I'm neither cynical, nor a believer. To be cynical you must disbelieve in something, or believe in something in the negative (often in response to an unpleasant or traumatic experience), producing a mindset of distrust and contempt. My goal, as should be everyone's, is to neither believe, nor disbelieve (because once you do you block out all possibilities outside the scope of that programming and lock yourself into a viewpoint that's more difficult to change even in the face of an overwhelmingly contradictory reality), but to instead form fluid conclusions that adapt based on the best information currently available, empirically observing reality outside the context of an obfuscating sense of self (i.e. without putting yourself at the center of your worldview). Only then can you see with clarity and accuracy. Never think that you know something with certainty, i.e. never believe.
The ideas you espoused have merit to various degrees, within reason and within the framework of conditions that maximize productive value to society. But for increased social welfare spending there's a glaring caveat of how it is spent (e.g. don't just give people handouts). People are very programmable. Give them money for nothing and they'll be conditioned to expect exactly that, caged by compassion. Let them struggle and they'll learn to fight for what they want. A safety net of some type is necessary to catch those who fall through the cracks, but only if it's designed to help them to their feet and teach them to stand on their own, and to then in turn help others who need it. Trapping them in a cycle of welfare is a disservice to them and to future generations.
I don't limit what I think may work for society with a label, nor lock into a subscribed ideology interested only in self-preservation. I'm not liberal. I'm not conservative. I'm neither, and I am both. And if that irks you or induces an eye-roll instead of intrigues you to seek out further rumination, be aware that such behaviors reveal only the nature and level of your own sagacity.
_________________________________________
Never believe. Always question. Rebuke belief, a.k.a. bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
reply
share
Thaisticks (2551)
a year ago
Here's a fluid conclusion--piss off!
reply
share
warrior-poet (1333)
a year ago
A mature, enlightened response. Thank you for your contribution.
_________________________________________
Never believe. Always question. Rebuke belief, a.k.a. bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
reply
share
Thaistickers (1099)
a year ago
That's the only response possible to the type of Randian bs you were espousing. Your epigrams sound like the creation of a 10-year-old and your fake condescension reeks of brittle self-importance. You think your some sort of Wittgenstein but your real soul-brother would be Frankenstein. Now say "duh," it's time for go-to-bed.
reply
share
warrior-poet (1333)
a year ago
Hey, you asked: "So what do you believe in, or are you a total cynic?". And I answered. You have only yourself to blame. You may want to spend some time in self-reflection pondering why the answer bothers you so much. Hint: letting the words of a random person on the internet have power over how you think and feel is your first mistake. Especially revealing is that you perceived condescension (i.e. an attitude of patronizing superiority; disdain) in what I imparted about my outlook. How you proceed from this point is entirely in your hands, and yours alone.
_________________________________________
Never believe. Always question. Rebuke belief, a.k.a. bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.
reply
share