“b-but bears are actually dangerous!” Shut the hell up.

  • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    8 months ago

    Yes, feelings matter. Beautifully put.

    But nobody is purposefully “wedging a stick” between allies and enemies. No secret society is plotting to prevent you from sending any message of safety. The metaphor is not designed, or created for a specific purpose. You have to realise how crazy and for real dangerous this way of agumenting is.

    You aim for a good purpose, then use basically the debate version of biological weapons of mass destruction to make your point.

    Just for any small argument about a small thing between sexes, like always it’s fun for people to discuss, and some get mad, but

    For you to use the narrative of psy ops, learned no doubt subconsciously, to speak like there is a secret cabal that want you to be fearful, we must unite against some kind of expression just because they are coming for you… No

    If anyone takes it too far it’s talk like that, and you unironically talk about how reasonable people are hard to come by

    Gee

    Wonder why that is brother

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      But nobody is purposefully “wedging a stick” between allies and enemies.

      The purpose of a system is what it does.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Just because noone sets out to do a thing on purpose, individually, as a group, organically, conspiratorially, whatever, doesn’t mean that the resulting system of action does not act with a particular purpose in the wider system.

          Life, for example, has the purpose of hastening the heat death of the universe: We reduce entropy locally and to do that increase the rate of entropy increase in the wider universe. It’s what we do. It’s our purpose, as far as the universe is concerned, whether we like it or not, whether we intend to or not, whether we are aware of it or not, whether we try to or not.

          These kinds of memes (bear, worm, what have you) have a particular impact. That impact is their purpose. If you don’t like the impact I suggest advocating against the practice instead of saying “but nobody meant to”. Have some Goethe.

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Purpose implies intent more than outcome. I agree with your overall stance but think something like “result” would be more effective. Calling it the “purpose” makes a similar accusation to anyone who wants to have this debate to what it itself is making about men in general, which will just increase the divide. I don’t think you’re deliberately trying to do that, but I think it could end up being the result.

            Your overall point does capture how this whole thing has made me feel. Even as someone who didn’t get offended, understands what women who would “prefer the bear” are actually saying and doesn’t think I’m owed any attention from anyone that doesn’t want to give it to me, the only thing this meme makes me want to do is disengage even more. And a younger version of me would have really resented being made to feel like my mere presence was offensive or scary.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              It’s a system thinking heuristic. The reason “purpose” is used instead of result is a) “the result of a system is what it does” doesn’t actually make sense, as systems aren’t events in time but, well, systems which have non-negligible timespans – it sounds something like “what is the result of a dishwasher” – I dunno, what is it doing? Is it standing there? Short-circuiting and on fire? Washing dishes? All that is part of what “a dishwasher” is, does, and therefore, its purpose in the grand scheme of things. And b) precisely to stop people trying to find purpose in motives, intentions, etc, to go with a materialistic instead of idealist interpretation of things. To quote Beer: “There is no point in claiming that the purpose of a system is to do what it constantly fails to do.” The purpose of prisons is to rehabilitate? Well maybe in some countries, in other countries no matter what the stated intent is their purpose is to be a place where people can get degrees in how to do crime.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        No it’s not and that’s a terrible way to view the world.

        Are you the same idiot who argued with me before because he thought he’d found the Word of God in this random philosophical exercise?

        Edit: nope, different moron. I wonder why this silly thing is making the idiot rounds lately? It’s like when a 19 year old has their first philosophy 101 class and thinks they’ve gained supreme knowledge of how the world works.

        https://lemmy.world/comment/9746636

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          It’s systems thinking and if you think it’s terrible then because it’s terribly good at getting rid of excuses. “Oh but you see the intent of the prison system is to reduce crime, never mind it doing the opposite, move along, nothing to see because intent is all that matters”.