Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 6:58 am
I already shared this view and have promoted all the ideas in parts of my own arguments everywhere. Veritasium did a better job at summarizing this and explains with scientific rationality.
What were 'your ideas' and 'arguments' regarding 'this'?
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 6:58 am
What are your thoughts?
The human being known as "derek muller" comes across as confident in what 'it' is SAYING and CLAIMING. But, is this because "derek muller" ONLY does what 'it' does on 'youtube videos' for money and/or fame, which some class as and call 'success', or for other reasons or a combination of reasons?
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 6:58 am
Did you CHANGE any view after watching?
Not really, but watching that video just made me recall those occurrences, which I had already previously realized were because of luck, of not being lucky, from what I had actually done/achieved, and/or from what I had actually not done/achieved.
That last sentence is confusing to me and your mental disassociation with humanity you seem to jump to when lacking anything valid to say is offputting.
Would you like to KNOW what I find 'off putting'?
Either way, it is when 'you', human beings, MAKE ASSUMPTIONS and JUMP to CONCLUSIONS BEFORE you GAIN ACTUAL CLARITY of what thee ACTUAL Truth IS FIRST.
Could it EVER be a POSSIBILITY that you PRECONCEPTION that I "LACK absolutely ANY thing AT ALL valid to say" is NOT ALLOWING you to LOOK AT and READ what I am CLEARLY WRITING, and ACTUALLY SAYING and MEANING here?
Could you be MAKING the ASSUMPTIONS and JUMPING to the CONCLUSIONS that I "have a mental disassociation with humanity"?
You even SAID that you found my last sentence CONFUSING. So, what this ACTUALLY MEANS IS, if you DO NOT ASK FOR CLARITY, then that last sentence of mine will FOREVER REMAIN CONFUSING to you, ALONE.
LOOK, 'you' ASKED; "Did you CHANGE ANY view after watching?"
I ANSWERED; 'Not really'.
THEN, I just EXPLAINED that watching that video just REMINDED me of past experiences WHEN I HAS ALREADY PREVIOUSLY NOTICED that the 'success' (or unluck) that I WAS having, at that THOSE moments, WAS because of my PREVIOUS 'luck' or my PREVIOUS 'hard work'.
That was ALL I was saying.
In, other words, I had ALREADY PREVIOUSLY 'thought' ABOUT what was being mentioned in that video. Thus, MY ANSWER of 'Not really'.
Really, how could you "find" that so CONFUSING.
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
But....
As to MY shared agreement to Derek's, I've had a lifetime of living in a world that tells its children that anything and everything is literally possible and, where one's will is concerned, assured if one remains persistent, they CAN acheive anything. contradicts reality when people actually DO try but fail.
The REASON WHY they so-call "fail" is because they were NOT 'persistent' ENOUGH and/or did NOT REALLY WANT 'it' ENOUGH.
Name the 'things' that you would TELL children is NOT 'possible' to 'them'.
If you do NOT provide those EXAMPLES here, then there is, literally, NOTHING to discuss here.
Also, 'you', human beings, REALLY do NEED TO LOOK AT the ACTUAL WORDS that 'you' and 'I' USE here.
'you' wrote; "But this religious fantasy is the delusion that effectively contradicts reality when people actually DO try but fail."
NOW, I will leave it up to ANY of 'you' to NOTICE, and THEN POINT OUT, WHERE in that sentence, and thus WHY that sentence of 'yours' here, itself, CONTRADICTS its OWN 'self'.
Until then at least we now KNOW what your BELIEFS are, which is what 'you' are 'TRYING TO' 'argue' and 'fight' for here.
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
The argument can be made identically by asking,
"Is Failure due to Bad Luck or to one Unwilling to Work for it?''
But to ask such a 'thing' could just BE ABSURD.
ALSO, WITHOUT EXAMPLES, which are VERY RARE from 'you', posters, here by the way, there is REALLY, and literally, NOTHING WHATSOEVER to LOOK AT and DISCUSS.
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
While certainly if one is lazy, they are going to be less likely to succeed from earning it unless being lazy itself was the goal. But the presumption by those who 'win', as comparable to the thread on Putin's War against Ukraine, the winner alone decides what the 'facts' are.
Do you have ANY examples of when the so-called "winner" PRESUMED that the "winner" alone decides what the 'facts' ARE?
'Facts' to, well me anyway, are AGREED UPON and ACCEPTED. 'Facts', to me, have NEVER been DECIDED UPON by these so-called and alleged "winners". WHOEVER they may be?
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
For those who 'win' (a type of 'success') the war, they get to decide what 'crimes' of their enemy exist.
Do 'they'?
And, WHO 'lets' 'them' DECIDE?
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
In the same way, the 'successful' place no or little significance upon their own flaws and so intepret their 'wins' as EARNED and justified in the same way they would interpret the 'loser' as losing due to DESERVING it (That is, earning their demise).
Although there may be great deal of Truth in the way those human beings who class "themselves" as being so-called "successful" place no or little significance upon their own flaws and interpret their so-called "wins" or "success" as EARNED and "justified" in the same way they would interpret the so-called "loser" as losing due to DESERVING it (That is, earning their demise), I do NOT SEE 'this' as being the SAME WAY as what you were SAYING and CLAIMING in regards to so-called "winners" 'getting to decide' on what 'crimes' of the so-called "enemy" exist.
To me, these are two VERY DIFFERENT SPECIFIC 'things'.
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
That is, they do not interpret the outcomes of all people involved as 'earning' it! Is that logically rational or sound?
ONCE AGAIN, it would ALL DEPEND UPON the VERY SPECIFIC DETAILS in EVERY SPECIFIC CASE, as OBVIOUSLY there would NOT BE and would NEVER BE two CASES that were EXACTLY the SAME.
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
By contrast, the loser, like if Ukraine fails to Russia, would rationally recognize that the precondition of Russia's larger force due to better weapons of mass destruction was what made Russia 'win'.
WHERE is the PRESUMPTION that there IS a "loser" like if "ukraine falls to "russia"?
'you', adult human beings, REALLY DO HAVE the MOST NARROWED field of views.
WHO are 'you' going to SAY ARE "the losers" here?
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
This is the "LUCK" factor. Or would you interpret whomever wins the war as 'earning' their success?
I have NEVER observed a human being NOR human beings EVER so-call "winning" ANY WAR.
To me TALKING ABOUT 'winning' or 'losing' in regards to 'WAR' is just IDIOTIC and downright ABSURD.
Thinking of 'success' in relation to 'WAR', to me, is just BEYOND ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY.
How could ANY human being SEE that human beings KILLING human beings, or KILLING just one human being, as being 'success'?
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
Is Ukraine not 'unlucky' for lacking the same muscle power that Russia has? If so, is Russia's success not relatively 'lucky' by contrast?
I would be VERY SURPRISED if the one who was presenting that video EVER had 'war' in 'their' thinking in regards to 'success', and 'luck' OR 'hard work'.
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
Also, the Ukrainians are still 'working hard' to win (not lose) even against the odds.
What could the people of "ukraine" possibly 'win' here, in YOUR examples here?
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
So if (or 'when') they lose, would it be due to their LACK of 'working hard'?
REALLY, was there absolutely ANY 'thing' in that video, which STARTED this DISCUSSION, absolutely ANY 'thing' in regards to 'WAR' and 'winning/success'?
If yes, then WHERE was 'that part'?
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
No doubt the Russians would nevertheless interpret their 'hard work' as futile afterthefact. And what will you think Putin would think once he wins?
I NEVER 'think' ANY one 'wins' IN WAR.
So, I could NOT 'think' what will "vladimir putin" think " once "he" so-call "wins" ". Do you UNDERSTAND 'this'. Or, do you "find" 'this' CONFUSING ALSO?
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Mar 30, 2022 8:56 am
Would he chalk it up to just 'luck'? Or do you think he 'earned' the right to rule over Ukraine?
Absolutely NO one has a 'right' to BLOW UP and KILL "other" human beings. Just as absolutely NO one has a 'right' to BLOW UP and DESTROY 'property'.
This is my view anyway. But, if 'you', adult human beings, THINK or SEE DIFFERENTLY, then so be it.