[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 351 KB, 2849x2000, 49203988.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4847079 No.4847079[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>ITT intellectual and not so intellectual things which made life easier and you wish you knew earlier
I'll start: It's actually really fun just observing people. Sit by a café and just watch people go about their day in a non-creepy manner

>> No.4847084

Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

>> No.4847102

>>4847084
pls respond

>> No.4847116

>>4847079
>>ITT intellectual and not so intellectual things which made life easier

oh i have a wh--

>and you wish you knew earlier

none, absolutely none

>> No.4847118

It's an immense relief once you realize that no-one really gives a shit about you, what you're doing, or what you're about.

Walk down the street, 99% of the people passing by you won't remember you exist two minutes later.

(Except if you're a midget, then people will remember you. So if you're a midget, rock on!)

>> No.4847119

I wish I had known that the trajectory you push and ride into adulthood maintains a certain inertia as you peak, and then everything introverts and you become insane.

I wish somebody told me to slow down--maybe they did, but nobody told me why.

>> No.4847122

>>4847119
>I wish I had known that the trajectory you push and ride into adulthood maintains a certain inertia as you peak, and then everything introverts and you become insane.
not sure if I'm understanding what you mean but I think I do and holy shit: Growing up is weird. Being an adult mostly sucks!!! I'm aware this isn't very eloquent for this board but I have no other way to put it - life just gets weirder and weirder

>> No.4847127

>>4847122
To add: The impression was you would just keep moving forward in life. Since your body is growing, maybe that is where this assumption comes from. Then, you think the mind will limitlessly expand if you let it. Adults often put up the "never let them see you sweat" front so this adds to the illusion.

>> No.4847136

>>4847127
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybDOJP7FP6Q

>> No.4847151

>>4847079
if that doesn't just send you into existential crises you're not doing it right

>> No.4847163

>>4847136
Haha

>> No.4847173

>>4847079
Sounds pretty damn boring anon

>> No.4847182

That even though I enjoy the writings from an irrelevant, dead shut in from Rhode Island I am not academic.

>> No.4847209

>>4847118
addendum to this one is the quote: Don't take yourself so seriously, no-one else does.

>> No.4847214

Imagining your world as a play and yourself as an actor in it. Of course, it kills authenticity, but it helps you not be so self-conscious and over-think and over-analyze every little detail around you until you are reduced to nothing but a brooding, pondering and most of all paralyzed creature.

>> No.4847216

Knowledge is power, but ignorance is strength

>> No.4847217

>>4847216
The stupidest thing I have every heard. Ever.

>> No.4847218

>>4847214
This adds to over-analysis because acting requires conscious attention to detail instead of just going with the flow and being an actual human being.

>> No.4847221

>>4847079
Make friends. There is no worse fate than having none when everyone around you is at the most social point in their lives.

>> No.4847227

>>4847218
Not for me. If an actor fucks up a line, even stars in a play that turns out to be shit, it's not too terrible. He can try the line again or find other plays to act in.

We all already do it, though. It's only when you consciously realize that you are doing it that this thought helps you. What are you, to the outside world? A collection of choices, an artifice that maybe faintly resembles "who you really are" (if such an essentialist thing even exists). You are what you choose to say and not to say, what clothes you wear, what taste you have in culture. You create yourself every time you leave your home.

This ties in with Sartre's "Hell is other people".

>> No.4847228

It actually, seriously, really, really is massively important to be popular and well-liked. Or at the very least, it's incalculably useful.

>> No.4847229

>>4847227
That's nice.

>> No.4847232

I wish I hadn't left it until the age of 20 to start learning Akkadian.

>> No.4847233

>>4847228
I incline to agree.

You don't have to be a nice-guy faggot or an overly charismatic douchebag to achieve this. But being a decent person, paying attention to other people, doing the right thing instead of the easy thing, helping your friends, giving compliments where they are due, _will_ end up with you having a strong network of people around you, willing to have your back and help you out of rough spots when needed.

It's the two only thing we have, really: time, and each other. Both are borrowed, though.

>> No.4847237

Jesus, this thread is descending into "pretend to be nice" delusional bullshit.

>> No.4847238

>>4847237
5-star post, my friend.

>> No.4847244

>>4847238
I know it wasn't nice.

>> No.4847245

>>4847244
That's not so bad. It was utterly void of substance, which was worse.

>> No.4847246

>>4847237

Can you give a brief outline of this "pretend to be nice" delusional bullshit?

>> No.4847251

>>4847246
finish last

>>4847245
>observations are bad

no more mr. nice guy

>> No.4847252

>>4847251

Can you give a slightly less brief outline? To the point where you can be reasonably confident I'll know what you mean.

>> No.4847253

You are primarily a mass of feelings that is trying to settle itself amongst other masses of feelings. Those words running through your head? They might have been running through your head for years and years now -- old manipulation, remnants of a long-passed worldview. Knowing yourself is feeling, not thinking, and you should check back in with yourself regularly lest you lose yourself to unfulfilling ego.

>> No.4847255

>>4847252
Take stock of all the "niceness" you've observed in acting, characters in books, life, wherever and do that.

>> No.4847257

>>4847217
Ignorance is the strength that allows action.

>> No.4847258

>>4847253
>I feel like shit.

Welp, that didn't help.

>> No.4847260

>>4847237
I sometimes wonder whether the wooden and off-kilter laughter and 'nice' actions of some people I observe are just bad acting.

>> No.4847262

>>4847258
Then you're doing it wrong.

>> No.4847264

>>4847255

That seems to be helping me, albeit in a somewhat circular manner, to understand what the word 'niceness' means. I'm OK for that, cheers, I'm just wondering what you were referring to when you mentioned ' "pretend to be nice" delusional bullshit'.

What would a further elaboration of 'pretend to be nice' look like? What are some reasons the bullshitters would offer to back up their prescription? And why is their prescription bullshit? That sort of thing.

>> No.4847266

>>4847260
My god, you're correct.

>>4847262
>doing feelings wrong

Okay, I will do my feelings differently.

>> No.4847269

>>4847260
It's all acting, it's all manipulation. There is true care in other people, though. It's like how a dog is a man's best friend, for example --it's because there's no bullshit between the man and the dog.

>> No.4847272

>>4847264
I think you wrote a wonderful post, anon.

>> No.4847274

>>4847253
2deep4me

>> No.4847275

>>4847266
It's your manipulation that's wrong, not your feelings. Being a smartass isn't helping you, either.

>> No.4847278

>>4847275
I thought you were about being nice.

>> No.4847279

>>4847237
What's delusional about it? When I went to university I hated everyone for their self-importance, at odds with their pathetic dependence on social groups surrounding them constantly as a security blanket.

I didn't try to befriend anyone and as a result I can't name a single person I went to university with. I practically failed and went slightly insane.

Pretending to be nice has its merits

>> No.4847280
File: 41 KB, 375x375, costanza belittles.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4847280

>>4847253
>>4847253
>Knowing yourself is feeling, not thinking

Knowing yourself is thinking about the feelings which you are feeling.

>> No.4847282

>>4847279
It turns you into a self-righteous asshole.

>> No.4847283

>>4847278
No, I'm about fixing things. You've got to really put your back into it sometimes.

>> No.4847284

>>4847283
>le perfectionist

卐

>> No.4847285

>>4847280
Not really. There's a sort of base knowing when it comes to feeling -- like how animals or children are much more perceptive than us, for example, because they've not layered over their feeling with ego. It only takes getting back in touch with yourself, letting down your guard.

>> No.4847287

>>4847260

I want to be pedantic and say that it's not JUST bad acting, even though it may well be bad acting.

I talk to my work colleagues and inquire after the health of their children, who I've never met. Not only do I not care about the health of their children (as in, I bear them no ill will etc, but neither do I think about their well-being independently of conversation with their parents) but their parents are aware that I don't care. They know and don't care that I don't care, and I know this. What's important is that in our culture, such inquiries are perceived to be a part of fellowship. Their absence is resented not because my colleagues seriously expect me to to give a crap about their kids, but because not to inquire is seen as a slight.

So perhaps I'm distracted some day and my heart's not really in the 'performance'. Most normal people who notice this won't give it a second thought, because they understand the true nature of the conversation. You might say that the actual subject of the conversation isn't their kids, but the fact that our relation to one another makes such a conversation appropriate.

>> No.4847291

>>4847284
Don't be so scared, mate.

>> No.4847292

>>4847287
Acting just leads you into a false existence.

That's why it's a job, not a lifestyle.

>> No.4847294

>>4847291
I'm terrified of gurus.

>> No.4847295

>>4847292
>Acting just leads you into a false existence.

There is no such thing as a 'false existence'.

>> No.4847297

>>4847295
That's what acting is.

>> No.4847300

>>4847294
It's change you're afraid of, mate. You think you've got it all under control as is, making silly little smartass jokes as if to play off monstrosity --it's the same reason Hitler's birthday is now world weed-smoking day, for example; and nobody realises it. You're still playing peek-a-boo with big scary daddy, basically. That's always worked so far!

>> No.4847301

>>4847300
>le psychic voodoo

Heal me!

>> No.4847302

>>4847297
We're all acting.

There's no such thing as a 'false existence'.

>> No.4847303

>>4847300
Daddy might bite if we stop playing the game ;________;

>> No.4847304

>>4847302
No, some people are authentic and have real relationships and aren't pretending within them.

>> No.4847305

>>4847301
See:>>4847303

>> No.4847307

>>4847297

No, I don't think so. I can't imagine myself as a person who inquires after the health of a colleague's child out of a sincere concern for their well-being. In fact I don't imagine such a person exists, or at least, if they do I think they're probably quite unhealthy mentally. So there is no question of actual deception, since the actions I'm performing do not follow the form of something which could be 'sincere'. If they could never be sincere or 'true' then, equally, neither can they be deceptive or 'false'.

>> No.4847310

>>4847302
I'm not acting right now, oh the rapture!

>> No.4847312

>>4847307
Well, your emotional make-up is not standard.

>> No.4847313

>>4847310
I know. You should go back to acting.

>> No.4847314

>>4847307
Not inquiring at all would be true, since that would reflect your true feelings (because you don't give a damn). Therefore, inquiring about the childrens health is false.

>> No.4847316

>>4847305
Going backwards is a pleb guru move.

Dropped!

>> No.4847318

>>4847313
I know you're just acting, so I forgive you

>> No.4847319
File: 6 KB, 161x314, flaneur.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4847319

>>4847079
Now do it walking and a superior lifestyle is born.

>> No.4847320

>>4847318
You should just do what you were doing "naturally" and not try so hard. It brings pain to us all.

>> No.4847321

Holy shit this is the most passive-aggressive thread I've ever seen

>> No.4847324

>>4847321
Fuck you.

>> No.4847325

>>4847217
He's actually quite right in a way, when you're too insightful and knowledgeable you start to dismantle your own coping systems. People need a healthy dose of ignorance to function.

>> No.4847328

>>4847325
You mean obsessive omni-awareness isn't the way to go?

You don't say.

>> No.4847329

>>4847316
You'll always be a child, then. Protip: You didn't have it all figured out back then. It's like how Nietzsche went back and broke down after all those years of chasing after "Truth" --if only we'd all do it more often the world would be a far better place. That man put his entire being into teaching humanity, in fairness to him.

>> No.4847330

>>4847312

I rather suspect it is, honestly. What reason do you have to suppose otherwise?

>>4847314
>Not inquiring at all would be true, since that would reflect your true feelings

Nihil ex nihilo. I don't speak to my colleagues about the parallels and contrasts between the early Wittgenstein and the late. Must we conclude from this that the subject doesn't interest me? Can we safely conclude from a brief conversation between you and a neighbour as you accidentally meet on your way to work, that absolutely nothing in the universe interests either of you, other than what's mentioned in the discussion? Of course not.

And of course, silence can deceive. Why are you not being 'false' in your failure to dutifully report to your colleagues the indifference you feel towards their children? Mustn't you, noblesse oblige, make perfectly clear to them how little you care?

>Therefore, inquiring about the childrens health is false.

As I said, I don't think it's truth-apt. It doesn't constitute a claim of actually caring about their children, only a claim that my relation to my colleagues is one that makes such an inquiry valid.

>> No.4847332
File: 20 KB, 800x533, hand.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4847332

>>4847329
>at least you tried

>> No.4847333

>>4847324
That wasn't very passive-aggressive
Why are you getting so upset?

>> No.4847335

>>4847330
That's your emotional comfort to assume everyone has your feels.

>> No.4847338

>>4847328
It's quite obvious, but by no means stupid.

>> No.4847339

>>4847304
Acting authentic and 'acting' are both forms of acting.

>> No.4847340

>>4847333
This thread was lacking humor.

I trust no "guru" who promotes le serious face.

>> No.4847343

>>4847335

Well, I can only ask again: What reason do you have to suppose that I'm atypical?

>> No.4847346

>>4847339
Express your actual feeling and being vulnerable to that is being authentic. Acting is pretending a different feeling.

>> No.4847347

>>4847343
You're a typical atypical

>> No.4847348

>>4847347
>no reason at all

OK.

>> No.4847349

>>4847343
Perhaps you are special and are the prototype for us all.

>> No.4847350

>>4847349

It doesn't seem very likely.

>> No.4847351

>>4847348
>le battle for 4chan's top guru

>> No.4847352

>>4847348
My response just then was typical and it did not mesh with you, therefore you are atypical

>> No.4847354

>>4847350
But, how can you KNOW? You have to keep an open mind.

The second coming could be in this very thread.

>> No.4847355

>>4847346

But when I talk to my colleagues I'm only expressing that our relation to one another is such that the inquiry is appropriate.

>>4847352
>My response just then was typical

Typical of something, perhaps, but not of anything relevant.

>>4847354
You shall be seated at my right hand. I'll fap into your ear you cheeky cunt.

>> No.4847356

>>4847355
>at work I'm acting

Yeah?

>> No.4847359

>>4847355
It is atypical that you are unable to realise the relevance

>> No.4847363

>>4847356

Yeah.

>>4847359

How typical is it that you're unable to articulate it?

>> No.4847367

>>4847363
Most typical, yet your lack of realisation continues to be atypical

>> No.4847374

>>4847363
Ah, yes. No point at all.

Le bullshit artist exposed.

>> No.4847375

>>4847367
>Most typical

But then you can only rely on inarticulate typicals to articulate typicality. And so you can't know whether the typicality so articulated is typical of typicality, or merely a poorly-articulated atypicality. You need an atypically articulate type like Your Humble Narrator here to articulate the types of typicality that are typical to our type. I'm the only reliable guide you can know.

>> No.4847376

>>4847374

Well, if you can't follow a conversation, it's often best not to try.

>> No.4847379

>>4847376
Ah, yes, the battle to be the best guru and not discuss truth goes on!

>> No.4847382

>>4847374
>Ah, yes.
>>4847379
>Ah, yes,

The desperately emphasised familiarity, the frantically projected superiority. Encore!

>> No.4847386

>>4847382
Ah, repeating the rhythm of my posts.

>le small mind

>> No.4847388

>>4847382
>I feel inferior.
>"Stop projecting your superiority!"

basic

>> No.4847391

>>4847375
I'm glad you've accepted that you are atypical

have a nice day!

>> No.4847393

>>4847391
Well done, anon. You get an A+

>> No.4847394

>>4847332
I wouldn't be so sure I've failed, either -- maybe you just don't have any other way of interacting with the world yet ;D

>> No.4847396

>>4847386
>Ah,

Now literally doing whatever I tell you, convinced all the while that you're defying my will. Small mind, indeed.

>>4847391
>I'm glad you've accepted that you are atypical

But in typical fashion, I reject your claim to victory.

>> No.4847397

>>4847394
>maybe we should all be friends

le Disney

>> No.4847400

>>4847388
>the word 'projecting' only has one meaning

It's nice to not think like this. You should try it.

>> No.4847401

>>4847396
>pretending to be alpha

cute

>> No.4847404

>>4847401
>getting mad

Gross.

>> No.4847403

>>4847400
Passive aggressiveness was so 20 posts ago.

>> No.4847407

>>4847404
>anger is bad

That's another sign of a pleb. Good one!

>> No.4847409

>>4847403
>i don't know what 'passive aggression' entails but i enjoy using the phrase

Have fun with it.

>>4847407

Anger that can be triggered purely at the whim of another, sure. Dance, little puppet. Dance for my amusement.

>> No.4847412

>>4847409
Aw. I can see you're bowing out. It's been fun.

>> No.4847417

>>4847412
>i can't think of a reply! I win! I WIN! YAAAAY!

I'm crushed.

>> No.4847418

>>4847417
See, I know you were playing the "I'm a better than guru than you" game.

>> No.4847423

>>4847418

I am the best Than Guru in history, friend. I'm taking Thanism to strange new peaks, charting the unknown possibilities of existence.

>> No.4847424

>>4847423
Now you've got some life back in ya!

>> No.4847452

I could write a book on this shit to be honest, but I have no idea where to start here. Realising that the outward expression --and in fact most human intake,too, is all programming, gets you most of the way towards really knowing what's going on. Taste, hearing, what you see, how you feel things -- all of this is heavily influenced by your programming and core being. That age old question of "Why is the sky blue?" for example --well, funny thing, that blue might be another person's red, or your brain's differentiation between red and blue might be the exact opposite to the next person's: he's sees your red as blue, where you see his blue as red; but you still get correspondence on what's blue or red, because the object remains the object, it's all just your brain differentiating between signals it's receiving, beams of light upon which the impression of an object is carried, your brain interpreting the object through these beams. Meh, lol. It's a wacky world out there dudes.

>> No.4847455

>>4847452
There's probably already a book, or two, written on that.

>> No.4847461

>>4847452
Trippy, right? I mean, imagine looking through another person's eyes, seeing the world by a completely different ordering of colours to what you personally know. I dunno, it inspires an incredible respect in me for other people anyway.

>> No.4847474

Continental Philosophy is real and good.

Keeping a critical distance from the world around you is not bad, but to not be invested in your life or the tasks you undertake is stupid and pointless. Don't try to be detatched from everything, then panic when you feel alienated as a a result.

>> No.4847476

Just be the best YOU that you can be.

>> No.4847478

Maybe I should find a quote from a fortune cookie and post it in this thread like the rest of you.

Holy shit you guys are /sp/ tier faggots.

>> No.4847480

>>4847455
See, why are you stuck on buzzkill mode? :P
If you're ever in Ireland and need a place to say, give me a shout man :D

>> No.4847482

>>4847319
Damn right! Flâneur in this bitch!

>> No.4847483

in an argument, try as much as you can to understand and clarify what someone means, rather than what they're saying, and argue based on that rather than attacking on the basis of semantics (unless that's central to the point)

>> No.4847484
File: 322 KB, 640x270, vlcsnap-2014-05-02-02h54m24s32.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4847484

>>4847480
Give me a buzz that I'll like.

>> No.4847486

>>4847478
Gosh, this post makes me so mad!!!

>> No.4847488

>>4847484
Death is boring.

>> No.4847489

>>4847483
In other words: listen, don't talk.

>> No.4847494

>>4847488
But you're boring and you're not dead, so I don't understand.

>> No.4847498

>>4847489
or generally, that the goal of an argument is rarely to run the other person into the ground; rather, reaching a place of mutual understanding is much more likely to actually change the other person's mind. All the better if you can point out the contradictions in their argument on their terms.

>> No.4847499

>>4847494
Still a massive buzzkill. Damn this capitalism anyway, it kills any real appreciation between people.

>> No.4847500

>>4847499
This is a free website. You're not making any sense.

>> No.4847502

>>4847499
I should just pretend I have no aspirations to write on the /lit/ board, I guess; livelihood that writing is for some people.

>> No.4847503

>>4847498
>argument

Listening has nothing to do with arguing.

arguing=talking without the intent to listen

>> No.4847508

>>4847452

This is fucking wrong. We know why we see red instead of blue. Unless that other persons eye structure is different or something, everybody sees the same color when certain frequencies of light are registered by the eye. If the mechanisms for vision are the same or very similar in everyone, then everybody sees the same color red.

>> No.4847509

>>4847508
everyone does not see the same colors

>> No.4847512

>>4847503
on those terms, then, I'm saying that arguing is rarely productive. satisfied?

>> No.4847513

>>4847512
Thank you. This is rarely admitted and it is great to hear.

>> No.4847517

People love to talk about themselves, not only does it make you seem interested but it also gets things off their chest which they may need to let out

Keep that in mind when you're hanging out with a mate or a chick

>> No.4847520

>>4847509

Ostensibly because they lack the biological mechanisms required to view such colors. However, if the mechanisms are the same in people, which 99% of the time they are, then we see the same colors.

>> No.4847522

>>4847517
People hate to listen to people who love to talk about themselves.

Keep that in mind next time you open your mouth.

>> No.4847525

>>4847520
some people see richer colors. you can purchase glasses that have you see colors you never did before.

>> No.4847534

>>4847508
We know no such thing as such a thing would be impossible to know. Colour exists only in your mind, it is something emergent, incapturable to anyone else but you --it's like how a camera can take pictures in sepia, etc.; the object is still being processed in its entirety, it's being fully realised; just differently, uniquely.

>> No.4847535

>>4847522
That too is good advice

>> No.4847545

>>4847525

Those glasses would have to allow you to register different frequencies of light. I'm not arguing the fact that there are different frequencies of light, or that other colors besides the ones humans are capable of seeing don't exist, i'm saying that it is outrageous to claim that someone might see red as blue or blue as red. All people have the same mechanisms for vision; there is no reason to believe such an extraordinary claim without the evidence for it.

>> No.4847555

>>4847534

Not true. Vision is a very well understood biological concept. If two identical clones, who have the same eye and same brain, both are exposed to light stimuli, they HAVE TO process it the exact same way. Just like two identical cameras taking a picture from the same location would capture the same image. You can conclude this without ever looking at the pictures, you just have to realize that both the cameras are identical and the location are identical, so a different picture would be impossible to exist.

>> No.4847558

>>4847489
>>4847517
Both these posts remind me so much of How to Win Friends And Influence People by Dale Carnegie. His lesson: "the only way to get the best of an argument is to avoid it" is something I wish more people would apply

>> No.4847559

>>4847545
Yes, but there are an infinite amount of colors, not just what are Crayola markers.

>> No.4847561

>>4847558
ikr. it sucks to win all the time. it would be nice to find a challenge, ie someone who also knows the art of how to listen.

>> No.4847564

>>4847545
There's no reason to disbelieve it, either. That the object always remains the object says nothing about the perception of the object. Mind is emergent from mechanics, colours but a representation that exist only in the mind, a virtuality --this virtuality need not be the same from one person to the next; indeed, it is an empirical fact that it isn't (see: synesthesia).

>> No.4847565

>>4847559

Well seeing as color can only be understood in the context of human vision, the more appropriate phrase would be that there is an infinite number of possible light frequencies.

>> No.4847567

>>4847565
That doesn't help, so the more appropriate response would be something of value.

>> No.4847570

>>4847555
The same processing does not make the same virtuality --the seeing of colours is just visual realisation; what if, say, there were no reds as you know them in a person's environment, but the seeing of red was easier for the person than the seeing of some other realisation? The slightest differences might make for entirely different worlds.

>> No.4847573

>>4847564
or we have anecdotal evidence that it isn't, rather, what with how we can't have anything more than that.

>> No.4847574

>>4847564

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

And you're wrong. I'm not trying to argue that the object remains the object. I'm saying that the perception of an object HAS TO be the same in two individuals when they have the exact same mechanisms for perception. Can you prove otherwise

>> No.4847579

>>4847574
Any police report with more than one witness will have different stories about what they saw.

>> No.4847583

>>4847574
Are we all the exact same, anon?

>> No.4847584

>>4847579

That is a problem with memory not perception

>> No.4847591

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14421303

>> No.4847595

>>4847591
Thank you, anon.

>> No.4847596

>>4847584
Then perception is useless if memory is unreliable, for there's no way to verify accurate perception, then.

>> No.4847599

>>4847583

No, but we all have very similar mechanisms for vision. Any nuances in perception can be explained with nuances in these mechanisms. There is no evidence to support the claim that people perceive color differently. Unless someone is like a mutant with an entirely different eye or occipital lobe, then they can't see red as blue or blue as red, and in fact perceive colors the same way as everybody else.

>> No.4847605

>>4847596

It's certainly not useless, although maybe in the context of a court room it can be considered useless. That's why it is not advisable to convict someone of a crime based solely upon eyewitness testimony, since this can lead to false convictions. DNA is much more reliable.

>> No.4847607

>>4847599
Read the link an anon kindly provided you. Colour is but a mental construct, it is not a solid thing, and even the slightest differences between people could make for incredibly different construction -- and in fact it does (see: synesthesia).

>> No.4847614

>>4847605
Wow. This is really fascinating. I've never heard this information before.

>> No.4847615

>>4847599

Cultural differences can skew perception to the point where certain shades of colours are imperceptible due to not having that particular shade acknowledged in the language. There was a Horizon documentary on this that was very interesting. It was called Do You See What I see, I think.

>> No.4847621

>>4847615
Fascinating.

>> No.4847624

>>4847599

I don't think you're understanding the issue. Think about the colour 'red' for a moment. Since you can imagine 'red' in an environment where your visual field perceives no redness, clearly you can envision redness independently of any light source. So what you 'see' as redness when light of a certain frequency stimulates your visual receptors is something internal to you PROMPTED by that stimulus, rather than something conveyed to you by means of it. 'Redness' doesn't travel along with the light waves.

Now think about the colour 'blue'. Very different from 'red', right? But suppose that what you see as 'blue' is what other people see as 'red'. You both receive light of the same frequency and you both say 'Yes, that's red.' But what the other person thinks of as 'red' is what you think of as 'blue'. We could never demonstrate that this is or isn't the case.

And this is (mildly) interesting for that reason - that we can't show otherwise, not because we have some reason to suppose that it's actually the case.

>> No.4847627

>>4847624
>blue is different from red

interesting.

>> No.4847628

Well damn, I thought I was worth a fortune

>> No.4847631

>>4847627
>if i don't read the post, i won't realise i'm wrong
>that means i win
>neenar neenar

That's me told.

>> No.4847635

>>4847631
I'm sorry, I wanted to let you win. I knew we weren't sharing information for mutual understanding.

>> No.4847644

>>4847624
Fuck off Wittgenstein. This literally 10-year-old philosophy, along with realizing the universe is big and thinking about phrases like "the straw that broke the camel's back". The fact that you all suck such a juvenile philosopher's cock so much seriously leads me to believe that very few of you possess an innate intelligence.

>> No.4847646

>>4847635
>now i will feign a spurious moral superiority

You wear it well.

>> No.4847649

One of the main things I discovered while growing up is how powerful our mind actually is. I always had people tell me "you can do whatever you set your mind to" and "don't say you can't" and all that shit, but I never took it seriously. I smoked marijuana one day and overcame some fairs and basically went through a mind motivation for all my tasks, and I performed significantly better at all of them.

Think of how much power it takes to hallucinate on DMT, the power to create a whole fucking unimagined world in your brain. That's some massive ability. So trying to do a kickflip on a skateboard is just using muscles and movement in the right way, why the fuck can't I do it. Once, I realized its all in my mind I was able to overcome it and pretty much every obstacle I've encountered since that smoking session.

>> No.4847650

>>4847646
I'm listening.

>> No.4847656

>>4847644
>an innate intelligence

You just ruined your entire position/post.

>> No.4847657

>>4847644
>This literally 10-year-old philosophy

Agreed - and yet I find myself having to explain it to people. Seems like your hostility might be better directed elsewhere.

>> No.4847658

>>4847644
>innate intelligence

les Futants?

>> No.4847660

>>4847644
I personally came to the realisation that colour needn't be the same from person to person all on my own, I am really intelligent.

>> No.4847661

>>4847656

I don't think a post that begins with "Fuck off Wittgenstein, this literally 10 year old philosophy" innately has much to ruin.

>> No.4847662

>>4847657
>can't handle the hostility

not very advanced, are you?

>> No.4847669

>>4847661
That fukkin burn with 'innately'.

Fukkin winrar.

>> No.4847670

>>4847656
Cry more faggot I just woke up an am hungover as shit from the Long Islands. I stand by my previous post, if Wittgenstein is revolutionary or even presenting new ideas to you, you're probably retarded.

>> No.4847671

>>4847662

No, alas. But I imagine that if you and I were the only occupants of Athens, the Oracle would name me as its most advanced occupant.

>> No.4847673

>>4847671
Wit is pretty useless, isn't it.

>> No.4847684

>>4847624

>PROMPTED by that stimulus

This is still a biological mechanism. Color is not a metaphysical idea but still a response to stimulus produced in the brain.

>> No.4847686

>>4847669

REKT status: REKT

TOLD status: TOLD

BURNT status: YA BURNT

SERVED status: JUST GOT

>> No.4847690

What does /sci/ have to do with this thread?

>> No.4847695

>>4847686
omg. i'm fukkin horny naow

>> No.4847699

>>4847684
>Color is not a metaphysical idea

I'm not saying it's a 'metaphysical' idea, just that it is in fact an idea, rather than some innate property of the light that prompts it.

>>4847673

Well. You wouldn't know, would you?

>> No.4847706

>>4847699
Being butthurt is useful, to me.

>> No.4847708
File: 88 KB, 461x612, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4847708

>>4847686
>The average person who like Wittgenstein samefagging and derailing

Nice.

>> No.4847727

>>4847708
>if two posts are critical of me then samefag

Damn I wish I lived in a fully-customisable reality. I'd have like, the BIGGEST dick and all the chicks would be trying to get on it. Shit would be so cash.

>> No.4847729

>>4847699

I never argued that color was some innate property of light. That's stupid. Color is an innate property of light perception in most humans, however.

>> No.4847736

>>4847729
Please, more /sci/ discussion, please.

>> No.4847739

>>4847729
>Color is an innate property of light perception in most humans, however.

Yes, but as I explained, that's not relevant to the issue of your 'red' versus my 'blue'. That lies beyond empirical investigation.

>> No.4847746

>>4847727
Lol I broke it. So you're pissed off because you can't think for yourself and believe nothing can be inherent in human beings because you're a stupid leftist faggot, right? Okay well people like Rodney Mullen, Scotty Stevens and everyone over 150 IQ, and the people paying attention know you're a ridiculous twat and some animals actually are more equal than others.

Innately

>> No.4847749

>>4847746
Be nice.

>> No.4847754

I'm a leftist and my IQ is over 150.

>> No.4847768

>>4847739

>That lies beyond empirical investigation.

Perhaps, doubt it will be like that for long.

>> No.4847775

>>4847754
Good for you cupcake. Niggers aren't people and stop trying to take my money via the state.

>> No.4847776

>>4847746
>believe nothing can be inherent in human beings

I never said that, nor anything from which that could reasonably be inferred. I suppose we can strike you off both the >150 IQ and the 'paying attention' lists.

>> No.4847781

>>4847768

Maybe, maybe not. I suspect there'll always be a sliver of ground for doubt, even if in the future I don't personally occupy it.

>> No.4847782

>>4847776
>I didn't say that I just shat my pants over the word innately

Commie pls, you cannot play your shit with me

>> No.4847789

>>4847775
I'm only looking out for you, mate. Just because some people represent bigger pieces of the jigsaw puzzle doesn't mean they wouldn't be more comfortable or amount to something more beautiful as a part of the whole.

>> No.4847809

>>4847789
So even though like 20 countries have instituted brutal authoritarian regimes with atrocities from famine to raping women with german shepards and there is no success story to point to, you think we should go ahead and try again? Well mr "150 IQ" maybe you leftie queers are on to something when you say intelligence isn't everything after all B)

[/spoiler]implying you have ever taken an actual test[/spoiler]

>> No.4847819

>>4847809
Haha I must still be drunk. Well I'll go make coffee and see if the janitor is gonna try and push a ban through.

Love ya /lit/, lets talk about books some time soon.

>> No.4847821

>>4847809
At least we've moved from /sci/ to /pol/

Change is good.

>> No.4847827

>>4847782
>i don't even know why people were mocking me

>>4847809

Yes, bring on the gulags. Come back, Uncle Joe, all is forgiven. You surely have your finger on the pulse of modern leftism, dog. No strawmen here!

>[/spoiler]implying you have ever taken an actual test[/spoiler]

Ladies and gentlemen, I for one welcome our high-IQ overlords.

Highlight the text you want to spoiler and Ctrl-S, there's a tip, my intellectually super-endowed friend.

>> No.4847828

>>4847827
>giving spoiler tips whilst fucking it up

kek

>> No.4847832

>>4847809
The brutality is your philosophy, mate; not mine --more equal than others and whatnot. Yes, I'm looking for something different to the same old monotony of carnage.

And I've taken numerous tests, actually; though I'll admit that I haven't always placed over 150, but also often well over it (those tests aren't incredibly accurate, there's incredible nuance to intelligence that they fail to take into account).

>> No.4847835

>>4847828
>giving spoiler tips whilst fucking it up

Nah, he fucked it up. I quoted his fuck-up to mock it.

>> No.4847841

>>4847835
I knew you were trying to win.

>le argumentetive

>> No.4847863

>>4847841

Have you really been entering various threads just to quixotically 'accuse' people of 'trying to win'? Is that the best use of your time you can think of?

Because, like, yeah, man, I'm trying to win. Do you think this is news to me? Something I'm apt to deny? Something I should be ashamed of?

>> No.4847866

>>4847832
>The brutality is your philosophy, mate; not mine --more equal than others and whatnot. Yes, I'm looking for something different to the same old monotony of carnage.

Such brutality is inarguably just greater, more obvious manifestation of the capitalistic spirit --that spirit, however, is still just as insidiously creeping and murderous in its scattered state. Money pools and adds up to tyrants, mate.

>> No.4847875

>>4847863
It's just this one. We covered arguing as being useless many posts ago. You're regressing the very nature of the thread.

>> No.4847892

WTF happend to my thread?

>> No.4847893

>>4847892
4chan happened.

>> No.4847943

>>4847253
There is a fascinating manifestation of this to be witnessed in people in how they will deal with mental turmoil by making themselves more physically comfortable, btw --which is that silly common capitalistic spirit, a petty defiance in the immediate moment, the future paid no heed to, forced out.

>> No.4847949

>>4847943
You'll see it very commonly with celebrities appearing on talk shows before a big scary audience, if you're interested in witnessing it.

>> No.4847956

money does buy happiness

>> No.4847957

>>4847943
>>4847949
And then all of this, from everyone, adds up to monstrosity.

>> No.4847962

>>4847957
>le drama

>> No.4847968

It's okay to have relationship with underage girls

>> No.4847971

>>4847962
It's the truth.

>> No.4847973

>>4847971
BIG DRAMA

>> No.4847974

Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Was quite surprised when it finally dawned on me.

>> No.4847980

>>4847974
Nobody expects the Son of God.

>> No.4847985

>>4847980
the first big clue was that all the important people in society belong to one or another satanic cult.
that got me thinking

>> No.4847987

>>4847985
*smooths out the crinkles in your tinfoil hat*

go on

>> No.4847997

>>4847346
>>4847339
I had this exact argument with my sister the other day. She believes there is no authenticity and everyone is acting, some better and some worse while I do believe in authenticity.
I might be the one brainwashed by marketing and whatnot but I'm still too romantic to think that everything we do is in some way fake , which isn't implied by something not being authentic but I don't know... I'd like to think there is a certain truth to authenticity even if there isn't

>> No.4848004

>>4847997
Some people are acting all the time.

The point is it starts with you being vulnerable in just being honest about your emotions.

>> No.4848010

>>4848004
>The point is it starts with you being vulnerable in just being honest about your emotions.
sorry but ...what?

>> No.4848021

>>4848010
what what?

>> No.4848033

>>4848004
I find that if you are honest there are usually two reactions:

1. people are taken aback by your honesty, but actually respect you and feel affection for you.
2. they think you are insane.

>> No.4848036

>>4848021
I didn't quite get what starts with you being vulnerable etc...
You were replying to my post,right?

>> No.4848038

>>4848033
they don't think you're insane, they're just mechanical assholes and are to be pitied

>> No.4848046

>>4848036
I don't understand your question, so at least we agree there.

>> No.4848051

>>4848038
the thing is that they stick to their "mechanics" out of fear.
I think you just have to talk to them in a way that puts them totally at ease, where they trust you completely.

>> No.4848054

>>4848051
you can't save them

>> No.4848075

>>4848033

Honesty and authenticity is also a great way to throw insecure and manipulative people for a loop.

I think I've had too many of those people in my life and in a way its affected me. I can spot the biggest actors with ease and they're usually prone to neutoric bouts.

>> No.4848077

>>4848075

*neurotic

>> No.4848078

>>4848075
pls elaborate.

>> No.4848108

>>4848078

Generally a manipulative person, or at least the ones I've dealt with like to lead people on or trap you in their little game.

If you're able to catch that, you can avoid playing into their hands and passively avoid their tactics by simply being yourself.

As for insecure people - or at least the ones i've dealth with - depending on what kind of reaction they're fishing for, they might take offense or feel threatened that they didn't fish the kind of response they want from you to feed their egos.

In a way they're kind of similar; similar pattern, different game.

>> No.4848115

>>4848108
this is all so vague. I know this might ruin the magic but Care to give an example?
>Generally a manipulative person, or at least the ones I've dealt with like to lead people on or trap you in their little game.
I feel like I know what you mean. Pls give an example

>> No.4848116

>>4847973
SNAP OUT OF IT

>> No.4848143

>>4848115
There's no magic involved. It's very simple. In fact, it takes no thought at all.

>> No.4848197

>>4848143
So did you like the story I wrote about the care salesman then?

>> No.4848202

>>4848197
Oh... car*
lol

>> No.4848236
File: 28 KB, 308x500, Games_People_Play_(1969).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4848236

>>4848115
>Pls give an example

The nature of it is pretty vague because you're dealing with a lot of bullshitting in general but it's also kind of hard to describe without a specific context. Either way I'll give it a shot and try to keep it brief.

Let's say the manipulative person's game is to try and learn any kind of buttons they can push so they can trigger a negative response from you when they feel like it. Over time that person tries to steer conversations onto topics of what they think will push your buttons and you steer it away or display strong emotions. They will read that as a positive sign of something they can use as a weapon.

The thing to keep in mind is that these kinds of people mostly target authentic types either because they see that as a sign of weakness (naiveté) or someone they haven't pulled into their web. One of my favorite things to do in these kinds of situations is to (indirectly or directly) call them out on their game because at that point they realize you're on to them. Depending on how devious they are, they might stop pursuing their game with you right then and there.

>> No.4848266

>>4848236
That's a good book, but you should stop bullshitting. "I like to call them out on their game, because that that point they realise you're onto them". Stop talking, lol.

>> No.4848290

And then that book isn't that great either, there are much more obvious games, and games in need of being guarded against, that people play that aren't mentioned in it ---though I guess that book came about before the internet, and so us modern folk commonly have more observed. An example would be the "getting anon mad" game, which has two parts (as many of the games in that book do too, though only one part is ever expounded upon): 1. in controlling the physicality of a person (anon's anger is something you have control over), and 2. in justification of oneself, as anger is associated with the ills of the world (you'll often get this part of the game from the religious in defending their religion against angry atheists).

>> No.4848302

>>4848290
Basically, people are retarded.

>> No.4848313

>>4848302
And everyone is a manipulative person, and when you have a whole bunch of manipulative people in the same room, their manipulativeness will congeal, AS IF BY MAGIC, in trying to press down upon a different sort of person sharing the room with them. It's collective unconscious sort of stuff -- and it's what made Hitler, in fact; the German people were NOT oblivious, they're just an incredibly separated (and thus solipsistic) race of people (as per their so different language, IMO). God bless capitalism.

>> No.4848343

The ego blinds man as to what he really is. It's actually incredible how conniving we can be without realising it. I mean, there's a selfish little core that is the person, sure, and the person is aware of that much, but generally has no idea with what profundity that selfish little core manifests itself. It's just something quite astounding, to be honest; something you could only consider magic ---and I have no idea how people can be so oblivious to it and not oblivious to it at the same time. In the necessity of feeding oneself delusion, I suppose; in the need to hide from yourself the monster you are.

>> No.4848345

>>4847574
but we don't.

>> No.4848361

When I learned that sex hormone is all that really matters on such this shitty earth

>> No.4848366

The greatest thing I learned is the need to be independent above all else

>> No.4848371

>>4848343
Orwell's Doublethink, basically; but it's layering infinite and wicked genius with oblivious and innocent retardation.

>> No.4848374

>>4848343
Well said. The goal of a noble life is dedeluding yourself and at the very least becoming AWARE.

>> No.4848378

>>4848374
Deluding yourself or not deluding yourself? lol

>> No.4848384

Holy shit, I come so close to believing in Jesus and good and evil and hopelessness and all that bullshit when I think about this stuff, but there's a moral sense in me that rails against it.

>> No.4848406

>>4847209
but thats precisely why you should take yourself seriously

>> No.4848417

>>4848343
A child knows the sort of person you are just in being around you. They see right through you. I don't know where we lose this ability along the way. It's probably language or something, that our consciousness gets lost in language --but then language is so layered with that genius, too, it's unreal; it's just it can be retardedly ingenious, which I know makes very little sense, but think NLP, words behind words.

>> No.4848426

>>4848417
No one is retarded. Heck, poverty in first world countries is just another game like in that book, a lie, a challenging of some existential consideration, the same fucking thing that had Paul Walker die in a car crash. Human beings are so fucking profound.

>> No.4848429

I just don't understand it, but I can see it; it's fucking magic.

>> No.4848452

And so I drink, because holy shit I cannot handle that shit all the time, lol. But I've had some beautiful moments of it, too --one in particular that stands out--and all the shits in the world are worth it for the one in a million you come across who echoes your own soul with the majesty of infinity.

>> No.4848458

>>4848452
And trust me, I sound crazy even to myself, but I can document quite a lot of this shit, and have done on here too --it just hardly makes sense.

>> No.4848474

>>4848452
I guess all the shits get that all the time, but they're shits --they hardly take any beauty in knowing those around them hate them just as they hate those around them.

>> No.4848490

Problems have to be able to be solved by yourself, otherwise they are not problems

>> No.4848514

>>4848474
It's like in the movie Red Dragon where Hannibal Lecter is throwing a dinner party for the orchestra and feeding them one of their own, a poor musician. And they're all talking about Epicurus and his herd and so on, and one of the orchestra "confesses" a darkness, that he's glad the missing musician (who is being eaten) is missing because he was poor anyway, and then it comes back to Hannibal, a lady amongst them prompting him, it's his turn to confess, "What is that we're eating?" and he gets a start at that monstrous knowing, but no fear, it's but knowing amongst monsters --------it's crazy!! Great movie, btw.

>> No.4848517

>>4848417
>>4848426
>>4848429
>>4848452
>>4848458
I think I've had enough /lit/ for one decade.

>> No.4848528

>>4848517
This is profundity like you're not going to find anywhere else, mate. Well, besides in Red Dragon, lol.

>> No.4848540

It makes no sense that humans are so retarded, to be quite honest.

>> No.4848544

>>4848528
Or 1984.

>> No.4848549

>>4848540
I'm gonna figure that out someday.

>> No.4848553

>>4847227

You were doing so well until

>"who you are" (if such an essentialist thing really exists)

Are you really going to deny identity? Habit? Character?

Why is this denial of "essentialism" trending in literary circles? Seems extraordinarily facile.

>> No.4848574

>>4848553
But essentialism is truly idiotic. You don't need to be an essentialist to recognise identity or habit or character.

>> No.4848595

>>4848540
Because it works enough to work. Excellence really isn't a given, a warranted expectation or even a requirement. Excellence is more like a hobby.

>> No.4848599

>>4848540
Yes it does. The brain is very energy-demanding. Evolution only needs to make things as smart as they need to be, hence the abundance of cognitively limited plants, insects, etc. The only time evolution selects strongly for intelligence is when it is required to survive a novel ecological pressure (ie competition from fellow humans). When it is highest (ie Nazis systematically eliminating Jews), the cleverest tend to survive, and may benefit the average intelligence of a population. If anything, it's remarkable we are capable of anything more than hunting, gathering, grunting, and fucking.

>> No.4848612

>>4848574

Are you talking about Aristotelian essential vs. accidental qualities?

You don't think that there are universal qualities of human mind?

If that were the case, how can we connect with ancient literature?

>> No.4848616

>>4848612
I think the problem with essentialism is when it starts getting prescriptive, which is always bound to happen.

>> No.4848642

>>4848595
Yes, I think that's it, to be honest; that most of it is just playing dumb.

>> No.4848648

>>4848642
Which is absurd, I know.

>> No.4848652

Life and life experiences have to be encountered statistically as a mass rather than individually on a case-by-case basis. It's much better to try to objectively turn yourself into a good/excellent person, and to present the resulting personality to people with only minor variations, than it is to try to get inside every single person's individual preferences and perceptions.

You should look at your personality and social interactions like a business card. A business card is totally disposable, you carry a billion of them so you can hand them out whenever, or even leave a stack on a table somewhere just in case. They might be thrown away, or laughed at, or even shoved up someone's ass, but 90% of the time they'll be well-received, and occasionally they'll even be useful and held onto by someone who is really interested.

Make yourself a really good business card and then present it to people and don't fucking cry and wonder why when you see it lying in the street occasionally, or see the person toss it in the garbage.

>> No.4848674

>>4848616

Yeah, humanities professors who grew up as hippies tend to reject and kind of "normative" or "prescriptive" cuz "dun judge me dun tell me how to live my life".

>> No.4848766

>>4848674
That's a fine reason to reject normative and prescriptive things. Don't /pol/ friends like you reject PC prescriptivist tendencies in the same way?

>> No.4849750

Looking back, I definitely wasn't putting on an act with my friends and acquaintances, and always expressed my feelings. True, this did put me in various troubles throughout the years, but it also gave me honest no-bullshit friendships. I dunno, I always valued honesty highly, even if it's something I'm not gonna like. Insinuating that everyone is puttimg on an act is foreign to me, it's modern depressive "society is fake" bullshit. I have very little practice in social manners to be aboe to fake them effectively, and I sure don't have the energy for it around people I like.
Go away nihilists.

>> No.4849774

>>4849750
>it's modern depressive "society is fake" bullshit

Society isn't 'fake'. 'Fakeness' isn't a concept that applies any more than does 'realness'. Society is as it is.

>> No.4849797

>>4847233
reminds me of It's A Wonderful Life.
when you're fucked, if you've been a decent person to everybody and you've won their respect, they'll help you out in your time of desperation.

>> No.4849817
File: 33 KB, 633x758, crusty feel.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4849817

>those retarded OOH OUR PERCEPTIONS OF BLUE MIGHT BE DIFFERENT fuckers are now in /lit/
goddammit

>> No.4851189

>>4849774
>muh relativism

>> No.4851208

>>4849817
/lit/ is dead

there is nowhere left to go

take heart from your books and never set foot on the internet again

>> No.4851214

>>4851189
No dumbass you are on a computer using electricity, society is quite real. You're just an idiot and say things that do not even make sense because you feel better. You know what the best part of your idiocy is? "Muh roads" and not raping people are actually social constructs. You fucking. Doublethinking drone motherfucking fucks.

>> No.4851219

>>4849817
I hate wittgenstein so god damn much

>> No.4851242

>>4851214
wtf are you on about? I'm not even the guy you responded to. Ofc being fake is relative if being real is relative in society too which is relative blababla

>> No.4851259

>>4849817
I didn't even know this was a thing. That is, a serious point of debate.

One may suppose that one's subjective experience of a wavelength of light might look like a blue while for another look like red. But they'd both be pointing at the same color and calling it whatever the fuck color it is, so it's a meaningless distinction.

If what I saw looks 'red' but all my life I've been told it's blue and that this other color is red, then it'd be blue to me and the other red.

>>4851219
Why?

I haven't gotten into his Investigations yet, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't seriously advance a position that retarded. He might bring it up, but he's all about language and surely would notice that 'blue' is whatever the fuck everyone says blue is.

>> No.4851266

>>4849817
>>4851219
>>4851259

You three are retarded.

>> No.4851395

>>4848406
If one wishes to be affected by the world one will never take oneself seriously.

If one wishes to affect the world or be completely independent of it one will take oneself seriously

>> No.4851551

That pain and effort pays of in most cases.

Wish I've kept up painting and fencing, I was great at both but my kid - self choose mmorpgs instead.

>> No.4852401

RED VS BLUE IS SHIT.
GO TO BED ROOSTERTEETH.

>> No.4852476

>>4851551
>That pain and effort pays of in most cases.
It doesn't.
>Wish I've kept up painting and fencing, I was great at both
See? This pays of. Talking about how you wished you did something and then not doing it. Paying lip service to your glorious talent that never blossomed and feeling good about it. Putting in an actual effort is a lot less pleasant.