Recent comments in /f/philosophy

iiioiia t1_isufabg wrote

1

iambingalls t1_isueu1f wrote

This is incredibly naive and simplistic. The truth is that if you believe that God is on your side, you are capable of committing any crime necessary to whatever ends you attribute to him, as we've seen throughout history. Belief in God is not the only foundation of morality and in many cases can be a twisted foundation of total immorality and genocide.

6

lpuckeri t1_istyoik wrote

Lol brutal spelling on my part

Again i never said it was the end all solution, i even implied i think the author doesnt intend that.

Im advising against using language that makes it seem such.

5

Not_a_N_Korean_Spy t1_istxnje wrote

Perhaps more politics than philosophy, but here an example of decadence/evil/disaster and restoration, a video explaining how the neoliberal myth replaced the Keynesian myth and how a new story is needed to bring society forward.

https://youtu.be/xDKth-qS8Jk

4

BunnyBunnyBuns t1_istwa18 wrote

I was in the Healthcare industry before I pivoted to tech and you're right. It is slow and painful to get things done and there's no room for error because it's people's lives. Makes sense to me that the pressure is much higher in that role! Are you working with Eric?

1

eliyah23rd t1_isttgbg wrote

I'm not sure where the "is" and where the "ought" are in the linked article.

If our genealogy or history is just fact, then the question is, given X, how does that create our self-understanding and how would prefiguring in X lead us to act.

In other parts, the article (and post title) suggests that X is not given and should be invented so as to create a desired (which?) self-understanding and actions?

2

mootfoot t1_istqjvb wrote

True that, and for reference my industry is healthcare software, so software moves slow and missed issues can mean patients get harmed at industrial scale... Could easily see solution engineer roles being more laid back in industries that don't have lives on the line.

Just goes to show how title is borderline meaningless in some cases. I've seen "developer" roles where people don't need to know how to read code and "engineer" titles where the only thing being engineered is how to tactfully tell a user they pressed the wrong button.

+1 to your advice, vet all potential jobs/companies because they have a lot of leeway to paint a picture!

2

lpuckeri t1_istpwiu wrote

4

wythehippy t1_istmzsn wrote

The older I get the more I realize that this is really what plays into a good career. I've had horrible jobs that take a lot away from my life but the coworkers were amazing, managers were relaxed, and it almost made me excited to go in and deal with the horribleness lol

2

wythehippy t1_istmlh0 wrote

Wow, thank you for the detailed reply. I'm 26, had a career in construction and realized it wasn't for me. I've always been a little nerdy with tech just with video games and stuff but never hopped into it as a profession.

I don't care about the big money people always talk about with tech all I want is decent benefits and pay but most importantly work life balance. I wouldn't mind coming in a few days. I'm learning I just can't do full time, at work jobs. Data analyst seems like what would fit me best and I've been planning on looking into SQL

1

Lumpy-Passenger-1986 t1_istkwb7 wrote

I guess my stance on post modernism is complicated. I agree with it to an extent, but looking at it as a realist I can only comment based on how I see the world working. Your arguments make many valid points, but you look at them from a viewpoint where the ideology is trying to exist in the overall societal thought process. If our society was built off of the beliefs of post modernism instead of what it actually was built off of, than it all could work very well because we as humans would redirect how we understand things based on those beliefs. Basically we could have adapted. But because post modernism is clashing with modern beliefs of society, it’s seems more likely to be ridiculous. It’s like objectivism. People say objectivists can’t live in the real world, and that’s not entirely true. They have a hard time living in the world that we created, and thus must try to live like that against the majority. If time had been different and somehow the founding fathers had decided to build the USA with a different philosophy in mind, it could have been just as successful as people imagined. So I guess I have a question for you now. Do your views and beliefs line up with overall society? Because if they came from and were influenced by said society, than that society’s truth is your truth. But In my mind, this does not make it the absolute truth. And as long as there are even just a few people who believe differently than the only logic post modernism defies is YOUR logic. Because there is no absolute truth and we as humans will most likely never know as we can only comprehend so much, than logic itself could also be questioned and argued with. Please know that I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with you because as we both agreed, we will never actually know who is right or wrong. Now from a purely scientific perspective (assuming it is 100% accurate and is hypothetically speaking the ABSOLUTE TRUTH) than post modernism makes absolutely no sense. But from a perspective based off of beliefs, ideology, and knowing that you don’t really have THE TRUTH, than the arguments made hold enough weight for me to take it somewhat seriously from an interest standpoint.

1