It is truly traitorous to change the rules of a particular game on people playing that game in mid-game.Higgenbotham wrote:I believe I understand the thought process. Generically speaking, life operates on the "edge of chaos" because the future is unknown.FishbellykanakaDude wrote: That's why, in my own mind at least, and perhaps other's, "life" equals "risky gamble".
Actually, if it DOESN'T mean that, you're not doing it right.
... But you also presumably mitigate that risk to the greatest extent possible.
There are things civilizations normally do to mitigate risk... . One is to pay a rate of interest on savings to those who have performed their societal obligation to work, have diligently saved according to prescribed rules of thumb, and can no longer work. For the most part, this was abolished in 2008 to promote "risky gambles".
I would submit that what was done to John and others who were retired and did not want to be forced into "risky gambles" was uncivilized and, for those, there was no benefit to this civilizational arrangement because it did not properly mitigate risk and required "risky gambles" where not appropriate.
...
Also, if retirees are not able to collect any interest on their savings, why is rampant age discrimination allowed? Either set a rate of interest that is reasonable or allow them to work.
Unfortunately, or more probably fortunately, nature doesn't really "understand" the concept of "traitorousness".
It's unfortunate that people "are driven" to be traitorous, by changing game rules, but sometimes nature forces "it's will" on people to do things that aren't particularly "wonderful".
And... we're back to the "nature of evil" conundrum that pops up around here quite often.
It would be lovely if "civilization" would see to it that we were all thoroughly comfortable at all times (of day and during our lifecycle), but is that REALLY what "we" want to have happen?
My opinion (obviously): One of our major "tasks" in life is to learn to be simultaneously very uncomfortable and happy ("about not being dead").
..I'm not gonna argue with anybody, or try to convince anybody, that that's more accurate than not, but the "image" of a person being not-humorlessly pugnacious in the face of suffering is preferable to me to the "image" of a person "doing anything else" in the face of suffering.
..'though it's not my place to condemn or diminish those who can't "live up" to my self-serving "preferences".
When I was a kid, my most frequent "fantasy" was to head off into the wilderness in a loincloth with a decent knife.
I think that's because I needed to learn something that I didn't know I needed to learn.
..these days the loincloth is my teeny boat and the knife is some robust and simple fishing gear.