The Free Talk Live BBS
Free Talk Live => Serious Business => Topic started by: LoveFreedomAndLiberty on December 16, 2011, 06:52:18 AM
-
Does it seem like a lot of families rarely talk to one another anymore? Why is this? At one time, families used to help one another, or move in together to help each other out, and now it seems a lot of families barely speak to one another, let alone help each other.
Has anyone else noticed this, or gone through it? If so, what is your insight as to why people don't help one another? Some people could really help a family member get a job, but don't. Or, in the economy, some people have lost everything and turned to family for help and family turns them away.
So, why are some people willing to help friends and family by moving in together, or helping them with a job, while other people basically feel their family deserves to end up at a homeless shelter?
Then, there are people that have a long time friend, and the minute the economy went south the friend that was not affected by the economy stops the relationship with the friend that was affected. Why is that?
I watched a t.v. program where a married couple had a baby. First, the man lost his job to the economy, and then his wife lost hers a few months later. They ended up in a homeless shelter and no family or friends would help them find a job, or allow them to move in.
What is your opinion?
-
Good question. I only have but a few friends that help me when I really need it. I try and be that sort of friend myself. Think I will try and take good care of those friends, and not worry as much about pleasing the more fair weathered ones that are oh so fun to hang out with. That couples story is very sad I hope they get a break.
-
I think during prosperous times, people tend to become more selfish, which is perfectly understandable. Hell, everyone around you is doing fine. Why not be that way? When things suddenly turn to shit though, its not like a switch that can just be flipped in your head, on the fly, to make you more concious about the people around you.
Maybe it takes hard times to exist for a while for it to become second nature again to help those around you, voluntarily of course. Like a muscle that never gets used, it just needs to be flexed.
I hope this isnt coming off as some kind of socialist bullshit. Thats not what I mean at all.
-
I refuse to associate with immoral people if I am not being forced to under the threat of violence.
My family is immoral.
Therefore I no longer associate with them.
"Family" is an accident of genetics and obligations based on an accident of genetics are erroneous.
If you have a cool family that has earned your friendship, then awesome. Otherwise it's just another bunch of people.
-
http://news.yahoo.com/anonymous-donors-pay-off-kmart-layaway-accounts-221000605.html (http://news.yahoo.com/anonymous-donors-pay-off-kmart-layaway-accounts-221000605.html)
The Mark and Stephanie show kind of poo-pooed on this article but it made me feel good anyway.
-
I see some families that have a family business. Everyone gets along, and when they argue, the forgive and move on. Each family member makes a fair, decent living.
Other families seem to step on one another to get one inch higher. It is very difficult to go through life alone.
Why do some families make it work while others don't?
-
Why do some families make it work while others don't?
Cuz, if they cant make it work, it probably wasn't meant to be in the first place. Some people cant get along. The fact that they are blood related doesn't really change that.
Assholes are assholes.
-
yea, aside from not being assholes, everyone's gotta wanna get along. If someone doesn't they don't.
-
I refuse to associate with immoral people if I am not being forced to under the threat of violence.
My family is immoral.
Therefore I no longer associate with them.
"Family" is an accident of genetics and obligations based on an accident of genetics are erroneous.
If you have a cool family that has earned your friendship, then awesome. Otherwise it's just another bunch of people.
This. I feel fortunate to have a good relationship with my family. There are only one or two of them that I would like to dissociate with, but if they're at a family event, I won't let their presence stop me from spending time with the other people that I'm looking forward to seeing.
-
http://www.infowars.com/the-worst-time-of-the-year/ (http://www.infowars.com/the-worst-time-of-the-year/)
This has a part that says "no family was willing to take in".....
Stories like this is why I thought this was a good topic to discuss.
-
I refuse to associate with immoral people if I am not being forced to under the threat of violence.
My family is immoral.
Therefore I no longer associate with them.
"Family" is an accident of genetics and obligations based on an accident of genetics are erroneous.
If you have a cool family that has earned your friendship, then awesome. Otherwise it's just another bunch of people.
That's a very utilitarian way of maintaining a relationship with anyone, let alone family.
Families do drift apart. Varied interests and work schedules often prevent interaction until a holiday forces our hand and we interact with virtual strangers.
However, I demonstrate no virtue in loving those that love me in return. That's E-A-S-Y....and selfish.
I demonstrate real virtue by loving those that can, or don't, give me a thing in return, are unpopular and/or unloveable. In other words, selflessly. I should love others, especially family, regardless whether they love me back.
This is many times difficult and painful. I only grow as a human being when I'm stretched out of my 'comfort zone'; when I do what I KNOW is right vs what I FEEL like doing. When I act out of conviction instead of simply reacting.
If I withhold relationship from anyone in my family I'm committing violence against them, albeit covert, but violence just the same.
-
I think there is a term for loving those who do not love in return: codependency.
-
I demonstrate real virtue by loving those that can, or don't, give me a thing in return, are unpopular and/or unloveable. In other words, selflessly. I should love others, especially family, regardless whether they love me back.
This thinking seems based in a fallacy that most are taught, that suffering and self-sacrifice automatically result in making the world a better place. I think they can, but all suffering and sacrifice should be looked at as a price that's paid and we need to think about what we're getting in return for that. The rational choice comes from realizing that you're getting more back for whatever you're giving up. If your suffering and self-sacrifice improved your relationships, then it might be a good choice. What you're describing sounds like what you're buying with your suffering and self-sacrifice is enabling bad behavior, so it actually seems like you're paying a heavy price to actually perpetuate the negative in other people and making the world a worse place at the cost of suffering and self-sacrifice.
This is many times difficult and painful. I only grow as a human being when I'm stretched out of my 'comfort zone'; when I do what I KNOW is right vs what I FEEL like doing. When I act out of conviction instead of simply reacting.
I think that's sometimes true. We certainly come up with justifications to do what we want to do right this second without properly considering whether it is the right decision in the long-term. Sometimes things have short-term gain (I feel good right now) but come back to bite you or people you care about later. Sometimes something can hurt the people you care about right now, but will result in less pain and more potential for growth later.
-
That's a very utilitarian way of maintaining a relationship with anyone, let alone family.
Don't associate with bad people. That is absolutely utilitarian and it is also moral. And I will do as I please, thanks very much.
Families do drift apart. Varied interests and work schedules often prevent interaction until a holiday forces our hand and we interact with virtual strangers.
Who is this "we"? Got a mouse in your pocket? You're collectivizing there.
However, I demonstrate no virtue in loving those that love me in return. That's E-A-S-Y....and selfish.
I demonstrate real virtue by loving those that can, or don't, give me a thing in return, are unpopular and/or unloveable. In other words, selflessly. I should love others, especially family, regardless whether they love me back.
Everything you say in this part of your post is the opposite of what is good and true. Selflessness is not a virtue. Rand covered this in 1943 and codified it in 1957 fairly well.
This is many times difficult and painful. I only grow as a human being when I'm stretched out of my 'comfort zone'; when I do what I KNOW is right vs what I FEEL like doing. When I act out of conviction instead of simply reacting.
What you "KNOW is right" is wrong. Altruism is for suckers.
If I withhold relationship from anyone in my family I'm committing violence against them, albeit covert, but violence just the same.
Incorrect, also stockholm syndrome.
I'd give you advice but you probably won't listen, so I'll just hope you eventually see how self abuse isn't any better than abuse from others and wish you good luck.
But look, it's your life, right, go do what you want and if you think you have an obligation to associate with bad people then by all means go ahead and enjoy it, or not enjoy it for the sake of your interpretation of what is virtuous if that suits you.
But I have to disagree and reject with great distaste your definition of virtue and absolutely refuse to acknowledge it as valid.
Also, the claim that me NOT giving something to someone else is the initiation of violence is absolutely absurd, and logic like that could be turned right around and applied as an argument for pretty much any power the state currently wields. So double ick on that.
<<<Goes to shower off the icky.
-
You can pick your nose.
You can pick your friends.
You can't pick your family.
My dad was a bigot. Not on the scale of Scott the Bigot. He was one of those civilized bigots that only let his prejudices slip in every now end then when surrounded by white male friends and telling jokes. He was a good dad and I did love him. But I said things growing up to get his approval that I am now ashamed of.
Good strong families make for more solid people. Fucked up families lead to fucked up people. The majority of the fucked up families now a days are greedy, selfish, lazy people instilling those same traits in their spawn.
-
That's a very utilitarian way of maintaining a relationship with anyone, let alone family.
Don't associate with bad people. That is absolutely utilitarian and it is also moral. And I will do as I please, thanks very much.
Families do drift apart. Varied interests and work schedules often prevent interaction until a holiday forces our hand and we interact with virtual strangers.
Who is this "we"? Got a mouse in your pocket? You're collectivizing there.
However, I demonstrate no virtue in loving those that love me in return. That's E-A-S-Y....and selfish.
I demonstrate real virtue by loving those that can, or don't, give me a thing in return, are unpopular and/or unloveable. In other words, selflessly. I should love others, especially family, regardless whether they love me back.
Everything you say in this part of your post is the opposite of what is good and true. Selflessness is not a virtue. Rand covered this in 1943 and codified it in 1957 fairly well.
This is many times difficult and painful. I only grow as a human being when I'm stretched out of my 'comfort zone'; when I do what I KNOW is right vs what I FEEL like doing. When I act out of conviction instead of simply reacting.
What you "KNOW is right" is wrong. Altruism is for suckers.
If I withhold relationship from anyone in my family I'm committing violence against them, albeit covert, but violence just the same.
Incorrect, also stockholm syndrome.
I'd give you advice but you probably won't listen, so I'll just hope you eventually see how self abuse isn't any better than abuse from others and wish you good luck.
But look, it's your life, right, go do what you want and if you think you have an obligation to associate with bad people then by all means go ahead and enjoy it, or not enjoy it for the sake of your interpretation of what is virtuous if that suits you.
But I have to disagree and reject with great distaste your definition of virtue and absolutely refuse to acknowledge it as valid.
Also, the claim that me NOT giving something to someone else is the initiation of violence is absolutely absurd, and logic like that could be turned right around and applied as an argument for pretty much any power the state currently wields. So double ick on that.
<<<Goes to shower off the icky.
I simply expressed my opinion. I don't expect you to embrace it any more than I hope you expect me to embrace yours.
Thanks for posting your reply.
-
I simply expressed my opinion. I don't expect you to embrace it any more than I hope you expect me to embrace yours.
Right on. Just keep in mind that when you throw the word "virtue" around you're sorta claiming a moral high ground and you'll draw the attention of people who don't agree with your definition of what virtue is, and they will question it.
Also, you tossed the word "Utilitarian" into the mix in regards to my view of family...
Taking a moral stance about not associating with bad people is not utilitarian at all. As a matter of fact, in an immoral world, refusing to deal with people who are immoral is sorta the opposite of utility. It would qualify as quite the inconvenience most of the time. So I take back my acceptance of your comment about my views being utilitarian. It's fucking hard to try to be the good guy in a world of bad guys, even at the cost of separating yourself from family.
So utilitarian? No. Practical? Yes. Easy? Hell no. Right? Damn skippy.
-
I simply expressed my opinion. I don't expect you to embrace it any more than I hope you expect me to embrace yours.
Right on. Just keep in mind that when you throw the word "virtue" around you're sorta claiming a moral high ground and you'll draw the attention of people who don't agree with your definition of what virtue is, and they will question it.
Also, you tossed the word "Utilitarian" into the mix in regards to my view of family...
Taking a moral stance about not associating with bad people is not utilitarian at all. As a matter of fact, in an immoral world, refusing to deal with people who are immoral is sorta the opposite of utility. It would qualify as quite the inconvenience most of the time. So I take back my acceptance of your comment about my views being utilitarian. It's fucking hard to try to be the good guy in a world of bad guys, even at the cost of separating yourself from family.
So utilitarian? No. Practical? Yes. Easy? Hell no. Right? Damn skippy.
Thanks for correcting me. When you express it the way you did this time, I can't but agree.
-
'Pends on the family. I have not spoken to any of my three brothers in years, and don't even know where one of them is. On the other hand, my two daughters, one 300 miles away and the other 3,000, call us nearly every day.
My wife's family of 13 brothers and sisters scattered around the country gets together for a reunion every other year. We hosted the last one, and it was a kick. This year, it is in Arizona, and just about everyone will be there, along with their spouses and kids.
-
I work in the evil public school system. I find every year more and more families go home and spend time together doing seperate things, all in the same room, but Mom's watching TV, dad's on the laptop and kids playing on the PSP. See it during interviews, kids playing something on the mobile phone, dad's talking to one staff member and mom's talking to herself, or the kid or into her phone. I find lots of stuff very superficial, even friends feel upset sometimes when we spend time actually talking to each other instead of facebooking or some other social media shit. I stopped using facebook for that reason, I found it cut me off more than it connected me, at least to what I think is meaningful communication. I remember growing up and eating supper around the kitchen table, do it with my family, but l think more families today eat in their own little area. Biggest shock for me was coming back to North America after living in Europe and seeing how people don't even seem to sit down and eat, or even cook real food. Growing up I remember all my aunts, uncles and cousins stopping in to visit, nobody does that anymore, even people who live in the same city. We still get together for reunions but even those seem less social than back in the day. I feel because of social media etc. people don't really say, "Holy shit, I haven't seen you in a coons age, how the hell have ya been? Whatcha up to?" They've seen it all on the intertubes so it's like nobody has anything to talk about. I had a good family, still have a good family, some people don't, but be it family or friends. I think people need to connect to a real live community, and social media ain't it. Unless it helps create one, like Porcfest, what an awesome thing, I've never been but what a great event that is.