this post was submitted on 11 May 2024
84 points (71.9% liked)

memes

10405 readers
2370 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

"b-but bears are actually dangerous!" Shut the hell up.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

But nobody is purposefully “wedging a stick” between allies and enemies.

The purpose of a system is what it does.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

There are plenty systems that are not controlled by a cabal, yes

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

Just because noone sets out to do a thing on purpose, individually, as a group, organically, conspiratorially, whatever, doesn't mean that the resulting system of action does not act with a particular purpose in the wider system.

Life, for example, has the purpose of hastening the heat death of the universe: We reduce entropy locally and to do that increase the rate of entropy increase in the wider universe. It's what we do. It's our purpose, as far as the universe is concerned, whether we like it or not, whether we intend to or not, whether we are aware of it or not, whether we try to or not.

These kinds of memes (bear, worm, what have you) have a particular impact. That impact is their purpose. If you don't like the impact I suggest advocating against the practice instead of saying "but nobody meant to". Have some Goethe.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Exactly, which is why your rhetoric is damaging

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Purpose implies intent more than outcome. I agree with your overall stance but think something like "result" would be more effective. Calling it the "purpose" makes a similar accusation to anyone who wants to have this debate to what it itself is making about men in general, which will just increase the divide. I don't think you're deliberately trying to do that, but I think it could end up being the result.

Your overall point does capture how this whole thing has made me feel. Even as someone who didn't get offended, understands what women who would "prefer the bear" are actually saying and doesn't think I'm owed any attention from anyone that doesn't want to give it to me, the only thing this meme makes me want to do is disengage even more. And a younger version of me would have really resented being made to feel like my mere presence was offensive or scary.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

It's a system thinking heuristic. The reason "purpose" is used instead of result is a) "the result of a system is what it does" doesn't actually make sense, as systems aren't events in time but, well, systems which have non-negligible timespans -- it sounds something like "what is the result of a dishwasher" -- I dunno, what is it doing? Is it standing there? Short-circuiting and on fire? Washing dishes? All that is part of what "a dishwasher" is, does, and therefore, its purpose in the grand scheme of things. And b) precisely to stop people trying to find purpose in motives, intentions, etc, to go with a materialistic instead of idealist interpretation of things. To quote Beer: "There is no point in claiming that the purpose of a system is to do what it constantly fails to do." The purpose of prisons is to rehabilitate? Well maybe in some countries, in other countries no matter what the stated intent is their purpose is to be a place where people can get degrees in how to do crime.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

No it's not and that's a terrible way to view the world.

Are you the same idiot who argued with me before because he thought he'd found the Word of God in this random philosophical exercise?

Edit: nope, different moron. I wonder why this silly thing is making the idiot rounds lately? It's like when a 19 year old has their first philosophy 101 class and thinks they've gained supreme knowledge of how the world works.

https://lemmy.world/comment/9746636

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's systems thinking and if you think it's terrible then because it's terribly good at getting rid of excuses. "Oh but you see the intent of the prison system is to reduce crime, never mind it doing the opposite, move along, nothing to see because intent is all that matters".

[–] [email protected] -4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yes, it's a thought exercise, not a tautology. And it's not a great thought exercise either, because people of low intellect apparently assume it's a tautology because of how it's worded.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's not a thought exercise but a modelling discipline.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Those are more or less synonymous.

I can tell you've been huffing too much philosophy because you insist on weird hair splitting like this lol

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Or I'm just a boring nerd into cybernetics.