Chemistry influences every aspect of our lives whether we think about it or not. Gravity does too. As does complexity and information theory, and the English language, and our clothing, and the fact we tend to build architecture in rectilinear shapes.
All of these things are ubiquitous things that permeate everything whether you think about them or not.
I bet you probably don’t want to help mass-murdering pedophiles either but here you are exhaling CO2 which will get incorporated into a plant that some mass murdering pedophile will eat.
Just draw in your sphere of concern to that which you can actually affect with a reasonable degree of predictive accuracy.
This way you kill two birds with one stone: you maximize the amount of actual good you create, while minimizing the sort of mental allergic reactions that come from chasing after smaller and smaller, more and more distant and ambiguous causal connections to global events.
You literally can’t even love who you want without it being political; religion, race, gender, sex, class/caste, etc. have all been used by autocratic and democratic governments to prohibit people from falling in love, having consensual relationships, and/or starting a family.
You can’t love who you want to live without a lot of neurological activity too. So neurology is a lens you could view love through. So is religion, chemistry, math, game theory, philosophy, sports, evolutionary theory, etc
People reading this thread: if you do not understand what the concept of a “lens” is in this context, please stop skipping over that fact. Either go look it up, or admit you don’t know. Don’t just barrel forward ignoring my point.
Want everything in your life to be political? There’s a lens for that!
Politics does influence almost every aspect of life whether we think about it or not.
Especially for people in minority groups, where sometimes simply existing as they are is political enough.
Chemistry influences every aspect of our lives whether we think about it or not. Gravity does too. As does complexity and information theory, and the English language, and our clothing, and the fact we tend to build architecture in rectilinear shapes.
All of these things are ubiquitous things that permeate everything whether you think about them or not.
Choosing to think about them is called a “lens”.
Right. Concept of “lens”
Or, you can have sand
deleted by creator
The horror that it is when I don’t want to indirectly support policies I don’t agree with.
I bet you probably don’t want to help mass-murdering pedophiles either but here you are exhaling CO2 which will get incorporated into a plant that some mass murdering pedophile will eat.
Just draw in your sphere of concern to that which you can actually affect with a reasonable degree of predictive accuracy.
This way you kill two birds with one stone: you maximize the amount of actual good you create, while minimizing the sort of mental allergic reactions that come from chasing after smaller and smaller, more and more distant and ambiguous causal connections to global events.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Perhaps I misunderstood your use of the word “indirectly support”?
How would you find yourself indirectly supporting bad policies?
You literally can’t even love who you want without it being political; religion, race, gender, sex, class/caste, etc. have all been used by autocratic and democratic governments to prohibit people from falling in love, having consensual relationships, and/or starting a family.
You can’t love who you want to live without a lot of neurological activity too. So neurology is a lens you could view love through. So is religion, chemistry, math, game theory, philosophy, sports, evolutionary theory, etc
People reading this thread: if you do not understand what the concept of a “lens” is in this context, please stop skipping over that fact. Either go look it up, or admit you don’t know. Don’t just barrel forward ignoring my point.