Spiral dynamics and distrust of government

[sholomar]

If there's one thing I got from Leo's video on conspiracy theories, it's "so what" ... even if such and such a conspiracy is true, so what? It it going to make me a happier or better person to know that?  That said my ego is still an information junkie and I still enjoy digging around especially in the sciences. I have very much a live and let live mentality. I don't meddle in other's lives, they don't meddle in mine, and all is good. Transgenders can marry, guy on the ranch can own his guns, guy at work can smoke his pot, it's all good.

That said, I don't subscribe to many of the progressive ideologies the majority here subscribe too. Around where I live people fear having to mask up and lockdown again more than they fear simply getting the virus and getting on with life. I disagree with having to lock down society once again. If this virus is going to mutate like the flu there's no way I will spend the rest of my life with a mask on.  Throughout the history of our species viruses took out the genetically weakest individuals, leaving the strong to survive, and I believe a certain level of "survival of the fittest" mentality is healthy, and fits the science, and that more damage can be done by over-reacting to a virus than the virus itself... that is to say the treatment is worse than the disease in numerous ways. Let's hope the Delta variant does hold up to the mRNA vaccines because I don't look forward to more months and years of this.

 

Edited July 20, 2021 by sholomar

[OneHandClap]

2 minutes ago, sholomar said:

If there's one thing I got from Leo's video on conspiracy theories, it's "so what" ... even if such and such a conspiracy is true, so what? It it going to make me a happier or better person to know that?  That said my ego is still an information junkie and I still enjoy digging around especially in the sciences.

That said, I don't subscribe to many of the progressive ideologies the majority here subscribe too. Around where I live people fear having to mask up and lockdown again more than they fear simply getting the virus and getting on with life. I disagree with having to lock down society once again. If this virus is going to mutate like the flu there's no way I will spend the rest of my life with a mask on.  Throughout the history of our species viruses took out the genetically weakest individuals, leaving the strong to survive, and I believe a certain level of "survival of the fittest" mentality is healthy, and fits the science, and that more damage can be done by over-reacting to a virus than the virus itself... that is to say the treatment is worse than the disease in numerous ways. Let's hope the Delta variant does hold up to the mRNA vaccines because I don't look forward to more months and years of this.

Well, the grand irony is that if everybody had gotten their vaccines post-haste, we wouldn't need the masks. I live in a vaccinated area of the country that has had all of its pre-covid freedoms restored, all because of vaccination levels. Those who are being hit hardest are, oddly enough, refusing to accept the very thing that would bring an end to this lockdown world. 

I also don't like the idea of masks, and I'm one of the more liberal people you'll find. But I also acknowledge that the way to getting free of masks is to adapt to the world and collectively bring about an end to this thing. It's the holdouts and slow rollouts that are perpetuating this. 

[sholomar]

15 minutes ago, OneHandClap said:

Well, the grand irony is that if everybody had gotten their vaccines post-haste, we wouldn't need the masks. I live in a vaccinated area of the country that has had all of its pre-covid freedoms restored, all because of vaccination levels. Those who are being hit hardest are, oddly enough, refusing to accept the very thing that would bring an end to this lockdown world. 

I also don't like the idea of masks, and I'm one of the more liberal people you'll find. But I also acknowledge that the way to getting free of masks is to adapt to the world and collectively bring about an end to this thing. It's the holdouts and slow rollouts that are perpetuating this. 

I would have taken away insurance coverage for people who got covid unvaccinated without a good reason for not getting it. I mean if you get covid, voluntarily chose not to get the vaccine because of an anti-vaccine mentality, why should the government or insurance companies have to pay for your ventilator? They never want to use operant conditioning to get people to do the right thing. They just nag them, or force them. I would have "highly encouraged" them by letting them gamble on whether they want a $150,000 hospital bill or not.

Hopefully they are working on booster shots if needed. I'll get mine with the flu shot in October if offered.  Also, some conspiracies are worth pursuing. If Fauci or some other government officials are funding experiments with lab viruses and this one got out, it's worth knowing about and having accountability held.  People in power have a history of hiding their misdeeds from the public, and it's human nature to want to play detective.

Edited July 20, 2021 by sholomar

[Mannyb]

25 minutes ago, OneHandClap said:

No offense taken. 

You said yourself that the compassionate response is to stop the stabbing. 

Likewise, the compassionate response to anti-vax movements is to stop giving them a platform.

Do we ask how the stabber is feeling? No. Do we ask why they want to stab? No. That comes after we've dismantled the problem.

You can think all you want about my level of understanding, but it doesn't change the root fact that giving conspiracy theories airtime and entertaining the delusion is absolutely detrimental to the welfare of those who are dying as we speak. The rest is just insanity apologism dressed up as "love." 

You're jumping to the conclusion that the anti-vaxers are as dangerous as stabbers, yet that's just your opinion.

Having loving, open conversations with conspiracy theorists doesn't cause harm, it can actually help you make your point and discredit them if you can make a good one.

I'm not thinking about your level of understanding, you're freely displaying it pretty deftly yourself.

You think that loving conversations are detrimental, did you know that's how totalitarians think too? Are you really a liberal?

If your position is anti loving conversations so be it, we have nothing to further discuss as I've told you already. Be well. Namaste.

 

Edited July 20, 2021 by Mannyb

[OneHandClap]

2 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

I'm not thinking about your level of understanding, you're freely displaying it pretty deftly yourself.

Ahh, and it comes out at last. The great stick of enlightened authority. 

You're right—anti-vaxers are not as dangerous as stabbers. They are arguably more dangerous, considering how many have died from refusing to get their shots and subsequently spreading Covid to loved ones and immunocompromised strangers alike. 

History will not look well on your positions. But as you said, we are clearly at an impasse. Which is fine. 

11 minutes ago, sholomar said:

I would have taken away insurance coverage for people who got covid unvaccinated without a good reason for not getting it. I mean if you get covid, voluntarily chose not to get the vaccine because of an anti-vaccine mentality, why should the government or insurance companies have to pay for your ventilator? They never want to use operant conditioning to get people to do the right thing. They just nag them, or force them. I would have "highly encouraged" them by letting them gamble on whether they want a $150,000 hospital bill or not.

Hopefully they are working on booster shots if needed. I'll get mine with the flu shot in October if offered.  Also, some conspiracies are worth pursuing. If Fauci or some other government officials are funding experiments with lab viruses and this one got out, it's worth knowing about and having accountability held.

I really like this line of logic. I think there should indeed be "incentives" to get people vaccinated. You are correct that forcible vaccination is a bad idea, and also correct that operant conditioning is a great path to change social outlooks. 

 

[Mannyb]

27 minutes ago, OneHandClap said:

Ahh, and it comes out at last. The great stick of enlightened authority. 

You're right—anti-vaxers are not as dangerous as stabbers. They are arguably more dangerous, considering how many have died from refusing to get their shots and subsequently spreading Covid to loved ones and immunocompromised strangers alike. 

History will not look well on your positions. But as you said, we are clearly at an impasse. Which is fine. 

I really like this line of logic. I think there should indeed be "incentives" to get people vaccinated. You are correct that forcible vaccination is a bad idea, and also correct that operant conditioning is a great path to change social outlooks. 

 

Enlightened authority? 
Again what you’re talking about is your opinion. 
My position of love will be looked very well upon I am certain of it (especially since we’ll see how the lack of open discourse only fostered division and dangerous thoughts). In fact, it’ll be hard to believe how unloving humans were ❤️ Yet it will be looked upon through deeply loving and compassionate eyes. ?

Edited July 20, 2021 by Mannyb

[spinderella]

49 minutes ago, OneHandClap said:

No offense taken. 

You said yourself that the compassionate response is to stop the stabbing. 

Likewise, the compassionate response to anti-vax movements is to stop giving them a platform.

Do we ask how the stabber is feeling? No. Do we ask why they want to stab? No. That comes after we've dismantled the problem.

You can think all you want about my level of understanding, but it doesn't change the root fact that giving conspiracy theories airtime and entertaining the delusion is absolutely detrimental to the welfare of those who are dying as we speak. The rest is just insanity apologism dressed up as "love." 

Not taking a side here, but using stabbing as an example assumes that we're talking about something lethal here. 

It seems that most anti-vax or vaccine skeptical people don't actually believe that covid is dangerous. 

Which kind of renders the stabbing comparison useless.  

It's not that they don't care about the wellbeing of others, they just don't believe the wellbeing of others is truly at risk.  

[OneHandClap]

3 minutes ago, spinderella said:

Not taking a side here, but using stabbing as an example assumes that we're talking about something lethal here. 

It seems that most anti-vax or vaccine skeptical people don't actually believe that covid is dangerous. 

Which kind of renders the stabbing comparison useless.  

It's not that they don't care about the wellbeing of others, they just don't believe the wellbeing of others is truly at risk.  

Well, quite frankly, the death numbers speak for themselves. We can talk all we want about how deaths have been misclassified, but it is obvious in every sense that Covid has killed many, many people and permanently fucked up the respiratory systems of many more. 

So whether or not anti-vax people want to believe it is lethal, it is.

Which is why I evoked the stabbing analogy. Covid is lethal; that is a fact. It doesn't matter what the conspiracy crowd thinks of that data—they are living in Insanity Land if they believe otherwise. And as such, their opinions really hold no weight. They're akin to the barking of a dog. 

If they choose to ignore all tangible proof of Covid's lethality and still insist it's a hoax and/or overplayed, then they are absolutely at fault (at least partially) for the catastrophic damage this virus continues to do. Their willful ignorance is having real consequences. 

I think I've said all I care to offer on this subject, but I urge anybody who's still on the fence about giving anti-vax supporters the time of day to carefully consider that choice. Tolerance to these positions is passively supporting them. 

Goodnight, hombres. 

[Parththakkar12]

3 hours ago, spinderella said:

Not taking a side here, but using stabbing as an example assumes that we're talking about something lethal here. 

It seems that most anti-vax or vaccine skeptical people don't actually believe that covid is dangerous. 

Which kind of renders the stabbing comparison useless.  

It's not that they don't care about the wellbeing of others, they just don't believe the wellbeing of others is truly at risk.  

To add to this or to make it more precise, anti-vax people have an open mind to the possibility that covid is not dangerous.

The idea is to question the epistemology of Western medicine, which includes germ theory. Germ theory is held as an absolute in Western medicine. Whether it's true or not, it is profitable! To the pharma companies.

To the people asking 'So what?', I'm going to tell you so what. They're giving people an experimental gene-therapy vaccine that they don't know for sure will work or not. They'll say they know it'll work but it's in their best-interests to do so! When you quote them on this, your logic is actually circular.

Consider the possibility that the scientists who questioned germ-theory are conscious scientists who actually care about epistemology and who found certain corruptions in the creation of germ-theory. That it was framed that way to come up with the business-idea of a 'synthetic medicine' and to incorporate it into the education-system.

Edited July 20, 2021 by Parththakkar12

[Loving Radiance]

11 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Conspiracy theories

Btw, thanks for speaking about your grant conspiracy theory in your last video. I had a breakdown and cried in the train. Now I got to reevaluate life with all the fragments. I always dreamed too small. That episode was a banger of inspiration. Thanks for that

Edited July 20, 2021 by Loving Radiance

[ZzzleepingBear]

Taking on the anti-vax position, is like taking on doubts in traffic rules. And I imagine that kind of thinking could go something like this.

"If love is all there is, then why should I restrict myself to some traffic rules that doesn't honour myself as a free expressing and loving being? Why not fully express my own personal style and love for speed on the highway to work for the love and fun of it all. And people love watching racing on the telly any way, so why don't what we all in the name of love, start to having a bit fun while going somewhere. And just let go of all these surpressing and boring traffic rules?"

"Love knows no bounderys, so why not scrap all these surpressive traffic rules so everyone can express love this way. The ultimate love is the expression of freedom, where the fitest on the highway will survive."

"No government should tell me how to drive. So in the name of love, what's the worst that could happen if I choose it myself how to drive ..right?"

"There we have it, the highway to love and expression of freedom. Why taking traffic rules for granted when you can put an equal amount of doubt in them? No one likes to sit in a traffic jam after all, so why don't we all let people drive as they feel like? Everyone who are in a hurry should feel free to pass by the traffic jam in their own creative ways."

Doesn't this sound lovely? Why should people who buy a car for their hard earned money, be restricted by not be allowed of driving it on the public roads without a drivers license? I bet that all those who doesn't have a drivers license, or have lost their drivers license stil would like to be able to use the roads freely as everyboy else. But it looks like they are being surpressed by the government for not be able to do so. Now what do we think about that?

I guess I have to put this as a disclaimer, so that anyone who are at risk of creating their own doubt in traffic rules can be assured that this text is only meant to be of ironic purpose. I repeat, this text is Irony.

This to me seems to be the only way to communicate with anti-vaxers unfortunatelly. Since their love for doubt in common sense, seems even greater than love itself.

[spinderella]

8 hours ago, Parththakkar12 said:

To add to this or to make it more precise, anti-vax people have an open mind to the possibility that covid is not dangerous.

The idea is to question the epistemology of Western medicine, which includes germ theory. Germ theory is held as an absolute in Western medicine. Whether it's true or not, it is profitable! To the pharma companies.

To the people asking 'So what?', I'm going to tell you so what. They're giving people an experimental gene-therapy vaccine that they don't know for sure will work or not. They'll say they know it'll work but it's in their best-interests to do so! When you quote them on this, your logic is actually circular.

Consider the possibility that the scientists who questioned germ-theory are conscious scientists who actually care about epistemology and who found certain corruptions in the creation of germ-theory. That it was framed that way to come up with the business-idea of a 'synthetic medicine' and to incorporate it into the education-system.

I have a feeling the thread is going to get shut down soon, but I wanted to say that I also find the history of how germ theory came to be the predominant "ideology" fascinating!  I think after watching Leo's series on the myth of science, we can all agree that germ theory is an ideology, nor did it even make 100% perfect sense, even when it was first adopted.  I'm also not saying that it's false, we have epidemiological data that show vaccines appear to work.  But even that data can be critically analyzed (if, you're able to it on the social matrix giant Google, some of it's on duckduckgo).    

But as I understand it, Leo's saying that our logic and philosophizing about the history and truth here doesn't matter because people believe their lives are at stake. 

No, I don't think it should be like that.  I wish the world wasn't in such a fear response, and I wish others we more open to the possibility that this is as big a deal as it's been made out to be.  But, others have a direct experience that is different than mine, and that's reality for them.  Others live through the tv and believe what they see, and that's reality for them.  

However, when people believe their survival is at risk, they will take you down if they feel like you're questioning the belief system that makes them feel safe in the face of death.  

And for the record, I'm not anti-vaccine - I actually have the vaccine.  I just want to feel more at peace with all the conflict going on.  I don't ideologically agree with the way this is being handled and have a newfound distrust of the government after being a Canadian liberal my entire life, where everybody I knew growing up my was also liberal.  

I'm not sure my spiral dynamics stage on this, since I have distrust (which I think is blue?), but I also understand how vaccines work and intimately understand the healthcare system (orange?) and I've also been vaccinated (green?).  I mostly keep my opinions to myself, while just lying to people and agreeing with them so I don't lose all my friends.  Can someone tell me what they think?  It's important to me that I take this opportunity to grow.

Am I stuck in blue?  

Or is there a way I can move from here through to yellow without agreeing with what's going on?  Maybe I just agree with a different, non-conflicting energy?  I guess I do feel like I can do this, but I get SO much backlash.  Maybe it's more about how I handle the backlash?   

Edited July 20, 2021 by spinderella

[Mannyb]

@spinderella Don’t worry about that nor SD too much, it’s just a model. 
 

@ZzzleepingBear Questioning the base assumption of your argument will be the only way to communicate with anti vaxers, not a petty failed attempt at ridiculing them. Do you honestly believe that type of attitude is going to result in more unity, love, and understanding?

Instead use the following assumption, it’ll yield better results: assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don’t. 

Edited July 20, 2021 by Mannyb

[ZzzleepingBear]

6 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

 

@ZzzleepingBear Questioning the base assumption of your argument’ll be the only way to communicate with anti vaxers, not a petty attempt at ridiculing them. 

I don't have a solid argument against anti vaxer, as they are the embodiment of doubt in common sense when mostly needed. Nothing can be said to disprove them, so they can't be proved right nor wrong. My petty attempt of ridiculing is exactly that ,petty. Used as a last attempt to see if there is any recognition left in them to see the parallell of their absurdity of never ending doubtfulness. 

After all, I must indeed not only looking like a fool, but be a fool to believe that by any attempt of speaking to them will dissolve or make it clear to them, of their pridful ignorance and futile doubt.

Anti vaxers sure have their right to remain ignorant, so who am I to question their lack of arguments and reasoning. Thing are better left unsaid in their presence as their stoic belief in ignorance leaves them untouched of true communication anyway.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, ZzzleepingBear said:

Anti vaxers sure have their right to remain ignorant

Actually, they have no such right.

[ZzzleepingBear]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Actually, they have no such right.

I was thinking the same thing as I was typing it out. But from a higher perspective they unfortunately do have such right. But it comes with a individual and collective cost. Ingorance is of it's own right it seems.

I also came to be reminded of the common sense I was refering to. It's common, but  are not to be taken for granted that everyones mind operate from it.  That is why it's merely common, but not granted.

[spinderella]

45 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Actually, they have no such right.

So, theoretically speaking, who is deciding who gets what "rights"?

I'm not challenging you, I just want to understand. 

[BadHippie]

Quote

 

Of course, it's ignorance and selfishness and survival done poorly.

Conspiracy theories are an ignorant mind's idea of intelligence. 

 

Aren´t you doing the same as you just told before with regards to the government? You are the government... So in a sense you also are a conspiracy-theorist. 

By labeling someone else as "other" (in this case conspiracy theorist) you simply deny their truth. Maybe they seem selfish and ignorant to you, but to me you seem selfish and ignorant, when saying stuff like this. 

Conspiracies are real, just check history... So why should every so called "conspiracy-theorist" be only full of shit? Sure there is some bullshit in everyone. But there is also a kernel of truth in every perspective.

I talked to some so-called "conspiracy theorists" and actually realized that they are (the ones I talked to) doing a better job at sensemaking and are a lot less ideological with their perspective than most people who think "Everyone needs to be vaccinated for the so called absolute-good". That´s just blind dogma and way to unnuanced to be a good interpretation of the current situation.

Don´t almost all people have beliefs that are "conspiracy" in a sense that it´s untrue information?

Using "conspiracy theory" to not listen to someone´s perspective is pretty low conscious and saying it´s all about arguing about which science is true isn´t what really matters to the people who are labeled "conspiracy theorists" by the government and media.

I did my research (in germany) and found that the people who are going to demonstrations and are labelled conspiracy theorist are actually anything but that. They are simply fed up with the government not caring about their own set of values.

Some values I often heard are: Freedom and Free Choice of Medication and Bodily Autonomy - Can´t say I don´t want that stuff to be honest.

How would you feel if the government would decide that eating meat is prohibited and everyone has to be vegan? Because science says it´s best for everyone? Would you simply let go of your own belief that eating carnivore is something you need for your health? Or simply put your own agenda back because the government says so?

Edited July 20, 2021 by BadHippie

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, spinderella said:

So, theoretically speaking, who is deciding who gets what "rights"?

You are!

All rights are imagined by you in your mind.

If you want, you could choose to believe that you have a right to shit on the President's face. Is it true? No less so than any other right you feel you have. Rights are things you invent to make yourself feel secure.

And then it's just a question of how many of your peers can you brainwash to agree with you? If you brainwash enough of them, your wish may actually come true. In this way, if you gather enough peers you could even enslave an entire race or rape an entire city all the while believing you are merely exercising your God-given rights.

[RendHeaven]

22 hours ago, Mannyb said:

Maybe you are scared  ? Why is a conversation idiocy? With that attitude, certainly. I can’t really see much love from the way you speak… If you’re interested in discussing things calmly and lovingly I am here for you, otherwise farewell. Namaste ?? 

Dude just get the jab lmao.

Your pretentious love facade is obviously a defense mechanism. You're only fooling yourself.

Fixation on this one topic is neurotic. We have much larger fish to fry here.