piety, and why today's society is bad

This thread is for ranting about why (and if) our society sucks. Here is a segment of a conversation I had with a real-life friend today on Discord. Let's name him "John" for the sake of anonymity. I kept the original French text only because [] might be interested in it. SamToday at 1:38 AM La question reste sans réponse: La société d'aujourd'hui est-elle mauvaise, et si oui, pourquoi? [The question remains unanswered: Is today's society bad, and if so, why?] [...] SamToday at 1:40 AM Je pense avoir une réponse valide. [I think I have a valid answer.] À mon avis, la société d'aujourd'hui est mauvaise, parce qu'elle manque de piété. [In my opinion, today's society is bad, because it lacks piety.] JohnToday at 1:40 AM piété? As in? [piety? As in?] "Attachement fervent aux devoirs et aux pratiques de la religion." ["Fervent attachment to duty and to religious practices."] SamToday at 1:42 AM Non [No] JohnToday at 1:43 AM "une vertu cultivée" ["a refined virtue"] SamToday at 1:43 AM non ça ça veut rien dire lol [no that doesn't mean anything lol] As-tu lu Euthyphron de Platon? [have you read Euthyphro (by Plato)?] JohnToday at 1:43 AM non [no] SamToday at 1:43 AM fuck [fuck] JohnToday at 1:44 AM Peux-tu remplacer piété par un autre mot? [Can you replace piety with a different word?] SamToday at 1:45 AM "Sentiments humains alliant l'affection au respect." ["Human feelings combining affection with respect."] JohnToday at 1:46 AM Ah! [Ah!] Quel est ton raisonnement? [What is your reasoning?] Pour "À mon avis, la société d'aujourd'hui est mauvaise, parce qu'elle manque de piété." [For "In my opinion, today's society is bad, because it isn't pious enough."] SamToday at 1:48 AM Tsé quand les gens ont du sex avec tout le monde? [Y'know when people have sex with anyone?] Ne crois-tu pas tout comme moi que c'est une chose immorale puisque que le corps humain ne devrait pas être utilisé comme simple objet? [Don't you believe just like me that it is an immoral thing because the human body should not be used like a mere object?] C'est un exemple de chose impie. Une personne qui valorise la piété souhaite honorer le corps et la pensée d'autrui. [This is an example of an impious thing. Someone who valorizes piety wishes to honor others' body and thoughts.] JohnToday at 1:50 AM Moi le seul point que je vois que quelqu'un pourrait avoir pour "Tsé quand les gens ont du sex avec tout le monde" c'est si c'est sans risque et que c'est pour l'amusement et non du sérieux [To me, the only valid reason I see that someone could have for "Y'know when people have sex with anyone?" is if it's without risk and that it's for amusement and not something serious] SamToday at 1:52 AM Même si c'est pour l'amusement, c'est impie. [Even if it's for amusement, it's impious.] Une autre exemple: [Another example:] Quelqu'un utilise toujours le même verre à table, au point où la famille reconnaît facilement que "ça c'est son verre à lui". Si quelqu'un se mit à utiliser son verre, même pour l'amusement, ce serait une chose impie. [Someone always uses the same glass when at the table, to the point where the family easily acknowledges that "that's his glass". If someone were to use his glass, even for amusement, it would be an impious thing.] [...] SamToday at 1:55 AM Pour la personne pieuse, le corps est, je suppose qu'on peut le dire ainsi, "sacré". [To the pious person, the body is, I guess we could say it this way, "sacred".] JohnToday at 1:55 AM oui, donc elle ne veut pas essayer d'en abuser [yes, so that person doesn't want to try abusing it.] SamToday at 1:56 AM Ouais [Yeah] Si tu vois de quoi je parle et que je suis possiblement une personne très pieuse, tu peux comprendre pourquoi je voulais pas poster mon dessin hier. [If you see what I mean and that I possibly am a very pious person, you can understand why I didn't want to post my drawing yesterday.] (Editor's note: don't ask for the context lol) JohnToday at 1:57 AM parce que tu voulais te respecter et ce que tu as dessiné [it's because you wanted to respect yourself and what you drew] SamToday at 1:59 AM Non; c'est parce que je crois avoir déshonoré la chose que j'ai dessinée. C'est-à-dire, l'avoir banalisée, trivialisée, alors qu'elle est à mes yeux une chose "sacrée". [No; it's because I believe I have dishonored the thing that I drew. That is, having trivialized it, when it is to my eyes a "sacred" thing.] JohnToday at 1:59 AM ah, ok [ah, ok] SamToday at 2:00 AM Autre exemple: t'as des vieux toutous pis ta mère les jette :frowning: [Other example: you have old plushies and your mom tosses them :frowning:] JohnToday at 2:00 AM Donc si je faisais quelque chose d'honteux en utilisant l'image de quelqu'un que j'aime, si j'ai de la piété, je ne devrais pas essayer d'en faire mention [So if I do something shameful using the image of someone I like, if I have piety, I shouldn't try to mention it] [...] SamToday at 2:02 AM Non seulement ça, mais tu te sentirais honteux et essaierais de te pardonner. [Not only that, but you would also feel ashamed and would try to forgive yourself.] [...] SamToday at 2:04 AM "Don't forget to like and subscribe" est une chose très impie, parce qu'elle banalise la pensée humaine en la traitant comme un simple article de commerce. ["Don't forget to like and subscribe" is a very impious thing, because it trivializes human thoughts by treating them like mere commercial goods.] JohnToday at 2:05 AM :frowning: je le faisais dans quelques-unes de mes vidéos [:frowning: I used to do that in some of my videos] [...] SamToday at 2:06 AM Mais ouais je valorise beaucoup beaucoup la piété [But yeah I valorize piety a LOT]
this 'piety' or conservatism is too arbitrary in its values. Notice that even in the examples given, meaningless breaks from tradition are met with disapproval. In cases like the glass on the table, yes, it makes sense. It is convenient to make that implicit assumption that things should "be that way." But just as often is it used to oppose progress and justify 'preventing change.' But values... cultural, social, are arbitrary. Their solidity is a state that only exists in the mind. Piety is just a poor excuse for refusing to be open-minded, and you imply its own defense with a self-righteous mentality, i.e. "tradition is good because I am better for upholding it." This is fallacious. To what value are human thoughts that they can not be treated as goods? No, there are definitely better ways to rationalize disliking that use of language than "it is bad because it is a thing that I consider bad[trivializing...] which is bad[impious]"
I wasn't trying to prove that my point was rational. ...I regret making this thread.
c'est une blague xDDDDDDDDDDDD
I'm not laughing also this thread was a mistake I wish it disappeared
But, do you understand why it was a mistake? You have to learn from everything.
I'm laughing lol
>>24510 No, I don't understand. There isn't much I understand anymore: most of my thoughts are very cloudy and I'm unable to think properly. Everything around me is just weird and sad. I'm going to meet a psychologist this Wednesday, but I doubt this will help much. Be aware that I'm not trying to use some "oh I'm desperate so have pity on me" argument, or at least I don't want to. Here's another theory I made up. Sharing it might help me. I think my dilemma may be: "should I want to be considered normal, which implies no one should have privileges, or should I want to be considered retarded, which implies I should have privileges like all those other minorities that I've always hated for having privileges?" Spending my time in some kind of asylum where I live off of people's taxes sounds great and all, but I want to live a real life... Also, >>24512 is very offending
Why do you care? You know you're right, right? What do the words of any random internet stranger mean to you? Nothing. Nothing. You're right. You're right. You're right. You're right. What's wrong?
>>24518 (I'd answer, but this is a public forum: we're here to speak openly, not have a dialogue.)
>>24520 You say that, yet you know your last post kind of was a dialogue. You make no sense.
>>24510 >>24514 I think the problem wasn't having these thoughts, nor sharing them. The problem was that you already became very rigid in your beliefs. If you didn't want input, then sharing it is a mistake. Sharing something without being able to accept criticism is proselytizing, it is an arrogant statement that "I am already perfect! I have the answers!" So it wasn't really a discussion, I think. Things like "why society is bad." is like a claim that you have "figured it all out." It's those two (three) things that are at odds with each other. "Wanting answers," "not wanting disagreement," and "sharing publicly" Everyone struggles with an identity of "normalcy" ...but not in the context of a gambit like you seem to perceive. Those people that really do get to "live for free" are unable to realize that they are even getting something out of it. A dependent that does understand their situation understands how much of a burden their existence puts on everyone around them. If there are people taking advantage of it... well, they may be sociopaths. You are already not "normal" Because "normal" no longer exists--it is a figment of an unreality constructed by the media, don't you think? "Always be happy" and "success" is [portrayed as] natural. But even unworried, socially apt people do not actually live this way. They fake it by necessity of fitting in. Being sad is "wrong" and must be corrected. That's what I've observed. So, even if you were not already too far "flawed" from that "normal" image, you could still never truly obtain it. Most humans perceive about the same amount of personal suffering. My last point this time... there is usually a reason that people say things. Sometimes it turns out to not be a very good reason, but more often it turns out that there is a good reason but it has been mutated beyond usefulness by the easy by which the layperson turns to useless things like "emotion" and "faith." As a result, interacting with the followers of a belief is rarely as valuable or worthwhile as with the source material. I would suggest looking into some of the things that you disagree with more, from a source that explains the situation correctly. It may not be that they are "correct," but they will help you avoid turning to your own faulty "emotion" and "faith" when defending against them.
You are supposed to be awake at 9:30 AM when you do sleep the night before. Society is insane.