🇳🇱
As someone who donates a lot of time tutoring students I can say this one I agree with :)
@crunklord420 While there are certainly some shitty educators, most in fact, it isnt for lack of trying. They certainly arent evil people. So to assume all educators are bad people is just absurd to me. If you had said most educators are shitty educators though I might have agreed.
@realDonaldTrump Sure, how is that relevant here though?
@realDonaldTrump Well for starters, no, CrunkLord did, not me (or at least "bad person" which implies evil).
Second.. not sure how even if i did bring up the notion of "evil" that answers my question. I never claimed you brought up the notion of evil, I asked you what the relevance was of pointing out not one intends to be a bad person. I made no statements about intent to be good or bad, so im struggling to see what point your making or how it relates to what I said.
Your said that they aren't evil, therefore (???, Your objection wasn't really clear)
What I was getting at is that it doesn't matter. Lack of malice doesn't make a disservice any less harmful.
@realDonaldTrump Ok I see what your saying now. Your wording was off because you seemed to assume that doing a disservice is the same as "evil", which I wouldnt agree with.
I do agree with you that them intending to educate people and doing a poor job at achieving itis largely not forgiven simply because of intent. But again there is a distinction between being evil and being ineffectual.
Teachers largely do a poor job at educating because they use the wrong methods to educate. Being ineffective at your job does not make you an evil person though, which is basically what I originally said and it still stands true. But yes we agree not being a evil person doesnt make their ineffectiveness go away.
>No one intends to be a bad person
Lol you can't really believe this.
Or simply a different perception of it.
When I think of even the most evil people they almost always justify their evil as some greater good. Serial killers for example claiming it is what god wanted them to do and want not.
I think the vast majority (not all but almost) of people justify their evil actions as good ones somehow
The modern serial killer is a mass shooter, though, and it does usually apply to them.
Obv it's not "literally" everyone, though.
>No one intends to be a bad person
that was made by someone that until now I had assumed had some experience with and understanding of a different kind of person than the average cow-man with a cow-man's ego and morality. Literally who cares.
#MostPeopleButNotLiterallyEveryPersonThinksTheyAreANetPositiveOnSociety
@Frankie
I would agree with you that the totalistim of the statement made it untrue. Ki da weird you dont see the relevance of serial killer example though. Its to show that in even the most obvious cases of evil people still tend to be able to see it as good. For more everyday sorta of evil it would make sense that would be much easier to convince yourself it isnt evil since it is a less obvious sort of evil.
@crunklord420 @realDonaldTrump
Isnt relevant? You mean except for all the real world serial murders who fit this exact description...
* Stanley Mossburg - murdered people because "god needs them" (his own words)
* albert fish - designed all his murders around stories in the bible, specifically genesis.
* Herbert Mullin 0 a bit reversed in this case, though the principle is similar. He heard voices from albert einstein telling him he was the new leader of the human race and was compelled to kill religious leaders.
* Gary ridgeway - Killed prostitutes because he through god thought they were evil. Even went so far as to leave religious symbology at the murder scenes intentionally.
I think you get the point...
Be specific, which ones specifically said "I just like killing people" or similar? I never said serial killers killing for religious reasons was the norm, but I did say they almost always justify it some how (religion being only one example of that).
So what your really asking us to compare is the ratio of serial killers who provided some moral justification to why they did what they did, any justification, vs ones who have stated "I just enjoyed killing".
I am no expert, so I dont really know what the ratio would be, but I honestly dont know of any who didnt try to justify their actions somehow..
Since you seem to have an idea of what this ratio is can you list a few serial killers who explicitly stated they did it just cause they liked doing it and nothing else?
>I will double down on my moronic insistence of using the self-aggrandizement of serial killers to support my assertions about the moralizing compulsions of the general population in a conversation about the non-normative parts of humanity
lol you retard.
As usual not even enough brain cells to understand the conversation.
I provided two sets of examples, one being the serial killers who are at the fringes and some of the more evil people. As well as examples of the majority "the norm". To cover both basis.. But of course you have some sort of serious mental problem and cant handle someone disagreeing with you without throwing a hissy fit.
Honestly your a complete joke and its very amusing.. "Oh no your an idiot for giving an example that isnt the norm"... two seconds later "Oh no your an idiot for giving an example that is the norm"...
LOLits not every day I get to see this level of stupid.
Either way I'm done, you have at the very least demonstrated you provide no value to any conversation and are just going to have an episode unless your in a lice little safe space echo chamber... so fuck off and get your wish.
You are welcome to that opinion of course, and maybe you met some of the very rare exceptions to the rule. But I wouldnt say that is anywhere near the norm. Even when ive known people who enjoyed the misery of others thry still tended to justify it by seeing those people as deserving of it. They almost always have some reasoning, i cant say ive ever met someone who answered why they did aomething evil with "Because it was the evil thing to do"
Sorry for interfering in the "let's generalize everything into meaninglessness" party.
@Frankie so you criticize the serial killer example because it doesnt apply to the majority:
> not sure what appeals to a divine mandate made serial killers have to do with the majority of people
and now your criticism is I that I am talking about the majority (the norm, as in the majority of people)
> nobody's talking about the norm.
So in order to make a coherent in point in your mindsomehow I have to neither talk about the majority, or the fringe? Me thinks you really care very little about any points that arent your own at this point.
@Frankie Not quite yet but listening to you talk I'm getting there awfully fast.
It was a rhetorical question, it's obvious that you can't keep up with the most simple train of thought without veering off into useless generalizations backed by whatever shit pops into your empty head.
>listening to you talk
You do realize after getting called out on contradicting yourself and trying to frame it as if other people are stupid, then going on to have a temper tantrum, and a pretty sad looking one at that, isnt going to help you recover right?
Though I, the based sentient neuroatypical, am more prone to what you're describing when I want something done, so maybe I'm actually a normie in the midst of outliers.
One day I'll find a competent human being.
@crunklord420 Wait... so educator includes anyone who helps anyone learn any subject, not just teachers or those in educational institutions.
So because I offer my time freely to help someone learn a topic they are struggling with that makes me compromised and if I were a good person I'd refuse to help people learn things?
I mean I literally tutor people, someone doesnt understand something they call me up and I hang out with them at their house or mine and explain things... how evil of me...
LOL ok buddy.
@freemo @crunklord420 if you offer your time freely as in just tutor people you like or as a public service your entire original post becomes disingenuous with the “ as an educator”
@freemo @crunklord420 I guess you didn’t but your meme sorta implied it as though the policy is something that directly affects your lively hood, its like if a white guy post some black power meme and says “as poc ally”. So I guess ya, you were upfront with your cringe.
Not really. In my OP I very explicitly state that my time is donated and not my likelihood.
> As someone who donates a lot of time ...
Not sure how I can "imply" my my livelihood depends on tutoring when the post explicitly states otherwise.
@freemo @crunklord420 yes i addressed that in the latter half of what i wrote, so whats your point?
@a7
Basically my point is that your whole basis for "cringe" is that i implied i was an educator in a post that explicitly said i wasnt an educator. Morover as someone who invests a lot of time teaching people i am exposed daily to the effects of the educational system and stuck in a position where i jave to undo their mistakes. So while i am not effected financially i am part the process.
@crunklord420
@freemo @crunklord420 nono i said you were upfront with your cringe, read the latter half again. for fucks sake you retard.
