What's new

Fall 2018 General Conference Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 365
  • Start date Start date
The thing that makes this whole hypocrisy thing even more silly is that it's regarding fish's fandom of a sports team, something which is inherently irrational in the first place.
 
NAOS watches advertisements on Jazz games and lines the Millers’ pockets.

The Millers contribute to the local economy and enable Jason to create JFC.

JFC enforces and upholds NAOS’ ban.

NAOS supports his own ban.
 
General conference is a far cry from an 'appreciation day' of any kind. It is a forum the church uses to talk about current events (although I don't know if they brought up this particular issue) a better comparison might be a thread on an Amazon keynote event.

In any case I don't think the venue is particularly relevant to your argument. And wasn't brought up by you initially either.

As for his resisting, I think he's simply protesting because literally everyone is guilty of these kind of small hypocrisies. Plus you were (and continue to be) a dick about it.
Hair splitting. You’re starting to get my point, it seems.... but you also love the feeling of having your heels dug in so deep.

Also, of course I didn’t bring it up initially. I saw something and responded to it.
 
The thing that makes this whole hypocrisy thing even more silly is that it's regarding fish's fandom of a sports team, something which is inherently irrational in the first place.
So, are you saying that when you become aware that something with a non-rational or irrational root is blocking the progress of a rational desire, you should simply say, “Well, damn, no sense looking into this rational desire any further since my non-rationality or irrationality is immutable... too bad it’s helping to block the progress of my rational desire...”?
 
Last edited:
So, are you saying that when you become aware that something with a non-rational or irrational root is blocking a rational desire, you should simply say, “Well, damn, no sense looking into this rational desire any further since my non-rationality or irrationality is immutable... too bad it’s helping to block the progress of my rational desire...”?
I'm saying that it's not reasonable to expect some to rationalize their way out of something they didn't rationalize themselves into.

Also, let's keep it 100 here, if Fish decides to stop spending money on BYU sports, or I stop spending money on the Jazz, it is going to have absolutely zero impact on the respective owners ability to spend their money however they wish. So it would really end up as a symbolic gesture, and we'd each miss out on something we get a lot of enjoyment out of.
 
I'm saying that it's not reasonable to expect some to rationalize their way out of something they didn't rationalize themselves into.

That's super cynical. And wrong. Evidence of your error is everywhere. It isn't always easy, but we are not slaves to irrational or non-rational desire. I'll be the first to stand up and say that the powers of rationality are over-stated in mass culture; but your position is hogwash, so I'll defend rationality.

Also, let's keep it 100 here, if Fish decides to stop spending money on BYU sports, or I stop spending money on the Jazz, it is going to have absolutely zero impact on the respective owners ability to spend their money however they wish. So it would really end up as a symbolic gesture, and we'd each miss out on something we get a lot of enjoyment out of.

Zero impact is also incorrect. And your fatalism here matches your fatalism above.

"The Bosses are going to do what the Bosses are going to do..... may as well slog along day-to-day and look at porn during my lunch break.... Something in me really desires it..."
 
That's super cynical. And wrong. Evidence of your error is everywhere. It isn't always easy, but we are not slaves to irrational or non-rational desire. I'll be the first to stand up and say that the powers of rationality are over-stated in mass culture; but your position is hogwash, so I'll defend rationality.



Zero impact is also incorrect. And your fatalism here matches your fatalism above.
Yeah, I was a little to general with that first part, but the emotional bonds of sports fandom are pretty strong. I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who's abandoned a team they've been die hard fans of since childhood over political differences with the owners.

My couple hundred bucks a year (tops) are a drop in the ocean for a multimillion dollar sports franchise.
 
Yeah, I was a little to general with that first part, but the emotional bonds of sports fandom are pretty strong. I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who's abandoned a team they've been die hard fans of since childhood over political differences with the owners.

My couple hundred bucks a year (tops) are a drop in the ocean for a multimillion dollar sports franchise.
You seem really comfortable in the language of subjugation.
 
You seem really comfortable in the language of subjugation.

Lol, man we get one life to live here. We can live it as rational robots who agonize over every contradiction in their lives, or we can recognize that a lot of **** doesn't make a ton of sense, but it gives us some respite from the motonony and toil of life.

If that makes me a slave to my corporate overlords so be it.
 
Lol, man we get one life to live here. We can live it as rational robots who agonize over every contradiction in their lives, or we can recognize that a lot of **** doesn't make a ton of sense, but it gives us some respite from the motonony and toil of life.

If that makes me a slave to my corporate overlords so be it.
Do we have to go over every nuance twice? I’m not advocating for a Rational Life. I’m just not down with your fatalism, erroneous conclusions, or false dichotomies (like your “or” statement above). But, yeah, you seem pretty comfortable.
 
Back
Top