Carl-Richard

Use the force

Hehe. I've kinda taken the path of "surrender" in the sense that I see debating and passionately sharing one's opinions as something one just does as a human, and that I neither hate myself or others for doing it. I just try to keep it as civil as possible, and also that when it does get heated, I'm not surprised or demoralized by it (like "why are humans like this???"). It's like every time I get the thought "oh well, this is just ego", I'm like "duh!"

@Michael569 I considered locking the thread earlier, but you beat me to it It doesn't work as well when you're not also blocking her (it's not mutual blocking), but again, it's not an effective solution. It's about pragmatics: making people less likely to get into conflict. It doesn't stop people talking about you, but it stops people talking to you. It might seem stupid right now, but I think if we tried it out, it would have more positive effects over time. However, I'm not sure how to know for certain when somebody is blocking somebody or not

Yes. Metamodernity is when postmodernity re-integrates some of the aspects of modernity (progress, meta-narratives etc.), more specifically a metatheoretical/systems/biopsychosocial evolutionary lens. It says that we have to work with the natural impetus of evolutionary systems and not against them. Examples are Game B, Spiral Dynamics, Integral Theory and Nordic metamodernism. You get ideas like radical inclusivity/pluralism ("don't hate the hateful"), "transcend and include", "don't abolish modern society/technology and escape to nature; marry them!" You get increasingly more useful models/fictions for addressing the survival challenges that you've defined as important. An example is again zooming out and seeing the relationship between biological, psychological, societal and evolutionary factors. The postmodern critique helps to keep that within the pragmatic frame, rather than making hasty conclusions of universality or objectivity (e.g. "my model applies to everything/everyone" or "my model is not merely an useful fiction; it's absolute truth"). True objectivity lies outside all relative contexts and constructs (the transcendent, the formless, the absolute, God etc.), so in that sense, there is a way out (mysticism), but it's generally not a good survival strategy on its own. If you care about survival, the intellect (rationality, science, morality etc.) and its relative biases should not (and cannot) be abandoned, as survival is inherently a type of bias. Mysticism that outright denies intellect leads to naive skepticism and nihilism, loss of order, direction, purpose etc. For the sake of functionality, being (the East) must be married with meaning (the West).

It still has its place in a dialectic between deconstruction and construction, which is how metamodernity and beyond keeps itself sober. There is otherwise a danger of thinking that zooming out through levels of analysis is a way towards true objectivity. The postmodern impulse will then correct course and say: despite how meta one's worldview appears to be, it's still mediated by context&construct.

@Loba @Preety_India Anybody fancy some coerced mutual blocking? Pros and cons?

If you see something that is against the guidelines, report the person. You want to revolutionize moderation? Write your own thread or debunk mine.

Ask them personally whether they think that.

Postmodernism is an important part of context & construct awareness.

It's a definition of God that emphasises "the logos", and he probably thought mathematics was the purest or most fundamental version of it, or the most sacred symbol of God.

Points are the problem

@Preety_India No matter how many points anyone makes about the specifics, it only provides additional confirmation to my understanding that it's a systemic problem, and the solution will remain in accordance with that.

?!

It's quite obvious that it's environmentally caused, or that the individuals and the environment are entangled. It's the first point of my "thesis" here (1.1), namely that it's generally not a simple problem caused by one individual or one action (linear causality), but rather a complex systemic problem (cyclical causality). On the other hand, my solution, is actually an individual one, but as a result of acknowledging the systemic factors: it's up to the individuals themselves to make the change that they desire every time they click the report button, which is to block or stop reading journals of people they don't like, stop contributing to the mess. The solution is individual responsibility because the moderators are supposed to deal with simple problems with linear causality as defined by the guidelines, something which minimizes ambiguity and bias, and preserves the trust of the moderators. We're not family therapy counselors. All we can really do in this context is provide encouragement, which was the purpose of this thread. Although, maybe in the future, I'll consider enforcing mutual blocking using warning points on a case-by-case basis, which is also commensurate with the systemic problems: avoiding individual solution => perpetuation of collective problem => collective punishment / coerced individual solution. I'll have to contemplate how authoritarian that truly is.

Is their behavior also environmentally caused?

The Piagetian correlate to Stage Blue.

They're not gone forever. Emotions. Let me correct you again. Actually, let me not. HEY

??

I'm way too privileged to even comment on that ?

I also bet if we enforced mutual blocking, some of you would probably use multiple accounts to spy on each other. It's true; there is no effective solution. There never was. It's about what's pragmatic, and it does require some work on your part. Blocking (recommended or enforced) is certainly better than whatever half-assed solutions us mods have been coming up with up to this point.

So be it. All other solutions are shit in comparison. Journal locking doesn't ultimately prevent that either, only in your own journal. I've also thought about enforcing mutual blocking with warning points, considering I'm accused of being too passive. What if mods could edit block lists of users? ?

Journal locking is a half-measure. Most of the drama occurs when somebody reads someone elses journal and takes offence to something. There will still be conflict PMs or in other threads. Blocking eliminates all that.

I was probably the Jordan Peterson in my group of friends

He is extremely open-minded, creative and compassionate. He implicitly taught me the importance of internal motivation through the way he raised me, his actions and general approach to life, which is definitely another thing that saved my life. He is a great dad and I owe him a lot.

I have some personal experiences as well (not bipolar, but psychotic symptoms). Some months before my spiritual awakening at 19, I think I was very close to a psychotic break, induced by heavy cannabis use, dysfunctional coping and escalating stress. I was already highly prone to anxiety and neuroticism, and my mind was starting to become increasingly hyper-associative, also thinking thoughts at a rapid rate. My speech pattern became very weird (word choice, tone of voice, mannerisms etc.), and my general sense of reality became slightly altered (aspects of my visuospatial awareness was actually deteriorating). My attention increasingly shifted towards my inner world, and I was losing touch with my surroundings. Luckily, I spent a weekend with my friends at a vacation house, and one of them (who is on the spectrum and is more likely to be honest despite social cost) told me in semi-private "you're talking too much". That suddenly gave me a moment of self-awareness, and it made me shift my attention from my inner world to the social world, and I thought "oh crap, I'm actually being kinda weird!". I think this saved me, because the day after that, my mental state had almost returned to normal, probably because I was more attuned to average mental state of the social group. I think this is one reason why social isolation is a risk factor for mental illness, as it detaches you from the average baseline of the social word. This experience was in fact the breaking point that initiated my journey towards self-development (I watched Leo's video "40 signs you're being neurotic" on the train ride home, and it hit me like a ton of bricks). I think that video, and my friend who told me I was being weird, actually saved my life.