"Cards on the table: I think mounting evidence continues to justify the courage and prudence of those who refused to be blown about by every wind of the zeitgeist."
I seem to recall something about 1. us being "Wise As Serpents.." 2. The Gift Of Discernment, 3. God gave me A Brain, and expects me to Use It (Come let Us Reason Together)
This is helpful, along with the Ordo Amoris post, in helping understand how to navigate the suicidal empathy conundrum. But it seems difficult to articulate this simply and effectively so it can be used in practice.
Yet it appears that this is the most important problem to solve, from all sides. It’s something along the lines of:
Love =
0. Doing the right thing, not the thing that feels good.
1. Prioritizing your future self, not just your current self.
2. Doing what’s best for your children, not what they feel like/want right now.
3. Doing what’s best for students, not whatever gets highest scores or lifts the most low performers.
4. Doing what’s best for society, not what the “disadvantaged” groups and activists demand.
But when one tries to make this argument, it seems to by nature become muddled with “yeah but who says/which study proves that you taking that position (that’s obviously counter to my now feelings) is best?”
We all know what feels good, but what’s *best*? Since we cannot agree on this, we seemingly cannot use it to make the argument against whatever feels good.
On a lighter note, a study finally came out that said “Children who do chores are more successful”. I don’t know who financed this study, but it must have been divine intervention. If only now we can have studies to conclusively prove that water is wet, and the sky is blue.
"Cards on the table: I think mounting evidence continues to justify the courage and prudence of those who refused to be blown about by every wind of the zeitgeist."
I seem to recall something about 1. us being "Wise As Serpents.." 2. The Gift Of Discernment, 3. God gave me A Brain, and expects me to Use It (Come let Us Reason Together)
This is helpful, along with the Ordo Amoris post, in helping understand how to navigate the suicidal empathy conundrum. But it seems difficult to articulate this simply and effectively so it can be used in practice.
Yet it appears that this is the most important problem to solve, from all sides. It’s something along the lines of:
Love =
0. Doing the right thing, not the thing that feels good.
1. Prioritizing your future self, not just your current self.
2. Doing what’s best for your children, not what they feel like/want right now.
3. Doing what’s best for students, not whatever gets highest scores or lifts the most low performers.
4. Doing what’s best for society, not what the “disadvantaged” groups and activists demand.
But when one tries to make this argument, it seems to by nature become muddled with “yeah but who says/which study proves that you taking that position (that’s obviously counter to my now feelings) is best?”
We all know what feels good, but what’s *best*? Since we cannot agree on this, we seemingly cannot use it to make the argument against whatever feels good.
On a lighter note, a study finally came out that said “Children who do chores are more successful”. I don’t know who financed this study, but it must have been divine intervention. If only now we can have studies to conclusively prove that water is wet, and the sky is blue.