Steve81

Once one is willing to commit acts of such violence, no. It’s no different from putting down a rabid dog.

Sounds like a case of rule 1, regarding helping others. You’re not helping the mass shooter of course, just everyone else involved.

Indeed! 😆

Surveys aren’t perfect, but unfortunately people don’t come with handy performance monitoring apps like the workstations and servers I deal with do. Ideas for improving the M&E aspect? I think it’s reasonable to suggest that I’ve read other people’s work on the subject, else we wouldn’t have this topic at all. Regarding context for happiness, assuming I understand your meaning, there will always be sources of pain and sadness in the world. People get sick and die. People get injured. People make mistakes and experience shame (which apologies help with, but can’t totally eliminate). Life will never be perfect IOW. One more important addendum: the irrefutable rule. People are free to practice the rules that make them happy, and ignore the ones that don’t, so long as ignoring a particular rule doesn’t cause harm to others.

I’ll ponder the solution to that for a bit, but initial thoughts would be: 1. Occasional surveys to monitor & evaluate happiness, for those that opt to participate in such a system 2. Encouraging those participants to share new things that make them happy that aren’t covered in the rules, or conversely, things in the rules that make them unhappy. 3. After discussion, take a vote.

General consensus based on the human experience of what promotes happiness I suppose.

Seems like the basis for a new rule, as opposed to throwing the baby out with the bath water. Your opinion on that idea?

@Genady Even though we may have a clash of personalities, I have added a few more “rules” to my philosophy based on the thoughts provoked by your commentary. Addendums in no particular order are: 1. Sincerely apologize for errors which cause harm to others, and learn from your mistakes 2. When you need help, ask for it. 3. If you find this philosophy helpful, share it and your experiences with others as opportunities to do so present themselves. Do not force this philosophy upon others. Progress? Any additional thoughts?

True.

I think that would apply to the written word as well, since that directly connects to verbalization through phonics.

Accountable to the difference in the medium of communication. With sign language, the sign for poop makes perfect sense as a representation of what’s being communicated . You just can’t do that with verbalization.

Exactly. I suspect the OP is taking an idea expressed in a Marvel movie by Thor that all words are made up, forgetting the part you succinctly state, and thus arriving at his ridiculous conclusion. Addendum: To put it simply, if I say "rock", and point to a rock, you might understand what I'm trying to communicate, even if you have never heard the term rock before.

I will leave you with the same words you were earlier kind enough to bestow upon me, with a small addition. Be happy, however you choose to arrive at that destination.

Life doesn't have to be that complex. Sometimes simple things are better. What way/circumstances would it take for you to talk to me about your experiences?

We may be different, but we are both human. Being social and sharing your experiences is a part of that.

I feel sorry for you, sincerely. I have shared my experiences willingly on this forum, and I feel I have gained something from doing so. Just saw this part of your post. There is no bad faith here. This forum has challenged me to become better, and I appreciate that.

Yet here you are, expending time and effort to reply. Clearly, there is some motivation to engage with me. Does it cost so much to share your experiences with me and others who may read this thread in the future?

Do you have something beyond sarcasm to add to this topic? Or should I merely ignore you?

Then why post on this topic at all? Why waste your valuable time responding to me? Does a philosophical discussion threaten you or Genady in some way?

Because I asked you politely to do so. The question then becomes, why wouldn't you do so?

Then why do you not wish to reply? You can PM me if you prefer not to say publicly. I'm not here to shame you.

It's a pretty simple philosophy. Do you fear sharing your experiences with others? That's not meant to be a rhetorical question, even if you opt not to reply.

Yes, I realized that fact on gulags after I posted and edited right as you replied. The dissemination may have been peaceful, but what meaning does that have in a society that is not free? The greatest violence may have preceded the publishing of the moral code, but the implicit threat of violence is just as powerful. That it was ultimately ignored is neither here nor there. Please tell me which part you dislike? Do you dislike kindness towards others? Do you dislike learning? Do you dislike enjoyment? Do you dislike self-care? Which of these offends you? Be specific, and include your reasoning. Why don't you wish to share your experiences on kindness, learning, enjoyment, and self-care? They are relevant to the discussion. I'm not asking you to share your deepest darkest secrets.

So you're suggesting the Soviet Union was a free society when the "Moral Code" was published and in the years following? No repression of the populace that you can think of? It is connected to the violence by the society that disseminated it. The "Moral Code" isn't 100% evil in and of itself. That said, my principles demand no loyalty unto themselves. You can opt to follow them or not, and if you find they work for you, so much the better. Further, my principles in no way promote intolerance against things like careerism, acquisitiveness, or the enemies of my little philosophy. You don't like it? Ignore it, which I thought you were going to given this snippet.

Perhaps you can explain your thoughts in a manner superior to posting an emoji in response to the statement: Certainly the implication seems to be that you think I'm naive for thinking a more evolved philosophy can spread in such a manner. Your notes on the "Moral Code of the Builder of Communism" also suggest a great deal of violence, given the history of the USSR. Please, enlighten me as to what you really meant. I do not wish to misinterpret your thoughts.