about your friend, so I won't say anything about him in particular. I suspected that he had a natural problem with such things, and so as I mentioned, I won't call him a bad person. It's something that appears to be natively far more difficult for him for others, and so I will stand by my statement that it should be a focus of his. Without personal knowledge of his situation, I of course can't say whether it's even possible for him personally to handle it. There's always the potential for an exception to any rule. I was simply answering the question of the "teenage angst" alone. My answer was mostly aimed to hit at what connects surly manchildren and people like your friend, who I believe are in other respects in very different camps. The connection there, I believe, is that the manner of living is inherently unpleasant. The logical conclusion there is not that they should stop listening to Linkin Park, but rather that they should devote a greater amount of energy than most people to answering the "teenage angst" which makes them want to listen to Linkin Park (and, more pertinently, makes their lives less pleasant). If, on the other hand, he believes that his "teenage angst" inherently adds value to his life, then I would have to have that conversation with him personally. He might change my opinion on such matters. it's not about "adding value," its about filling a certain drive for release. not everything has to be about making one's life more pleasant; i'm not into the whole cult of productivity and positivity. to me, being human is whatever you want to be. i'm not one for virtue ethics personally, though i respect those who constantly strive in everything they do to stick by virtuous principles. and i don't think finding music that accords with certain negative perspectives and feelings exacerbates said negativity; in a lot of cases, it's a soothing/coping mechanism. i know in some dark parts of my life, listening to some sad music helped me become less sad, etc. I understand what you're saying, and keep in mind that our words for "happy" and "pleasant" and so on and so forth are colored by the English language, in which they have the sense of meaning only those things that are on the surface very bright and cheery. This is not the case with many more nuanced interpretations, such as (appropriately enough for virtue ethics) Aristotle's use of eudaimon. A better word might perhaps be "satisfied." My argument here is predicated on the notion that the constant dissatisfaction engendered in "teenage angst" would interfere with the ultimate satisfaction one might desire from life. If you want another example of what I would consider an inherently unhealthy, I would name fear of death. Not, to be clear, the fear of immediate death: it is quite healthy to try to avoid death, especially in situations such as crossing the street. However, fear of death on a whole will cause extreme dissatisfaction and unhappiness in the very manner that one lives one's life, especially as one moves towards the end of one's life. Does the comparison help to show why I value what I value, and help to separate the bright-and-cheery happiness from overall satisfaction with living? Furthermore, I wish to stress once again that I am not against the music. I have done my best in this discussion to treat it as a symptom. I have no interest in it beyond that. The concern here is more to turn oneself into a person who doesn't need such music, such as a recovering alcoholic might desire to turn him or herself into a person who doesn't need to drink in order to not die from the withdrawals. It's a very extreme comparison, I understand, and the analogy fails in different areas, but I hope the point is clear: one doesn't necessarily need to fear symptoms so much as root causes. There might be some kind of echo chamber that is constructed by overindulgence, but that is a different discussion entirely.
|
On March 19 2015 04:59 CorsairHero wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2015 04:57 crms wrote:
my mom is a high school teacher who tells me crazy things all the time like some of her incoming freshmen weren't alive for 9/11 and don't know who Kurt Cobain is.
I struggle to understand these things. I'm old and confused. people still listen to nirvana?
Why would anyone stop? I listen to the Beatles too.
|
On March 19 2015 05:02 Acritter wrote:+ Show Spoiler [nah man you have great points] +On March 19 2015 04:46 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:+ Show Spoiler [im so fucking retarded] +On March 19 2015 04:41 Acritter wrote:+ Show Spoiler [don't worry, not retarded] +On March 19 2015 04:31 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2015 04:24 Acritter wrote:On March 19 2015 02:59 Acritter wrote:On March 19 2015 02:58 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:On March 19 2015 02:54 eieio wrote:On March 19 2015 02:54 kirsed wrote:
We're going too deep.
Nicki minaj vs Taylor Swift? nicki minaj on monster > t swizzle > average nicki minaj this is correct oh i've got a question: one of my most intelligent friends in college still loved linkin park and that aesthetic of "teenage angst" music, it accorded with some anger problems and mental issues he had. he claimed it was unfair to assume everyone should grow out of that kind of music just because it appeals most to teens, because it's still good music and valid emotive material for people who still think similarly. this is evidenced by the fact that many such people making the music are in their twenties and beyond, even though the primarily audience is probably teens. the question: is he correct or are you a dismissive asshole? That's actually a really interesting question that I'm going to think about. Not comfortable answering that immediately. All right. I feel prepared to answer now. Let's start with the reason we expect people to grow out of those things. It is not, I would argue, just because we've unfairly painted certain attitudes as "childish" and others as "mature," as we traditionally deal with things such as play versus work. It is rather because attitudes of "teenage angst," heavy with anger and self-dissatisfaction and resentment of others and society on a whole, are not suitable for living a happy life as an independent adult. We generally expect individuals to have found ways to resolve such issues by the time they leave their teenage years, because otherwise they won't be capable of fully "growing up." So, then. How do we handle the case of an individual who still has "teenage angst" far past their teen years? First, I can say that it is not an inherently moral problem. There is nothing about "teenage angst" which necessarily harms others, even if there are some correlations such as forcing others to listen to shitty music, and as such we have no right in castigating the aforementioned individual on a moral basis. It is, instead, a personal issue. As described above, "teenage angst" lies as an obstacle for living happily as an adult. An individual who still bears "teenage angst" as an adult will struggle through many problems that they would not otherwise experience. As such, such individuals are obligated for their own sake to try and handle their "teenage angst," and to not accept it as a terminus of their self-identity. said friend was an incredibly mature, empathetic, and responsible individual, but he's plagued with schizophrenia (which he's medicated for), anxiety (which he's medicated for), and a dark outlook on life and the world at large that will likely never go away. not to say it's not bad for him, but it's unrealistic to expect him to cast such issues off any time in the near future, despite him getting a job and playing the part of a responsible adult. Show nested quote +So much for the individual's personal attitude. What attitudes, then, are we justified in having towards an adult with "teenage angst?" An obvious conclusion is that we cannot view them as a paragon, given that they lack in what I will shorthand as maturity. They may have stellar abilities in other fields that we may desire to emulate, but in so far as individual living is concerned, they are no good role model. We are, furthermore, justified in using them as a negative example: this is a lifestyle that is undesirable, and "teenage angst" is a deep cause of that undesirability. However, as mentioned above, I will repeat that we are not justified in moral criticism of the individual: they may be living badly, but they are not a bad person. That is the distinction that I will draw. i don't look to the vast majority of people as potential role models, so this doesn't resonate too deeply with me. Show nested quote +In summary: I think that it's bad for you and you alone if you still listen to Linkin Park at that age. I won't deny that you have emotions that Linkin Park speaks to, but you should work extra-hard to try and address those emotions, because man oh man are they going to fuck you over. It's like if you don't know how to do your own laundry: sure, nobody's saying that you just imagine that you don't know how to do laundry, but you better get to work snappy-like to make sure you find out how. trust me, he's tried. some people have more difficult struggles than others, some seemingly impossible. for what it's worth, he's doing better than me overall at playing the part of a responsible adult, despite my greater hesitance to go back to listening to that kind of music. I know nothing about your friend, so I won't say anything about him in particular. I suspected that he had a natural problem with such things, and so as I mentioned, I won't call him a bad person. It's something that appears to be natively far more difficult for him for others, and so I will stand by my statement that it should be a focus of his. Without personal knowledge of his situation, I of course can't say whether it's even possible for him personally to handle it. There's always the potential for an exception to any rule. I was simply answering the question of the "teenage angst" alone. My answer was mostly aimed to hit at what connects surly manchildren and people like your friend, who I believe are in other respects in very different camps. The connection there, I believe, is that the manner of living is inherently unpleasant. The logical conclusion there is not that they should stop listening to Linkin Park, but rather that they should devote a greater amount of energy than most people to answering the "teenage angst" which makes them want to listen to Linkin Park (and, more pertinently, makes their lives less pleasant). If, on the other hand, he believes that his "teenage angst" inherently adds value to his life, then I would have to have that conversation with him personally. He might change my opinion on such matters. it's not about "adding value," its about filling a certain drive for release. not everything has to be about making one's life more pleasant; i'm not into the whole cult of productivity and positivity. to me, being human is whatever you want to be. i'm not one for virtue ethics personally, though i respect those who constantly strive in everything they do to stick by virtuous principles. and i don't think finding music that accords with certain negative perspectives and feelings exacerbates said negativity; in a lot of cases, it's a soothing/coping mechanism. i know in some dark parts of my life, listening to some sad music helped me become less sad, etc. I understand what you're saying, and keep in mind that our words for "happy" and "pleasant" and so on and so forth are colored by the English language, in which they have the sense of meaning only those things that are on the surface very bright and cheery. This is not the case with many more nuanced interpretations, such as (appropriately enough for virtue ethics) Aristotle's use of eudaimon. A better word might perhaps be "satisfied." My argument here is predicated on the notion that the constant dissatisfaction engendered in "teenage angst" would interfere with the ultimate satisfaction one might desire from life. If you want another example of what I would consider an inherently unhealthy, I would name fear of death. Not, to be clear, the fear of immediate death: it is quite healthy to try to avoid death, especially in situations such as crossing the street. However, fear of death on a whole will cause extreme dissatisfaction and unhappiness in the very manner that one lives one's life, especially as one moves towards the end of one's life. Does the comparison help to show why I value what I value, and help to separate the bright-and-cheery happiness from overall satisfaction with living? Furthermore, I wish to stress once again that I am not against the music. I have done my best in this discussion to treat it as a symptom. I have no interest in it beyond that. The concern here is more to turn oneself into a person who doesn't need such music, such as a recovering alcoholic might desire to turn him or herself into a person who doesn't need to drink in order to not die from the withdrawals. It's a very extreme comparison, I understand, and the analogy fails in different areas, but I hope the point is clear: one doesn't necessarily need to fear symptoms so much as root causes. There might be some kind of echo chamber that is constructed by overindulgence, but that is a different discussion entirely.
You know you can make a PM to eachother if you don't want to bother us.
Nirvana is still legit.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
i dont know if my memory of hearing about the attacks is implanted or not
i was 6
|
i want to bother you but with the nuance of spoilers
|
West coast 9/11 was weird cuz I didn't have to go to school :/
|
west coast best coast hehe
|
omg what a horrible perspective u should be shamed by adults pretending to be paragons of empathy and decorum
ROFL you edited "fun" or something to "weird" clearly the sense of shame was properly instilled in you
|
On March 19 2015 05:06 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:
omg what a horrible perspective u should be shamed by adults pretending to be paragons of empathy and decorum
ROFL you edited "fun" or something to "weird"
Shhh :p
|
On March 19 2015 05:01 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:
i was broken the news by a kid who made an off color joke about no more "made in china" stuff cuz he obv didnt understand what the WTC was for
fuck adults who guilt kids that do socially off stuff rather than respectfully epxlaining it
like i dont think it's a quick logical connection for most small kids who hear "a big building was just attacked" to think "wow a lot of people died what a horrible tragedy" but maybe im just a sociopath
Nah, you're right. Like, even if it's something that people ought to understand naturally why it's a bad thing, like breaking the news that a guy got shot in the face, just guilt tripping ain't right. The appropriate thing is to explain why exactly it's something that you should be respectful about. Otherwise, it's just appealing to your authority as a parent or an adult or whatever as to what's right and wrong. That's not how you end up with good kids, that's how you end up with kids who either do whatever they're told or who go into some dumbshit "rebellious phase" and do awful things in the name of showing up "the man."
|
On March 19 2015 05:04 Comeh wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2015 05:02 Acritter wrote:+ Show Spoiler [nah man you have great points] +On March 19 2015 04:46 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:+ Show Spoiler [im so fucking retarded] +On March 19 2015 04:41 Acritter wrote:+ Show Spoiler [don't worry, not retarded] +On March 19 2015 04:31 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2015 04:24 Acritter wrote:On March 19 2015 02:59 Acritter wrote:On March 19 2015 02:58 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:On March 19 2015 02:54 eieio wrote:On March 19 2015 02:54 kirsed wrote:
We're going too deep.
Nicki minaj vs Taylor Swift? nicki minaj on monster > t swizzle > average nicki minaj this is correct oh i've got a question: one of my most intelligent friends in college still loved linkin park and that aesthetic of "teenage angst" music, it accorded with some anger problems and mental issues he had. he claimed it was unfair to assume everyone should grow out of that kind of music just because it appeals most to teens, because it's still good music and valid emotive material for people who still think similarly. this is evidenced by the fact that many such people making the music are in their twenties and beyond, even though the primarily audience is probably teens. the question: is he correct or are you a dismissive asshole? That's actually a really interesting question that I'm going to think about. Not comfortable answering that immediately. All right. I feel prepared to answer now. Let's start with the reason we expect people to grow out of those things. It is not, I would argue, just because we've unfairly painted certain attitudes as "childish" and others as "mature," as we traditionally deal with things such as play versus work. It is rather because attitudes of "teenage angst," heavy with anger and self-dissatisfaction and resentment of others and society on a whole, are not suitable for living a happy life as an independent adult. We generally expect individuals to have found ways to resolve such issues by the time they leave their teenage years, because otherwise they won't be capable of fully "growing up." So, then. How do we handle the case of an individual who still has "teenage angst" far past their teen years? First, I can say that it is not an inherently moral problem. There is nothing about "teenage angst" which necessarily harms others, even if there are some correlations such as forcing others to listen to shitty music, and as such we have no right in castigating the aforementioned individual on a moral basis. It is, instead, a personal issue. As described above, "teenage angst" lies as an obstacle for living happily as an adult. An individual who still bears "teenage angst" as an adult will struggle through many problems that they would not otherwise experience. As such, such individuals are obligated for their own sake to try and handle their "teenage angst," and to not accept it as a terminus of their self-identity. said friend was an incredibly mature, empathetic, and responsible individual, but he's plagued with schizophrenia (which he's medicated for), anxiety (which he's medicated for), and a dark outlook on life and the world at large that will likely never go away. not to say it's not bad for him, but it's unrealistic to expect him to cast such issues off any time in the near future, despite him getting a job and playing the part of a responsible adult. Show nested quote +So much for the individual's personal attitude. What attitudes, then, are we justified in having towards an adult with "teenage angst?" An obvious conclusion is that we cannot view them as a paragon, given that they lack in what I will shorthand as maturity. They may have stellar abilities in other fields that we may desire to emulate, but in so far as individual living is concerned, they are no good role model. We are, furthermore, justified in using them as a negative example: this is a lifestyle that is undesirable, and "teenage angst" is a deep cause of that undesirability. However, as mentioned above, I will repeat that we are not justified in moral criticism of the individual: they may be living badly, but they are not a bad person. That is the distinction that I will draw. i don't look to the vast majority of people as potential role models, so this doesn't resonate too deeply with me. Show nested quote +In summary: I think that it's bad for you and you alone if you still listen to Linkin Park at that age. I won't deny that you have emotions that Linkin Park speaks to, but you should work extra-hard to try and address those emotions, because man oh man are they going to fuck you over. It's like if you don't know how to do your own laundry: sure, nobody's saying that you just imagine that you don't know how to do laundry, but you better get to work snappy-like to make sure you find out how. trust me, he's tried. some people have more difficult struggles than others, some seemingly impossible. for what it's worth, he's doing better than me overall at playing the part of a responsible adult, despite my greater hesitance to go back to listening to that kind of music. I know nothing about your friend, so I won't say anything about him in particular. I suspected that he had a natural problem with such things, and so as I mentioned, I won't call him a bad person. It's something that appears to be natively far more difficult for him for others, and so I will stand by my statement that it should be a focus of his. Without personal knowledge of his situation, I of course can't say whether it's even possible for him personally to handle it. There's always the potential for an exception to any rule. I was simply answering the question of the "teenage angst" alone. My answer was mostly aimed to hit at what connects surly manchildren and people like your friend, who I believe are in other respects in very different camps. The connection there, I believe, is that the manner of living is inherently unpleasant. The logical conclusion there is not that they should stop listening to Linkin Park, but rather that they should devote a greater amount of energy than most people to answering the "teenage angst" which makes them want to listen to Linkin Park (and, more pertinently, makes their lives less pleasant). If, on the other hand, he believes that his "teenage angst" inherently adds value to his life, then I would have to have that conversation with him personally. He might change my opinion on such matters. it's not about "adding value," its about filling a certain drive for release. not everything has to be about making one's life more pleasant; i'm not into the whole cult of productivity and positivity. to me, being human is whatever you want to be. i'm not one for virtue ethics personally, though i respect those who constantly strive in everything they do to stick by virtuous principles. and i don't think finding music that accords with certain negative perspectives and feelings exacerbates said negativity; in a lot of cases, it's a soothing/coping mechanism. i know in some dark parts of my life, listening to some sad music helped me become less sad, etc. I understand what you're saying, and keep in mind that our words for "happy" and "pleasant" and so on and so forth are colored by the English language, in which they have the sense of meaning only those things that are on the surface very bright and cheery. This is not the case with many more nuanced interpretations, such as (appropriately enough for virtue ethics) Aristotle's use of eudaimon. A better word might perhaps be "satisfied." My argument here is predicated on the notion that the constant dissatisfaction engendered in "teenage angst" would interfere with the ultimate satisfaction one might desire from life. If you want another example of what I would consider an inherently unhealthy, I would name fear of death. Not, to be clear, the fear of immediate death: it is quite healthy to try to avoid death, especially in situations such as crossing the street. However, fear of death on a whole will cause extreme dissatisfaction and unhappiness in the very manner that one lives one's life, especially as one moves towards the end of one's life. Does the comparison help to show why I value what I value, and help to separate the bright-and-cheery happiness from overall satisfaction with living? Furthermore, I wish to stress once again that I am not against the music. I have done my best in this discussion to treat it as a symptom. I have no interest in it beyond that. The concern here is more to turn oneself into a person who doesn't need such music, such as a recovering alcoholic might desire to turn him or herself into a person who doesn't need to drink in order to not die from the withdrawals. It's a very extreme comparison, I understand, and the analogy fails in different areas, but I hope the point is clear: one doesn't necessarily need to fear symptoms so much as root causes. There might be some kind of echo chamber that is constructed by overindulgence, but that is a different discussion entirely. You know you can make a PM to eachother if you don't want to bother us. Nirvana is still legit.
PMs don't get me LiquidGold. Once PMs get me LiquidGold I will start using PMs.
|
i feel like a lot of nuances caused by that one single event are lost on kids that don't remember it
before 911 I remember growing up thinking China and Russians were our greatest threat with the nuclear treaties made during that time
the word terrorists didn't really register in our lexicon back then.
the worst that happened during the 90s was Clinton having an affair and bombing Serbia lol
|
i wasn't even subjected to too much righteous shaming and i've been in a dumbshit rebellious phase my entire life.
|
Here on the east coast it was interesting. We were already in school for a while and they tried to keep it quiet. I think a few kids who had parents/family in New York were told, but for the most part the teachers were told not to say anything to the students. That of course didn't happen at all.
Not sure why they tried to keep it quiet though. Everyone knew, though as kids nobody knew what it really meant.
|
|
|
think that's just a classic case of adults not knowing how to deal with kids with respect to "adult matters" because god forbid kids get introduced to morally gray or unsavory stuff
|
Makes me fucking glad my father was never afraid to tell me like it was. Made figuring out stuff about the world a lot easier thanks to being able to recognize that the answers were often pretty knotty.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
WHY DO I ALWAYS MAKE COFFEE AND NOT START DRINKING IT TILL ITS COLD
|
On March 19 2015 05:18 Targe wrote:
WHY DO I ALWAYS MAKE COFFEE AND NOT START DRINKING IT TILL ITS COLD
wait 15 minutes from the time you want to make coffee
|
do they not have microwaves in uk?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
