I speak Japanese. You clearly do not. Edit: “no less unusual” is admittedly a slight overstatement. It is slightly more permissible to speak in third person in Japanese. Nevertheless it is false to say people GENERALLY talk in third person.

It’s also noteworthy that japanese people typically refer to themselves by their name,

Talking in third person in Japanese is no less unusual than doing so in English

If they manage to find work outside of Vancouver/the GTA/Ottawa I say go for it. We have loads of developing cities that could benefit from immigration.

Nah, this is every parent ever.

No debate there but I don’t think you can extend that truth into suggesting that everyone could just as easily be fulfilled if they just “focus their energy on other aspects of their lives”.

Wtf no your 9-5 (or in your case im guessing much longer) isn’t a replacement for a relationship.

If you’re somehow able to do nothing but work and self improvement all day and be satisfied with just that in your life then good for you but don’t assume everyone can just adapt to that mindset.

Humans are not evolved to find intimacy so irrelevant.

I don’t have any book recommendations but I can’t help but feel like the entire approach you’re trying to take might be too over generalized and you’re better off trying to approach each problematic social encounter one by one.

If for example you have family who’s down on their luck and trying to move into your living space despite you not wanting that, you need to consider what their other options are for living alone and if that would result in a quality of life you would be able to accept yourself, and weigh that against your own expectations for how the living situation would pan out in your mind.

Stuff like that family member’s previous behaviour, ability to show gratitude and value you equivalently, the degree to which they are responsible for their current living circumstances, etc, are all important to consider. This is nothing generalized advice about “boundaries” could possibly help with imo.

If on the other hand you’re a woman and have issues with men hitting on you at work, you have a completely different set of considerations you must make, with virtually no overlap with the previous example.

Speaking of boundaries it looks like you need to be able to follow some yourself. This is not your opportunity to proselytize your beliefs.

I’m not defending the act of refusing to accept reality when a woman says no, but the problem is a lot of women find that behaviour charming. The sad thing is I’ve seen it work for guys before, and not because the woman feels sorry for him.

Sorry but sitting down and observing your thoughts, or trying to concentrate your thoughts on something non stimulating is the next “religion”?

What exactly are you on about?

It legitimately IS exponentiation. Romanian lady was wrong.

You completely ignored everything I said. You have no faith, you believe in nothing, other than adhering to labels that are favourable to your social circumstances and avoiding labels that aren’t.

I don’t want to be an ass and tell this guy what he believes for him, but if someone claims only that god ‘exists’, without elaborating on any particular details about what sort of entity they are, it leads me to believe that they want to avoid the label atheist/agnostic for optics, but otherwise have an agnostic viewpoint (especially if they are willing to go so far as to say it doesn’t matter if the god is ‘real’).

The claim about God being similar to morality or other things that become “real” through shared perception to me does not have any philosophical rigour. God is a different category of thing from morality or whatever other cultural phenomenon you want to compare it to.

You can ‘believe’ in morality or cultural phenomenon without having to think anything is real. The only thing that makes cultural phenomena real IS the fact that it is perceived to exist in our heads.

God is totally different. If you don’t believe your God created the universe and/or life, the God you believe in is not a God by any sensible definition of the word.

If you find it equally possible that life in the universe could have just as easily arisen though purely mechanistic means as described by the laws of physics, then you do not believe in a God (unless you want to argue that they designed the laws of physics to eventually create life naturally).

Whether it’s life itself being designed, or the laws of physics being designed to facilitate life, I think its fair to say you must believe the universe was intentionally crafted in some way to facilitate life in order for a god to exist.

This event, of the universe and/or life being conceived and instantiated refers to an actual event in astronomical history. It refers to a category of thing that’s more real than the cultural phenomenon this guy compares it to.

Now you’re just trying to pivot without having admitted that your analogy only makes sense if you assume everyone who gets cancer must have done something to deserve getting it.

"

So anything bad that ever happens to you is your own fault?

Do you just walk around through life assuming cancer patients did something awful to deserve their disease? Cause that’s the only way this analogy makes any sense…

Does the family not have grounds to sue the executive branch for defamation at this point?

If you’re using Ubuntu make sure you’re using the most recent LTS release instead of the latest one. Stability issues shouldn’t be a problem on those.

Nah dw the mom just has epidermodysplasia verruciformis

You do realize not all germans are responsible for ww2. Only like 37 percent were literal Nazis. Not sure why everyone hated them so much /s

Source of radiation given to someone to hold in their wallet/pocket