SissyBrandi19
Daddy's Little Sissy
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2025
- Posts
- 337
BTW, what I'm going to say is entirely apolitical. I am not going to take a position that favors the so-called right OR left. I just want to perhaps introduce a concept that I am all but sure you will NOT hear discussed anywhere else, why? Because it favors NO agenda. Yet it is 100% true and factual. Anyone who knows me should know I like to joke around, but while I don't advertise this (because, why?) I am a practicing scientist and have been for over 30 years, and that is the basis for this post.
I'm going to begin by making a statement that on the surface may sound incredible, yet for anyone who reads this entirely AND has the ability to think (which is only about 20% of humans) will make sense. I can confidently tell you that the cause of the MN tragedy was not gun, was not being trans, and was not even any mental illness. I can hear is now, "How can you possibly know this? You have no insights into this person's thinking and motivations!" and while you are correct in that, in fact, none of those insights are necessary to my thesis. I don't need to know anything about this person in saying this - all I need to know (and I do) is the definition of "Cause".
In science, to be a "cause" something must satisfy two criteria - it must be necessary and it must be sufficient. For example, smoking tobacco does NOT cause cancer. There have been people who smoked and never got cancer, so it is not "sufficient". There have been people who have never smoked yet have gotten cancer, so smoking is not "necessary" either. So smoking fulfills neither of the two criteria for establishing cause. What we can say is that smoking tobacco is a predictor and can raise the likelihood of contracting certain cancers - no more.
Similarly, the "gun" argument is so silly to not even be worth addressing, but I will just say that at no time in history has a gun ever killed a human, as these are inert objects that require some human (or, in the very very odd case, dog) agent to use the gun. Objects cannot be a cause in this manner. Can you see that being trans cannot be the cause? Has every trans person killed someone? Not even close. Neither every gun owner and neither every person with a mental illness. None of these things - even in combination (mentally ill trans person with a gun) can be considered a cause.
In fact, as maddening and frustrating as it certainly is in these cases, here is the fact of the matter: Humans are incredibly complex. Let me restate that with more precision. The human brain, which I will posit is the cause of our perceptions, behaviors, thoughts, etc. is an incredibly complex entity, so much so that it exceeds the complexity perhaps of the entire physical universe. It may BE the entire physical universe (Bostrom, 2003). Because of the immense complexity of the human brain, the idea that we can somehow exert control over this thing we don't understand really much at all, is a fools notion. In fact, I think history has shown that attempts to do exactly this often have disastrous results. That is not to say we should not attempt to intervene and help people lead better lives, but to think we can or should "control" is silly. Here is another Hard Truth: Life is dangerous. Safety, while a very seductive concept, is not something that is possible to achieve, fully. I have often thought (as I have the ability and in fact highly enjoy "thinking") about the idea of Universal Truths - are there any such things? I think there is at least one: Every aspect of reality involves a trade-off. A purchase involves trading value (money) for value (goods/services). The very act of breathing is a tradeoff of CO2 for the mix of gases that constitute "air" (oxygen being the most important). The Laws of Thermodynamics all speak to the idea of trade-offs - matter is neither created nor destroyed, merely changed in form. In fact, sadly there is even a trade-off in the acquisition of knowledge! As we become more knowing, we lose innocence. That is perhaps the most tragic trade-off of all of them - this is not fact, this is my opinion.
So while being safe is something we all appreciate, to an extent, do not fool yourself into thinking you want a life of complete safety because you will have to trade something and that thing is the ability to exercise free will. Even then, you'll never achieve full safety. Now, it is so tempting for some to happily give away OTHERS freedom, "we need to make X illegal!" You want to be VERY careful about that. You may laugh and think "I don't care about THAT freedom and those that do can go fuck themselves". That level of non-thinking reactivity is tantamount to a form of suicide. The liberties YOU see as not having value others will disagree and anyone who can think (again, I know I'm speaking to only 20% of the population) will realize that it is probably the case that freedoms THEY hold very dear, others may see as garbage.
Many people talk about "drugs" being bad. Of course, they are non-thinkers so not even able to have a conversation with, but here's another fact that may be surprising to some: One of the most addictive drugs known to man is sugar. Yep. Sugar meets all the definitional requirements of a drug and is a highly addictive substance. So what if Those On High were to, ohhhhh, ban sugar? Not just processed sugar, ALL sugar. No alcohol, no carbs...nothing. Eggs and steak and water. I'm not an expert in nutritional science but I'll bet one who is could make a very good case for how many deaths could attributed to sugar, how so many lives could be extended and saved, yadda yadda. I'm saying the case for "safety" could be made. I'm not making it!
I think many probably are aware of the quote on safety and liberty that is attributed to Ben Franklin and if not I can paraphrase it enough to capture the meaning and it says "Those who wish to sacrifice liberty in the pursuit of safety deserve neither safety nor liberty." This is true on so many levels - safety is Utopia. Do you know the definition of "Utopia"? It's not a "perfect society" even though that is what you may read, because sadly the true definitions are being replaced with "popular usage" definitions. Utopia is actually an "impossible state or place" and the idea of having a Utopian society is predicated on not taming human nature but really the abolition of evil itself. Can we rid the world of evil? No. Nature is evil...to eat an animal must kill. This kind of goes back to the idea of trade-offs.
I hope you can see I made good on my promise. I have not elevated nor demoted any political ideology or any ideology whatsoever. Well, let me take that back a bit - I absolutely demote any ideology that is not logically coherent so yes, the "blame the object" thinking (or non-thinking, as it were) I have zero tolerance for. I do not suffer fools and for that I will never apologize or bend the knee. The fact of the matter is that if you want a failsafe solution, I don't know what to tell you but I can tell you that the USA is a country that highly values liberty more than safety. That is a fact and is very evident in the founding documents. Not all countries share this and if someone is a resident in the USA and thinks safety is far more important than liberty I can kindly suggest that emigration is legal and moral and even a viable option they may wish to pursue. I would also suggest that control is a seductress that few can deny and MANY will come in the wake of these things promising safety but...trading fore that, liberty and while that may appeal to some on an emotional level, anyone who can both think and has any understanding of history and authoritarian governments will tell you that is a very dangerous and regrettable trade.
One last thought and it's not mine but I heard this (long ago) and it rings very true: Your rights...are MY responsibility. That means as well MY rights...are YOUR responsibility. Trade-offs. Everyone loves to talk about their rights, but absent personal responsibility? Nobody - not one person - will have any rights at all. So if you enjoy having rights? Show that by acting responsibly. Now can I get back to pretending to be a stupid slutty bimbo? This "thinking" stuff...it's fucking difficult, sometimes! I mean I like it but...portion sizes!
I'm going to begin by making a statement that on the surface may sound incredible, yet for anyone who reads this entirely AND has the ability to think (which is only about 20% of humans) will make sense. I can confidently tell you that the cause of the MN tragedy was not gun, was not being trans, and was not even any mental illness. I can hear is now, "How can you possibly know this? You have no insights into this person's thinking and motivations!" and while you are correct in that, in fact, none of those insights are necessary to my thesis. I don't need to know anything about this person in saying this - all I need to know (and I do) is the definition of "Cause".
In science, to be a "cause" something must satisfy two criteria - it must be necessary and it must be sufficient. For example, smoking tobacco does NOT cause cancer. There have been people who smoked and never got cancer, so it is not "sufficient". There have been people who have never smoked yet have gotten cancer, so smoking is not "necessary" either. So smoking fulfills neither of the two criteria for establishing cause. What we can say is that smoking tobacco is a predictor and can raise the likelihood of contracting certain cancers - no more.
Similarly, the "gun" argument is so silly to not even be worth addressing, but I will just say that at no time in history has a gun ever killed a human, as these are inert objects that require some human (or, in the very very odd case, dog) agent to use the gun. Objects cannot be a cause in this manner. Can you see that being trans cannot be the cause? Has every trans person killed someone? Not even close. Neither every gun owner and neither every person with a mental illness. None of these things - even in combination (mentally ill trans person with a gun) can be considered a cause.
In fact, as maddening and frustrating as it certainly is in these cases, here is the fact of the matter: Humans are incredibly complex. Let me restate that with more precision. The human brain, which I will posit is the cause of our perceptions, behaviors, thoughts, etc. is an incredibly complex entity, so much so that it exceeds the complexity perhaps of the entire physical universe. It may BE the entire physical universe (Bostrom, 2003). Because of the immense complexity of the human brain, the idea that we can somehow exert control over this thing we don't understand really much at all, is a fools notion. In fact, I think history has shown that attempts to do exactly this often have disastrous results. That is not to say we should not attempt to intervene and help people lead better lives, but to think we can or should "control" is silly. Here is another Hard Truth: Life is dangerous. Safety, while a very seductive concept, is not something that is possible to achieve, fully. I have often thought (as I have the ability and in fact highly enjoy "thinking") about the idea of Universal Truths - are there any such things? I think there is at least one: Every aspect of reality involves a trade-off. A purchase involves trading value (money) for value (goods/services). The very act of breathing is a tradeoff of CO2 for the mix of gases that constitute "air" (oxygen being the most important). The Laws of Thermodynamics all speak to the idea of trade-offs - matter is neither created nor destroyed, merely changed in form. In fact, sadly there is even a trade-off in the acquisition of knowledge! As we become more knowing, we lose innocence. That is perhaps the most tragic trade-off of all of them - this is not fact, this is my opinion.
So while being safe is something we all appreciate, to an extent, do not fool yourself into thinking you want a life of complete safety because you will have to trade something and that thing is the ability to exercise free will. Even then, you'll never achieve full safety. Now, it is so tempting for some to happily give away OTHERS freedom, "we need to make X illegal!" You want to be VERY careful about that. You may laugh and think "I don't care about THAT freedom and those that do can go fuck themselves". That level of non-thinking reactivity is tantamount to a form of suicide. The liberties YOU see as not having value others will disagree and anyone who can think (again, I know I'm speaking to only 20% of the population) will realize that it is probably the case that freedoms THEY hold very dear, others may see as garbage.
Many people talk about "drugs" being bad. Of course, they are non-thinkers so not even able to have a conversation with, but here's another fact that may be surprising to some: One of the most addictive drugs known to man is sugar. Yep. Sugar meets all the definitional requirements of a drug and is a highly addictive substance. So what if Those On High were to, ohhhhh, ban sugar? Not just processed sugar, ALL sugar. No alcohol, no carbs...nothing. Eggs and steak and water. I'm not an expert in nutritional science but I'll bet one who is could make a very good case for how many deaths could attributed to sugar, how so many lives could be extended and saved, yadda yadda. I'm saying the case for "safety" could be made. I'm not making it!
I think many probably are aware of the quote on safety and liberty that is attributed to Ben Franklin and if not I can paraphrase it enough to capture the meaning and it says "Those who wish to sacrifice liberty in the pursuit of safety deserve neither safety nor liberty." This is true on so many levels - safety is Utopia. Do you know the definition of "Utopia"? It's not a "perfect society" even though that is what you may read, because sadly the true definitions are being replaced with "popular usage" definitions. Utopia is actually an "impossible state or place" and the idea of having a Utopian society is predicated on not taming human nature but really the abolition of evil itself. Can we rid the world of evil? No. Nature is evil...to eat an animal must kill. This kind of goes back to the idea of trade-offs.
I hope you can see I made good on my promise. I have not elevated nor demoted any political ideology or any ideology whatsoever. Well, let me take that back a bit - I absolutely demote any ideology that is not logically coherent so yes, the "blame the object" thinking (or non-thinking, as it were) I have zero tolerance for. I do not suffer fools and for that I will never apologize or bend the knee. The fact of the matter is that if you want a failsafe solution, I don't know what to tell you but I can tell you that the USA is a country that highly values liberty more than safety. That is a fact and is very evident in the founding documents. Not all countries share this and if someone is a resident in the USA and thinks safety is far more important than liberty I can kindly suggest that emigration is legal and moral and even a viable option they may wish to pursue. I would also suggest that control is a seductress that few can deny and MANY will come in the wake of these things promising safety but...trading fore that, liberty and while that may appeal to some on an emotional level, anyone who can both think and has any understanding of history and authoritarian governments will tell you that is a very dangerous and regrettable trade.
One last thought and it's not mine but I heard this (long ago) and it rings very true: Your rights...are MY responsibility. That means as well MY rights...are YOUR responsibility. Trade-offs. Everyone loves to talk about their rights, but absent personal responsibility? Nobody - not one person - will have any rights at all. So if you enjoy having rights? Show that by acting responsibly. Now can I get back to pretending to be a stupid slutty bimbo? This "thinking" stuff...it's fucking difficult, sometimes! I mean I like it but...portion sizes!
